Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Spot The Difference  (Read 8499 times)

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #32 on: May 04, 2021, 08:52:49 PM »
Advertisement
I'm not following what you mean by "Ownership is fine with me."

I'm simply stating that if you provide supporting evidence for Oswald owning the rifle I'm fine with "Oswald's rifle".

I thought you were disputing that the rifle belonged to Oswald?

I am, see above how to fix it.

The WC detailed the evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle.

They didn't.

It's been a matter of public record for almost six decades.

Wrong, see above.

Do you just want me to recite that again?

How would I know what you consider supporting evidence? I'll consider anything you can provide a link to (or at least reference by CE number or some FBI identification) and we'll go from there.

I"m assuming that you are aware of that evidence.

Depends on what "that evidence" is, see above.

Why play silly games to avoid a direct question?

No games, so far you haven't brought anything to the table except.....Warren Commission.

If you are disputing that it was Oswald's rifle, then simply specify why you reached that conclusion (e.g. cite what evidence is lacking).

Since nobody so far has provided evidence of Oswald taking ownership of that rifle or at least that it was sold to him.

Capisce?

So silly.  Again, it's not "my" evidence but evidence gathered by the official investigators.  The WC has an entire section on the evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle.  In fact, it is titled:  "Ownership and Possession of Assassination Weapon."  LOL.  But I'll play along just to see how long you can avoid trying to articulate why you believe this evidence is insufficient to link Oswald to the rifle.  Very amusing.  Capisce?  Here is "my" evidence:

OWNERSHIP AND POSSESSION OF ASSASSINATION WEAPON

Purchase of Rifle by Oswald

Shortly after the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building,1 agents of the FBI learned from retail outlets in Dallas that Crescent Firearms, Inc., of New York City, was a distributor of surplus Italian 6.5-millimeter military rifles.2 During the evening of November 22, 1963, a review of the records of Crescent Firearms revealed that the firm had shipped an Italian carbine, serial number C2766, to Klein's Sporting Goods Co., of Chicago, Ill.3 After searching their records from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m. the officers of Klein's discovered that a rifle bearing serial number C2766 had been shipped to one A. Hidell,

Page 119

Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex., on March 20, 1963.4 (See Waldman Exhibit No. 7, p. 120.)

According to its microfilm records, Klein's received an order for a rifle on March 13, 1963, on a coupon clipped from the February 1963 issue of the American Rifleman magazine. The order coupon was signed, in handprinting, "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas." (See Commission Exhibit No. 773, p. 120.) It was sent in an envelope bearing the same name and return address in handwriting. Document examiners for the Treasury Department and the FBI testified unequivocally that the bold printing on the face of the mail-order coupon was in the handprinting of Lee Harvey Oswald and that the writing on the envelope was also his. 5 Oswald's writing on these and other documents was identified by comparing the writing and printing on the documents in question with that appearing on documents known to have been written by Oswald, such as his letters, passport application, and endorsements of checks.6 (See app. X, p. 568-569.)

In addition to the order coupon the envelope contained a. U.S. postal money order for $21.45, purchased as No. 2,202,130,462 in Dallas, Tex., on March 12, 1963.7 The canceled money order was obtained from the Post Office Department. Opposite the printed words "Pay To" were written the words "Kleins Sporting Goods," and opposite the printed word "From" were written the words "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915 Dallas, Texas." These words were also in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald. 8 (See Commission Exhibit No. 788, p. 120.)

From Klein's records it was possible to trace the processing of the order after its receipt. A bank deposit made on March 13, 1963, included an item of $21.45. Klein's shipping order form shows an imprint made by the cash register which recorded the receipt of $21.45 on March 13, 1963. This price included $19.95 for the rifle and the scope, and $1.50 for postage and handling. The rifle without the scope cost only $12.78.9

According to the vice president of Klein's, William Waldman, the scope was mounted on the rifle by a gunsmith employed by Klein's, and the rifle was shipped fully assembled in accordance with customary company procedures. 10 The specific rifle shipped against the order had been received by Klein's from Crescent on February 21, 1963. It bore the manufacturer's serial number C2766. On that date, Klein's placed an internal control number VC836 on this rifle. 11 According to Klein's shipping order form, one Italian carbine 6.5 X-4 x scope, control number VC836, serial number C2766, was shipped parcel post to "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas," on March 20, 1963. 12 Information received from the Italian Armed Forces Intelligence Service has established that this particular rifle was the only rifle of its type bearing serial number C2766.13 (See app. X, p. 554.)

The post office box to which the rifle was shipped was rented to "Lee H. Oswald" from October 9, 1962, to May 14, 1963.14 Experts on handwriting identification from the Treasury Department and the

Page 120

This page reproduces COMMISSION EXHIBITS 791, 773, 788, and WALDMAN'S EXHIBIT 7 showing documents establishing purchase of rifle by Lee Harvey Oswald

Page 121

FBI testified that the signature and other writing on the application for that box were in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald,15 as was a change-of-address card dated May 12, 1963,16 by which Oswald requested that mail addressed to that box be forwarded to him in New Orleans, where he had moved on April 24.17 Since the rifle was shipped from Chicago on March 20, 1963, it was received in Dallas during the period when Oswald rented and used the box. (See Commission Exhibit No. 791, p. 120.)

It is not known whether the application for post office box 2915 listed "A. Hidell" as a person entitled to receive mail at this box. In accordance with postal regulations, the portion of the application which lists names of persons, other than the applicant, entitled to receive mail was thrown away after the box was closed on May 1963. 18 Postal Inspector Harry D. Holmes of the Dallas Post Office testified, however, that when a package is received for a certain box, a notice is placed in that box regardless of whether the name on the package is listed on the application as a person entitled to receive mail through that box. The person having access to the box then takes the notice to the window and is given the package. Ordinarily, Inspector Holmes testified, identification is not requested because it is assumed that the person with the notice is entitled to the package.19

Oswald's use of the name "Hidell" to purchase the assassination weapon was one of several instances in which he used this name as an alias. When arrested on the day of the assassination, he had in his possession a Smith & Wesson 38 caliber revolver purchased by mail-order coupon from Seaport-Traders, Inc., a mail-order division of George Rose & Co., Los Angeles. The mail-order coupon listed the purchaser as "A. J. Hidell Age 28" with the address of post office box 2915 in Dallas. 21 Handwriting experts from the FBI and the Treasury Department testified that the writing on the mail-order form was that of Lee Harvey Oswald.22

Among other identification cards in Oswald's wallet at the time of his arrest were a Selective Service notice of classification, a Selective Service registration certificate,23 and a certificate of service in the U.S. Marine Corps,24 all three cards being in his own name. Also in his wallet at that time were a Selective Service notice of classification and a Marine certificate of service in the name of Alek James Hidell.25 On the Hidell Selective Service card there appeared a signature, "Alek J. Hidell," and the photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald.26 Experts on questioned documents from the Treasury Department and the FBI testified that the Hidell cards were counterfeit photographic reproductions made by photographing the Oswald cards, retouching the resulting negatives, and producing prints from the retouched negatives. The Hidell signature on the notice of classification was in the handwriting of Oswald. (See app. X, p. 572.)

In Oswald's personal effects found in his room at 1026 North Beckley Avenue in Dallas was a purported international certificate of vaccination signed by "Dr. A. J. Hideel, Post Office Box 30016, New

Page 122

Orleans. 28 It certified that Lee Harvey Oswald had been vaccinated for smallpox on June 8, 1963. This, too, was a forgery. The signature of "A. J. Hideel" was in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald. 29 There is no "Dr. Hideel" licensed to practice medicine in Louisiana.30 There is no post office box 30016 in the New Orleans Post Office but Oswald had rented post office box 30061 in New Orleans on June 3, 1963, listing Marina Oswald and A. J. Hidell as additional persons entitled to receive mail in the box.32 The New Orleans postal authorities had not discarded the portion of the application listing the names of those, other than the owner of the box, entitled to receive mail through the box. Expert testimony confirmed that the writing on this application was that of Lee Harvey Oswald. 33

Hidell's name on the post office box application was part of Oswald's use of a nonexistent Hidell to serve as president of the so-called New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. (As discussed below in ch.VI, p. 292.) Marina Oswald testified that she first learned of Oswald's use of the fictitious name "Hidell" in connection with his pro-Castro activities in New Orleans.34 According to her testimony, he compelled her to write the name "Hidell" on membership cards in the space designated for the signature of the "Chapter President." 35 The name "Hidell" was stamped on some of the "Chapter's" printed literature and on the membership application blanks.36 Marina Oswald testified, "I knew there was no such organization. And I know Hidell is merely an altered Fidel, and I laughed at such foolishness." 37 Hidell was a fictitious president of an organization of which Oswald was the only member.38

When seeking employment in New Orleans, Oswald listed a "Sgt. Robt. Hidell" as a reference on one job application 39 and "George Hidell" as a reference on another.40 Both names were found to be fictitious.41 Moreover, the use of "Alek" as a first name for Hidell is a further link to Oswald because "Alek" was Oswald's nickname in Russia.42 Letters received by Marina Oswald from her husband signed "Alek" were given to the Commission.43

Return to Top

Oswald's Palmprint on Rifle Barrel

Based on the above evidence, the Commission concluded that Oswald purchased the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building. Additional evidence of ownership was provided in the form of palmprint identification which indicated that Oswald had possession of the rifle he had purchased.

A few minutes after the rifle was discovered on the sixth floor of the Depository Building 44 it was examined by Lt. J. C. Day of the identification bureau of the Dallas police. He lifted the rifle by the wooden stock after his examination convinced him that the wood was too rough to take fingerprints. Capt. J. W. Fritz then ejected a cartridge by operating the bolt, but only after Day viewed the knob on the bolt through a magnifying glass and found no prints.45 Day continued to examine the rifle with the magnifying glass, looking for

Page 123

possible fingerprints. He applied fingerprint powder to the side of the metal housing near the trigger, and noticed traces of two prints.46 At 11:45 p.m. on November 22, the rifle was released to the FBI and forwarded to Washington where it was examined on the morning of November 23 by Sebastian F. Latona, supervisor of the Latent Fingerprint Section of the FBI's Identification Division.47

In his testimony before the Commission, Latona stated that when he received the rifle, the area where prints were visible was protected by cellophane.48 He examined these prints, as well as photographs of them which the Dallas police had made, and concluded that:
...the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value.49
Latona then processed the complete weapon but developed no identifiable prints.50 He stated that the poor quality of the wood and the metal would cause the rifle to absorb moisture from the skin, thereby making a clear print unlikely. 51

On November 22, however, before surrendering possession of the rifle to the FBI Laboratory, Lieutenant Day of the Dallas Police Department had "lifted" a palmprint from the underside of the gun barrel "near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the woodstock when I took the woodstock loose." 52 "Lifting" a print involves the use of adhesive material to remove the fingerprint powder which adheres to the original print. In this way the powdered impression is actually removed from the object.53 The lifting had been so complete in this case that there was no trace of the print on the rifle itself when it was examined by Latona. Nor was there any indication that the lift had been performed. 54 Day, on the other hand, believed that sufficient traces of the print had been left on the rifle barrel, because he did not release the lifted print until November 26, when he received instructions to send "everything that we had" to the FBI.55 The print arrived in the FBI Laboratory in Washington on November 29, mounted on a card on which Lieutenant Day had written the words "off underside gun barrel near end of grip C2766." 56 The print's positive identity as having been lifted from the rifle was confirmed by FBI Laboratory tests which established that the adhesive material bearing the print also bore impressions of the same irregularities that appeared on the barrel of the rifle. 57

Latona testified that this palmprint was the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.58 At the request of the Commission, Arthur Mandella, fingerprint expert with the New York City Police Department, conducted an independent examination and also determined that this was the right palmprint of Oswald.59 Latona's findings were also confirmed by Ronald G. Wittmus, another FBI fingerprint

Page 124

expert.60 In the opinion of these experts, it was not possible to estimate the time which elapsed between the placing of the print on the rifle and the date of the lift.61

Experts testifying before the Commission agreed that palmprints are as unique as fingerprints for purposes of establishing identification.62 Oswald's palmprint on the underside of the barrel demonstrates that he handled the rifle when it was disassembled. A palmprint could not be placed on this portion of the rifle, when assembled, because the wooden foregrip covers the barrel at this point.63 The print is additional proof that the rifle was in Oswald's possession. Fibers on Rifle

In a crevice between the butt plate of the rifle and the wooden stock was a tuft of several cotton fibers of dark blue, gray-black, and orange-yellow shades.64 On November 23, 1963, these fibers were examined by Paul M. Stombaugh, a special agent assigned to the Hair and Fiber Unit of the FBI Laboratory.65 He compared them with the fibers found in the shirt which Oswald was wearing when arrested in the Texas Theatre.66 This shirt was also composed of dark blue, gray- black and orange-yellow cotton fibers. Stombaugh testified that the colors, shades, and twist of the fibers found in the tuft on the rifle matched those in Oswald's shirt.67 (See app. X, p. 592.) Stombaugh explained in his testimony that in fiber analysis, as distinct from fingerprint or firearms identification, it is not possible to state with scientific certainty that a particular small group of fibers come from a certain piece of clothing to the exclusion of all others because there are not enough microscopic characteristics present in fibers.68 Judgments as to probability will depend on the number and types of matches.69 He concluded, "There is no doubt in my mind that these fibers could have come from this shirt. There is no way, however, to eliminate the possibility of the fibers having come from another identical shirt." 70

Having considered the probabilities as explained in Stombaugh's testimony, the Commission has concluded that the fibers in the tuft on the rifle most probably came from the shirt worn by Oswald when he was arrested, and that this was the same shirt which Oswald wore on the morning of the assassination. Marina Oswald testified that she thought her husband wore this shirt to work on that day. The testimony of those who saw him after the assassination was inconclusive about the color of Oswald's shirt,72 but Mary Bledsoe, a former landlady of Oswald, saw him on a bus approximately 10 minutes after the assassination and identified the shirt as being the one worn by Oswald primarily because of a distinctive hole in the shirt's right elbow. 73 Moreover, the bus transfer which he obtained as he left. the bus was still in the pocket when he was arrested.74 Although Oswald returned to his roominghouse after the assassination and when questioned by the police, claimed to have changed his shirt,75 the evidence

Page 125

indicates that he continued wearing the same shirt which he was wearing all morning and which he was still wearing when arrested.

In light of these findings the Commission evaluated the additional testimony of Stombaugh that the fibers were caught in the crevice of the rifle's butt plate "in the recent past."76 Although Stombaugh was unable to estimate the period of time the fibers were on the rifle he said that the fibers "were clean, they had good color to them, there was no grease on them and they were not fragmented. They looked as if they had just been picked up." 77 The relative freshness of the fibers is strong evidence that they were caught on the rifle on the morning of the assassination or during the preceding evening. For 10 days prior to the eve of the assassination Oswald had not been present at Ruth Paine's house in Irving, Tex.,78 where the rifle was kept. 79 Moreover, the Commission found no reliable evidence that Oswald used the rifle at any time between September 23, when it was transported from New Orleans, and November 22, the day of the assassination.80 The fact that on the morning of the assassination Oswald was wearing the shirt from which these relatively fresh fibers most probably originated, provides some evidence that they were placed on the rifle that day since there was limited, if any, opportunity for Oswald to handle the weapon during the 2 months prior to November 22.

On the other hand Stombaugh pointed out that fibers might retain their freshness if the rifle had been "put aside" after catching the fibers. The rifle used in the assassination probably had been wrapped in a blanket for about 8 weeks prior to November 22.81 Because the relative freshness of these fibers might be explained by the continuous storage of the rifle in the blanket, the Commission was unable to reach any firm conclusion as to when the fibers were caught in the rifle. The Commission was able to conclude, however, that the fibers most probably came from Oswald's shirt. This adds to the conviction of the Commission that Oswald owned and handled the weapon used in the assassination.

Return to Top

Photograph of Oswald With Rifle

During the period from March 2, 1963, to April 24, 1963, the Oswalds lived on Neely Street in Dallas in a rented house which had a small back yard.32 One Sunday, while his wife was hanging diapers, Oswald asked her to take a picture of him holding a rifle, a pistol and issues of two newspapers later identified as the Worker and the Militant.83 Two pictures were taken. The Commission has concluded that the rifle shown in these pictures is the same rifle which was found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building on November 22, 1963. (See Commission Exhibits Nos. 133-A and 133-B, p.. 126.)

One of these pictures, Exhibit No. 133-A, shows most of the rifle's configuration.84 Special Agent Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt, a photography expert with the FBI, photographed the rifle used in the assassination, attempting to duplicate the position of the rifle and the lighting in Exhibit No. 133-A.85 After comparing the rifle in the simulated

Page 126 This page reproduces the photographs of Oswald holding rifle: COMMISSION EXHIBIT No. 133-A; COMMISSION EXHIBIT No. 133-B; and COMMISSION EXHIBIT No. 134 (Enlargement of Commission Exhibit No. 133-A)

Page 127

photograph with the rifle in Exhibit No. 133-A, Shaneyfelt testified, "I found it to be the same general configuration. All appearances were the same." He found "one notch in the stock at this point that appears very faintly in the photograph." He stated, however, that while he "found no differences" between the rifles in the two photographs, he could not make a "positive identification to the exclusion of all other rifles of the same general configuration." 86

The authenticity of these pictures has been established by expert testimony which links the second picture, Commission Exhibit No. 133-B, to Oswald's Imperial Reflex camera, with which Marina Oswald testified she took the pictures.87 The negative of that picture, Commission Exhibit No. 133-B, was found among Oswald's possessions.88 Using a recognized technique of determining whether a picture was taken with a particular camera, Shaneyfelt compared this negative with a negative which he made by taking a new picture with Oswald's camera.89 He concluded that the negative of Exhibit No. 133-B was exposed in Oswald's Imperial Reflex camera to the exclusion of all other cameras. 90 He could not test Exhibit No. 133-A in the same way because the negative was never recovered. 91 Both pictures, however, have identical backgrounds and lighting and, judging from the shadows, were taken at the same angle. They are photographs of the same scene.92 Since Exhibit No. 133-B was taken with Oswald's camera, it is reasonably certain that Exhibit No. 133-A was taken by the same camera at the same time, as Marina Oswald testified. Moreover, Shaneyfelt testified that in his opinion the photographs were not composites of two different photographs and that Oswald's face had not been superimposed on another body.93

One of the photographs taken by Marina Oswald was widely published in newspapers and magazines, and in many instances the details of these pictures differed from the original, and even from each other, particularly as to the configuration of the rifle. The Commission sought to determine whether these photographs were touched prior to publication. Shaneyfelt testified that the published photographs appeared to be based on a copy of the original which the publications had each retouched differently.94 Several of the publications furnished the Commission with the prints they had used, or described by correspondence the retouching they had done. This information enabled the Commission to conclude that the published pictures were the same as the original except for retouching done by these publications, apparently for the purpose of clarifying the lines of the rifle and other details in the picture.95

The dates surrounding the taking of this picture and the purchase of the rifle reinforce the belief that the rifle in the photograph is the rifle which Oswald bought from Klein's. The rifle was shipped from Klein's in Chicago on March 20, 1963, at a time when the Oswalds were living on Neely Street.96 From an examination of one of the photographs, the Commission determined the dates of the issues of the Militant and the Worker which Oswald was holding in his hand.

Page 128

By checking the actual mailing dates of these issues and the time usually takes to effect. delivery to Dallas, it was established that the photographs must have been taken sometime after March 27.97 Marina Oswald testified that the photographs were taken on a Sunday about 2 weeks before the attempted shooting of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker on April 10, 1963.98 By Sunday, March 31, 1963, 10 days prior to the Walker attempt, Oswald had undoubtedly received the rifle shipped from Chicago on March 20, the revolver shipped from Los Angeles on the same date,99 and the two newspapers which he was holding in the picture.

Return to Top

Rifle Among Oswald's Possessions

Marina Oswald testified that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building was the "fateful rifle of Lee Oswald." Moreover, it was the only rifle owned by her husband following his return from the Soviet Union in June 1962.101 It had been purchased in March 1963, and taken to New Orleans where Marina Oswald saw it in their rented apartment during the summer of 1963.102 It appears from his wife's testimony that Oswald may have sat on the screened-in porch at night practicing with the rifle by looking through the telescopic sight and operating the bolt.103 In September 1963, Oswald loaded their possessions into a station wagon owned by Ruth Paine, who had invited Marina Oswald and the baby to live at her home in Irving,104 Tex. Marina Oswald has stated that the rifle was among these possessions,105 although Ruth Paine testified that she was not aware of it.106

From September 24, 1963, when Marina Oswald arrived in Irving from New Orleans, until the morning of the assassination, the rifle was, according to the evidence, stored in a green and brown blanket in the Paines' garage among the Oswalds' other possessions.107 About 1 week after the return from New Orleans, Marina Oswald was looking in the garage for parts to the baby's crib and thought that the parts might be in the blanket. When she started to open the blanket, she saw the stock of the rifle.108 Ruth and Michael Paine both noticed the rolled-up blanket in the garage during the time that Marina Oswald was living in their home.109 On several occasions, Michael Paine moved the blanket in the garage.110 He thought it contained tent poles, or possibly other camping equipment such as a folding shovel.111 When he appeared before the Commission, Michael Paine lifted the blanket with the rifle wrapped inside and testified that it appeared to be the same approximate weight and shape as the package in his garage.112

About 3 hours after the assassination, a detective and deputy sheriff saw the blanket-roll, tied with a string, lying on the floor of the Paines' garage. Each man testified that he thought he could detect the outline of a rifle in the blanket, even though the blanket was empty.113 Paul M. Stombaugh, of the FBI Laboratory, examined the blanket and discovered a bulge approximately 10 inches long midway in the blanket. This bulge was apparently caused by a hard protruding

Page 129

object which had stretched the blanket's fibers. It could have been caused by the telescopic sight of the rifle which was approximately 11 inches long.114 (See Commission Exhibit No. 1304 p. 132.) Conclusion

Having reviewed the evidence that (1) Lee Harvey Oswald purchased the rifle used in the assassination, (2) Oswald's palmprint was on the rifle in a position which shows that he had handled it while it was disassembled, (3) fibers found on the rifle most probably came from the shirt Oswald was wearing on the day of the assassination, (4) a photograph taken in the yard of Oswald's apartment showed him holding this rifle, and (5) the rifle was kept among Oswald's possessions from the time of its purchase until the day of the assassination, the Commission concluded that the rifle used to assassinate President Kennedy and wound Governor Connally was owned and possessed by Lee Harvey Oswald.

Return to Top

THE RIFLE IN THE BUILDING

The Commission has evaluated the evidence tending to show how Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, serial number C2766, was brought into the Depository Building, where it was found on the sixth floor shortly after the assassination. In this connection the Commission considered (1) the circumstances surrounding Oswald's return to Irving, Tex., on Thursday, November 21, 1963, (2) the disappearance of the rifle from its normal place of storage, (3) Oswald's arrival at the Depository Building on November 22, carrying a long and bulky brown paper package, (4) the presence of a long handmade brown paper bag near the point from which the shots were fired, and (5) the palmprint, fiber, and paper analyses linking Oswald and the assassination weapon to this bag.

Return to Top

The Curtain Rod Story

During October and November of 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald lived in a roominghouse in Dallas while his wife and children lived in Irving, at the home of Ruth Paine,113 approximately 15 miles from Oswald's place of work at the Texas School Book Depository. Oswald traveled between Dallas and Irving on weekends in a car driven by a neighbor of the Paines, Buell Wesley Frazier, who also worked at the Depository.116 Oswald generally would go to Irving on Friday afternoon and return to Dallas Monday morning. According to the testimony of Frazier, Marina Oswald, and Ruth Paine, it appears that Oswald never returned to Irving in midweek prior to November 21, 1963, except on Monday, October 21, when he visited his wife in the hospital after the birth of their second child.117

During the morning of November 21, Oswald asked Frazier whether he could ride home with him that afternoon. Frazier, surprised, asked

Page 130

him why he was going to Irving on Thursday night rather than Friday. Oswald replied, "I'm going home to get some curtain rods... [to] put in an apartment." 118 The two men left work at 4: 40 p.m. and drove to Irving. There was little conversation between them on the way home.119 Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle, Frazier's sister, commented to her brother about Oswald's unusual midweek return to Irving. Frazier told her that Oswald had come home to get curtain rods.120

It would appear, however, that obtaining curtain rods was not the purpose of Oswald's trip to Irving on November 21. Mrs. A. C. Johnson, his landlady, testified that Oswald's room at 1026 North Beckley Avenue had curtains and curtain rods,121 and that Oswald had never discussed the subject with her.122 In the Paines' garage, along with many other objects of a household character, there were two flat lightweight curtain rods belonging to Ruth Paine but they were still there on Friday afternoon after Oswald's arrest.123 Oswald never asked Mrs. Paine about the use of curtain rods,124 and Marina Oswald testified that Oswald did not say anything about curtain rods on the day before the assassination.125 No curtain rods were known to have been discovered in the Depository Building after the assassination.126 In deciding whether Oswald carried a rifle to work in a long paper bag on November 22, the Commission gave weight to the fact that Oswald gave a false reason for returning home on November 21, and one which provided an excuse for the carrying of a bulky package the following morning.

Return to Top

The Missing Rifle

Before dinner on November 21, Oswald played on the lawn of the Paines' home with his daughter June.127 After dinner Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald were busy cleaning house and preparing their children for bed.128 Between the hours of 8 and 9 p.m. they were occupied with the children in the bedrooms located at the extreme east end of the house.129 On the west end of the house is the attached garage, which can be reached from the kitchen or from the outside.130 In the garage were the personal belongings of the Oswald family including, as the evidence has shown, the rifle wrapped in the old brown and green blanket.131

At approximately 9 p.m., after the children had been put to bed, Mrs. Paine, according to her testimony before the Commission, "went out to the garage to paint some children's blocks, and worked in the garage for half an hour or so. I noticed when I went out that the light was on." 132 Mrs. Paine was certain that she had not left the light on in the garage after dinner.138 According to Mrs. Paine, Oswald had gone to bed by 9 p.m.; 134 Marina Oswald testified that it was between 9 and 10 p.m.135 Neither Marina Oswald nor Ruth Paine saw Oswald in the garage.136 The period between 8 and 9 p.m., however, provided ample opportunity for Oswald to prepare the rifle for his departure the next morning. Only if disassembled could

Page 131

the rifle fit into the paper bag found near the window 137 from which the shots were fired. A firearms expert with the FBI assembled the rifle in 6 minutes using a 10-cent coin as a tool, and he could disassemble it more rapidly.138 While the rifle may have already been disassembled when Oswald arrived home on Thursday, he had ample time that evening to disassemble the rifle and insert it into the paper bag.

On the day of the assassination, Marina Oswald was watching television when she learned of the shooting. A short time later Mrs. Paine told her that someone had shot the President "from the building in which Lee is working." Marina Oswald testified that at that time "My heart dropped. I then went to the garage to see whether the rifle was there and I saw that the blanket was still there and I said 'Thank God.'" She did not unroll the blanket. She saw that it was in its usual position and it appeared to her to have something inside.139

Soon afterward, at about 3 p.m., police officers arrived and searched the house. Mrs. Paine pointed out that most of the Oswalds' possessions were in the garage.140 With Ruth Paine acting as an interpreter, Detective Rose asked Marina whether her husband had a rifle. Mrs. Paine, who had no knowledge of the rifle, first said "No," but when the question was translated, Marina Oswald replied "Yes." 141 She pointed to the blanket which was on the floor very close to where Ruth Paine was standing. Mrs. Paine testified:
As she [Marina] told me about it I stepped onto the blanket roll... And she indicated to me that she had peered into this roll and saw a portion of what she took to be a gun she knew her husband to have, a rifle. And I then translated this to the officers that she knew that her husband had a gun that he had stored in here... I then stepped off of it and the officer picked it up in the middle and it bent so... 142
Mrs. Paine had the actual blanket before her as she testified and she indicated that the blanket. hung limp in the officer's hand.143 Marina Oswald testified that this was her first knowledge that the rifle was not in its accustomed place.144

Return to Top

The Long and Bulky Package

On the morning of November 22, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald left the Paine house in Irving at approximately 7:15 a.m., while Marina Oswald was still in bed.145 Neither she nor Mrs. Paine saw him leave the house.146 About half-a-block away from the Paine house was the residence of Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle, the sister of the man with whom Oswald drove to work--Buell Wesley Frazier. Mrs. Randle stated that on the morning of November 22, while her brother was eating breakfast, she looked out the breakfast-room window and saw Oswald cross the street and walk toward the driveway where her brother parked his car near the carport. He carried a "heavy brown bag." 147 Oswald

Page 132

This page reproduces COMMISSION EXHIBIT No. 1304: C2766 Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and paper bag found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository.

Page 133

gripped the bag in his right hand near the top. "It tapered like this as he hugged it in his hand. It was ... more bulky toward the bottom" than toward the top.148 She then opened the kitchen door and saw Oswald open the right rear door of her brother's car and place the package in the back of the car.149 Mrs. Randle estimated that the package was approximately 28 inches long and about 8 inches wide.150 She thought. that its color was similar to that of the bag found on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository after the assassination.151

Frazier met Oswald at the kitchen door and together they walked to the car.152 After entering the car, Frazier glanced over his shoulder and noticed a brown paper package on the back seat. He asked, "What's the package, Lee?" Oswald replied, "curtain rods."153 Frazier told the Commission "... the main reason he was going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back some curtain rods, so I didn't think any more about it when he told me that."154 Frazier estimated that the bag was 2 feet long "give and take a few inches," and about 5 or 6 inches wide.155 As they sat in the car, Frazier asked Oswald where his lunch was, and Oswald replied that he was going to buy his lunch that day.156 Frazier testified that Oswald carried no lunch bag that day. "When he rode with me, I say he always brought lunch except that one day on November 22 he didn't bring his lunch that day." 157

Frazier parked the car in the company parking lot about 2 blocks north of the Depository Building. Oswald left the car first, picked up the brown paper bag, and proceeded toward the building ahead of Frazier. Frazier walked behind and as they crossed the railroad tracks he watched the switching of the cars. Frazier recalled that one end of the package was under Oswald's armpit and the lower part was held with his right hand so that it was carried straight and parallel to his body. When Oswald entered the rear door of the Depository Building, he was about 50 feet ahead of Frazier. It was the first time that Oswald had not walked with Frazier from the parking lot to the building entrance.158 When Frazier entered the building, he did not see Oswald.159 One employee, Jack Dougherty, believed that he saw Oswald coming to work, but he does not remember that Oswald had anything in his hands as he entered the door.160 No other employee has been found who saw Oswald enter that morning.161

In deciding whether Oswald carried the assassination weapon in the bag which Frazier and Mrs. Randle saw, the Commission has carefully considered the testimony of these two witnesses with regard to the length of the bag. Frazier and Mrs. Randle testified that the bag which Oswald was carrying was approximately 27 or 28 inches long,162 whereas the wooden stock of the rifle, which is its largest component, measured 34.8 inches.163 The bag found on the sixth floor was 88 inches long.164 (See Commission Exhibit No. 1304, p. 132.) When Frazier appeared before the Commission and was asked to demonstrate how Oswald carried the package, he said, "Like I said, I remember that I didn't look at the package very much ...

Page 134

but when I did look at it he did have his hands on the package like that," 165 and at this point Frazier placed the upper part of the package under his armpit and attempted to cup his right hand beneath the bottom of the bag. The disassembled rifle was too long to be carried in this manner. Similarly, when the butt of the rifle was placed in Frazier's hand, it extended above his shoulder to ear level. 1 Moreover, in an interview on December 1, 1963, with agents of the FBI, Frazier had marked the point on the back seat of his car which he believed was where the bag reached when it was laid on the seat with one edge against the door. The distance between the point on the seat and the door was 27 inches.167

Mrs. Randle said, when shown the paper bag, that the bag she saw Oswald carrying "wasn't that long, I mean it was folded down at the top as I told you. It definitely wasn't that long." 168 And she folded the bag to length of about 28½ inches. Frazier doubted whether the bag that Oswald carried was as wide as the bag found on the sixth floor,169 although Mrs. Randle testified that the width was approximately the same.170

The Commission has weighed the visual recollection of Frazier and Mrs. Randle against the evidence here presented that the bag Oswald carried contained the assassination weapon and has concluded that Frazier and Randle are mistaken as to the length of the bag. Mrs. Randle saw the bag fleetingly and her first remembrance is that it was held in Oswald's right hand "and it almost touched the ground as he carried it." 171 Frazier's view of the bag was from the rear. He continually advised that he was not paying close attention.172 For example, he said,
...I didn't pay too much attention the way he was walking because I was walking along there looking at the railroad cars and watching the men on the diesel switch them cars and I didn't pay too much attention on how he carried the package at all.173
Frazier could easily have been mistaken when he stated that Oswald held the bottom of the bag cupped in his hand with the upper end tucked into his armpit. Location of Bag

A handmade bag of wrapping paper and tape 174 was found in the southeast corner of the sixth floor alongside the window from which the shots were fired.175 (See Commission Exhibit No. 2707, p. 142.) It was not a standard type bag which could be obtained in a store and it was presumably made for a particular purpose. It was the appropriate size to contain, in disassembled form, Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, serial No. C2766, which was also found on the sixth floor.176 Three cartons had been placed at the window apparently to act as a gun rest and a fourth carton was placed behind those at the window.177 (See Commission Exhibit No. 1301,

Page 135

p. 138.) A person seated on the fourth carton could assemble the rifle without being seen from the rest of the sixth floor because the cartons stacked around the southeast corner would shield him.178 (See Commission Exhibit No. 723, p. 80.) The presence of the bag in this corner is cogent evidence that it was used as the container for the rifle. At the time the bag was found, Lieutenant Day of the Dallas police wrote on it, "Found next to the sixth floor window gun fired from. May have been used to carry gun. Lt. J. C. Day." 179

Return to Top

Scientific Evidence Linking Rifle and Oswald to Paper Bag

Oswald's fingerprint and palmprint found on bag.--Using a standard chemical method involving silver nitrates 180 the FBI Laboratory developed a latent palmprint and latent fingerprint on the bag. (See app. X, p. 565.) Sebastian F. Latona, supervisor of the FBI's Latent Fingerprint Section, identified these prints as the left index fingerprint and right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.181 The portion of the palm which was identified was the heel of the right palm, i.e., the area near the wrist, on the little finger side.182 These prints were examined independently by Ronald G. Wittmus of the FBI,183 and by Arthur Mandella, a fingerprint expert with the New York City Police Department. 184 Both concluded that the prints were the right palm and left index finger of Lee Oswald. No other identifiable prints were found on the bag.185

Oswald's palmprint on the bottom of the paper bag indicated, of course, that he had handled the bag. Furthermore, it was consistent with the bag having contained a heavy or bulky object when he handled it since a light object is usually held by the fingers.186 The palmprint was found on the closed end of the bag. It was from Oswald's right hand, in which he carried the long package as he walked from Frazier's car to the building.187

Materials used to make bag.--On the day of the assassination, the Dallas police obtained a sample of wrapping paper and tape from the shipping room of the Depository and forwarded it to the FBI Laboratory in Washington.188 James C. Cadigan, a questioned-documents expert with the Bureau, compared the samples with the paper and tape in the actual bag. He testified, "In all of the observations and physical tests that I made I found ... the bag ... and the paper sample ... were the same." 189

Among other tests, the paper and tape were submitted to fiber analysis and spectrographic examination.190 In addition the tape was compared to determine whether the sample tape and the tape on the bag had been taken from the tape dispensing machine at the Depository. When asked to explain the similarity of characteristics, Cadigan stated: 191
Well, briefly, it would be the thickness of both the paper and the tape, the color under various lighting conditions of both the paper and the tape, the width of the tape, the knurled markings
Page 136
on the surface of the fiber, the texture of the fiber, the letting pattern ...
°     °     °     °     °     
I found that the paper sack found on the sixth floor ... and the sample ... had the same observable characteristics both under the microscope and all the visual tests that I could conduct.
°     °     °     °     °     
The papers I also found were similar in fiber composition, therefore, in addition to the visual characteristics, microscopic and UV [ultra violet] characteristics.
Mr. Cadigan concluded that the paper and tape from the bag were identical in all respects to the sample paper and tape taken from the Texas School Book Depository shipping room on November 22, 1963.192

On December l, 1963, a replica bag was made from materials found on that date in the shipping room. This was done as an investigatory aid since the original bag had been discolored during various laboratory examinations and could not be used for valid identification by witnesses.193 Cadigan found that the paper used to make this replica sack had different characteristics from the paper in the original bag.194 The science of paper analysis enabled him to distinguish between different rolls of paper even though they were produced by the same manufacturer.125

Since the Depository normally used approximately one roll of paper every 3 working days,196 it was not surprising that the replica sack made on December 1, 1963, had different characteristics from both the actual bag and the sample taken on November 22. On the other hand, since two rolls could be made from the same batch of paper, one cannot estimate when, prior to November 22, Oswald made the paper bag. However, the complete identity of characteristics between the paper and tape in the bag found on the sixth floor and the paper and tape found in the shipping room of the Depository on November 22 enabled the Commission to conclude that the bag was made from these materials. The Depository shipping department was on the first floor to which Oswald had access in the normal performance of his duties filling orders.197

Fibers in paper bag matched fibers in blanket.--When Paul M. Stombaugh of the FBI Laboratory examined the paper bag, he found, on the inside, a single brown delustered viscose fiber and several light green cotton fibers.198 The blanket in which the rifle was stored was composed of brown and green cotton, viscose and woolen fibers.199

The single brown viscose fiber found in the bag matched some of the brown viscose fibers from the blanket in all observable characteristics.200 The green cotton fibers found in the paper bag matched some of the green cotton fibers in the blanket "in all observable microscopic

Page 137

characteristics." 201 Despite these matches, however, Stombaugh was unable to render on opinion that the fibers which he found in the bag had probably come from the blanket, because other types of fibers present in the blanket were not found in the bag. He concluded:
All I would say here is that it is possible that these fibers could have come from this blanket., because this blanket is composed of brown and green woolen fibers, brown and green delustered viscose fibers, and brown and green cotton fibers... We found no brown cotton fibers, no green viscose fibers, and no woolen fibers.
So if I found all of these then I would have been able to say these fibers probably had come from this blanket. But since I found so few, then I would say the possibility exists, these fibers could have come from this blanket.202
Stombaugh confirmed that the rifle could have picked up fibers from the blanket and transferred them to the paper bag.203 In light of the other evidence linking Lee Harvey Oswald, the blanket, and the rifle to the paper bag found on the sixth floor, the Commission considered Stombaugh's testimony of probative value in deciding whether Oswald carried the rifle into the building in the paper bag.

Return to Top

Conclusion

The preponderance of the evidence supports the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald (1) told the curtain rod story to Frazier to explain both the return to Irving on a Thursday and the obvious bulk of the package which he intended to bring to work the next day; (2) took paper and tape from the wrapping bench of the Depository and fashioned a bag large enough to carry the disassembled rifle; (3) removed the rifle from the blanket in the Paines' garage on Thursday evening; (4) carried the rifle into the Depository Building, concealed in the bag; and, (5) left the bag alongside the window from which the shots were fired.



JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #32 on: May 04, 2021, 08:52:49 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7407
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #33 on: May 04, 2021, 08:58:58 PM »

So silly.  Again, it's not "my" evidence but evidence gathered by the official investigators.  The WC has an entire section on the evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle.  In fact, it is titled:  "Ownership and Possession of Assassination Weapon."  LOL.  But I'll play along just to see how long you can avoid trying to articulate why you believe this evidence is insufficient to link Oswald to the rifle.  Very amusing.  Capisce?  Here is "my" evidence:


And then the idiot quotes from his bible (exactly the propaganda document which contains all the disputed claims) and calls it "evidence" , by using the logical fallacy of appeal to authority.

An argument from authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority on a topic is used as evidence to support an argument.

It doesn't get any more comical than this....  :D

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #34 on: May 05, 2021, 05:46:46 PM »
And then the idiot quotes from his bible (exactly the propaganda document which contains all the disputed claims) and calls it "evidence" , by using the logical fallacy of appeal to authority.

An argument from authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority on a topic is used as evidence to support an argument.

It doesn't get any more comical than this....  :D

Citing the actual evidence compiled by the law enforcement entities charged with investigating the case is somehow comical and an appeal to authority in your view?  Wow.  Imagine Martin/Roger Googling that phrase to come up with something clever.  Pitiful.  I guess I should just jump on an Internet forum and make stuff up in endless rambling posts.   I know that the use of evidence is inconsistent with your impossible standard of proof mantra when it comes to Oswald's guilt (i.e. the lazy contrarian Alice-in-Wonderland logic) but that is what is used to solve criminal cases here on Planet Earth.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #34 on: May 05, 2021, 05:46:46 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7407
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #35 on: May 05, 2021, 07:26:48 PM »
Citing the actual evidence compiled by the law enforcement entities charged with investigating the case is somehow comical and an appeal to authority in your view?  Wow.  Imagine Martin/Roger Googling that phrase to come up with something clever.  Pitiful.  I guess I should just jump on an Internet forum and make stuff up in endless rambling posts.   I know that the use of evidence is inconsistent with your impossible standard of proof mantra when it comes to Oswald's guilt (i.e. the lazy contrarian Alice-in-Wonderland logic) but that is what is used to solve criminal cases here on Planet Earth.

Citing the actual evidence compiled by the law enforcement entities charged with investigating the case is somehow comical and an appeal to authority in your view?  Wow.

Yes because it shows you are merely a parrot and have no inquisitive mind of your own.

I know that the use of evidence is inconsistent with your impossible standard of proof mantra when it comes to Oswald's guilt (i.e. the lazy contrarian Alice-in-Wonderland logic) but that is what is used to solve criminal cases here on Planet Earth.

Your constant whing about my alleged "impossible standard of proof" is not only getting old, it also exposes the weakness of the case you are trying to promote. I've said this before, you're like a badly prepared prosecutor with a weak case who complains to the Judge about the jury because they are not buying his crap!

And btw, I don't believe for a moment that you have any idea how crimes are solved.

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #36 on: May 05, 2021, 08:44:47 PM »
Citing the actual evidence compiled by the law enforcement entities charged with investigating the case is somehow comical and an appeal to authority in your view?  Wow.

Yes because it shows you are merely a parrot and have no inquisitive mind of your own.

I know that the use of evidence is inconsistent with your impossible standard of proof mantra when it comes to Oswald's guilt (i.e. the lazy contrarian Alice-in-Wonderland logic) but that is what is used to solve criminal cases here on Planet Earth.

Your constant whing about my alleged "impossible standard of proof" is not only getting old, it also exposes the weakness of the case you are trying to promote. I've said this before, you're like a badly prepared prosecutor with a weak case who complains to the Judge about the jury because they are not buying his crap!

And btw, I don't believe for a moment that you have any idea how crimes are solved.

By using a "mind of your own" do you mean ignoring the actual evidence compiled by the investigators and instead dreaming up what might be "possible"?  Then suggesting there is doubt but only after adding numerous insults.  Good work Inspector Clouseau.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #36 on: May 05, 2021, 08:44:47 PM »


Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #37 on: May 05, 2021, 08:50:03 PM »
The Crime Scene looks staged because it was staged

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7407
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #38 on: May 05, 2021, 09:26:46 PM »
By using a "mind of your own" do you mean ignoring the actual evidence compiled by the investigators and instead dreaming up what might be "possible"?  Then suggesting there is doubt but only after adding numerous insults.  Good work Inspector Clouseau.

By using a "mind of your own" do you mean ignoring the actual evidence compiled by the investigators and instead dreaming up what might be "possible"? 

If one of us is ignoring evidence then it's you. You do it all the time. Whatever is written in your WC bible is all you ever want to know. I'm guessing your high priest told you not to listen to other opinions because you might stray from the righteous path! You're a zealot in a cult and don't even know it.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #38 on: May 05, 2021, 09:26:46 PM »


Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
Re: Spot The Difference
« Reply #39 on: May 05, 2021, 10:58:06 PM »
The Crime Scene looks staged because it was staged

Tom Alyea really argues for this point.
He says he took images of the SN in it's original position but then the whole thing was stripped down before Studebaker or Day took any photos of it. It then had to be reconstructed for the official investigation pics, which may explain why there are two completely different set-ups for the "rifle rest".
He is also adamant Fritz pocketed the shells before any official pics were taken and gave them to Studebaker to recreate the scene.
If true we must be looking at something beyond incompetence.