Mannlicher Carcano
Tall guy
Hidell ordered was 36 inches long.
Is there proof that Klein's substituted the longer rifle?
Was the 40.2 inch Carcano sent to Hidell instead?
claviger
Tall Guy,
From what I've read on this discussion board Oswald ordered a carbine
but was sent a rifle. Evidently the ad did feature the carbine. LHO
simply chose to keep the rifle rather than return it because the
barrel was 4.2 inches too long. Others know more details abolut this.
Even at 40.2 inches the MC was a short rifle compared to other
military surplus rifles.
yeuhd
The specific rifle shipped against the order [from "A. Hidell"] had
been received by Klein's from Crescent [Crescent Firearms, Inc., of
New York City] 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. 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. 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.
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-4.html#purchase
tomnln
"yeuhd" <wal...@mailbag.com> wrote in message
news:8da17518-400f-45e9...@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Totally Impossible! ! !
The Manlicher-Carcano with serial number C2766 was owned by Doctor Johnj
Lattimer.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
English
> . 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.
>
It's a bit of a philosophical point, but they cannot know this for
sure.
The serial number is (usually) imprinted manually using dyes and a
club-hammer. This gives a margin for human error so it is a strange
statement.
Did the Italian Intelligence Services give any information as to how
many rifles were issued with no serial number at all? (That's
rhetorical before anyone wastes time looking it up.)
Anthony Marsh
> From the Warren Commission Report, p. 119:
>
> The specific rifle shipped against the order [from "A. Hidell"] had
> been received by Klein's from Crescent [Crescent Firearms, Inc., of
> New York City] 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. According to Klein's shipping order form, one
> Italian carbine 6.5 X-4 x scope, control number VC836, serial number
Almost correct, but it was NOT a carbine. It was the short rifle.
> C2766, was shipped parcel post to "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas,
> Texas," on March 20, 1963. 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.
>
Yes, that particular type of rifle from that plant. But a different type
of gun from a different plant might have the same serial number.
Why was Oswald's rifle the only rifle in the world stamped "MADE ITALY"?
> http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-4.html#purchase
>
Tall guy
What I am trying to reconsile is the difference between what the ad
stated and what was found on the sixth floor.
If Kein's shipping order form states that one Italian carbine with
control number VC836, serial number C2766 was sent to the Hidell
address. Is that the 40.2 inch version or the shorter 36 inch?
If they sent the longer rifle where does it state that? Was it an
error? Was the ad wrong?
Did anyone else who ordered that product from Klein's ad receive the
36 inch version? Did anyone else receive the 40.2 inch rifle?
Anthony Marsh
> The rifle found on the sixth floor was 40.2 inches long and the rifle
> Hidell ordered was 36 inches long.
>
Wrong again. Oswald using the alias Hidell ordered the CARBINE from the
ad, not the rifle.
> Is there proof that Klein's substituted the longer rifle?
>
Yes. Later ads no longer offered the carbine.
> Was the 40.2 inch Carcano sent to Hidell instead?
>
>
>
Hidell was Oswald. Tell me what are the odds that Oswald would have a
fake ID with the name Hidell on it?
Have you ever found a real person who is named Hidell?
>
curtjester1
It was discussed recently, and you might want to read into it.
CJ
yeuhd
The Warren Commission overlooked putting the American Rifleman
advertisement in its volumes. But conspiracy theorist Sylvia Meagher
points out that the advertisement was for a $12.88 Carcano ($19.95 with
scope) that was 36 inches long, weighed 5 1/2 pounds, and had a catalog
number of C20-T750, though we know the $19.95 Caracno that was sent to
Oswald was 40 1/5 inches long and weighed 8 pounds, which was closed to
the 40-inch Caracano weighing 7 pounds advertised in the November 1963 ad
in a different magazine, Field and Stream. But Meagher fails to state the
significance of this discovery.... In other words, so what? We know Oswald
was shipped his Carcano, serial number C2766 (whether or not it was the
same weapon he had ordered, and whether or not he was even aware he
received a Carcano a little over 4 inches longer and 3 1/2 pounds heavier
than he had ordered), we know it was found in the sniper's nest, and we
know it was the murder weapon.
yeuhd
> Totally Impossible! ! !
>
> The Manlicher-Carcano with serial number C2766 was owned by Doctor Johnj
> Lattimer.
>
> SEE>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
What a shame that Dr. Lattimer failed to include a photograph as proof of
this, or say anything about how he obtained the rifle. You would think
something as startling as that would be worth more than be mentioned in
passing.
yeuhd
> Why was Oswald's rifle the only rifle in the world stamped "MADE ITALY"?
Your evidence for this claim?
Spiffy_one
>
> - Show quoted text -
Marina Oswald at one point said Lee perhaps used the name Hidell
because it rhymed with Fidel.
yeuhd
>
* Charles C. Hidell, 1920-1990, Austin, Texas
* Charles Maxwell Hidell, -1953, San Antonio, Texas
* Charles Stephen Hidell, 1949- , San Antonio, Texas
* Alan Maxwell Hidell, 1920-2007, San Antonio, Texas
* Florence Hidell, 1898-1985, San Antonio, Texas
* Mabel W. Hidell, 1893-1966, Dallas, Texas
* Marian C. Hidell, 1946-1999, Texas
* Dora Robinson Hidell, -1932, San Antonio, Texas
* Martha Louise Hidell, -1957, San Antonio, Texas
* William H. Hidell, 1884-1948, Dallas, Texas
* William Henry Hidell III, 1945- , Dallas, Texas
* John S. Hidell, 1922- , San Antonio, Texas
* Margaret Hidell, 1948- , Dallas, Texas
* Richard Robinson Hidell, 1920- , Fort Worth, Texas
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Anthony Marsh
>> . 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.
>>
>
> It's a bit of a philosophical point, but they cannot know this for
> sure.
>
> The serial number is (usually) imprinted manually using dyes and a
I think you mean DIES. Dyes would be color.
> club-hammer. This gives a margin for human error so it is a strange
> statement.
>
Not really. They were describing the practice which was in effect during
WWII production. Each plant would stamp in a unique serial number for
each type of weapon.
> Did the Italian Intelligence Services give any information as to how
> many rifles were issued with no serial number at all? (That's
> rhetorical before anyone wastes time looking it up.)
>
Maybe not even issued. I don't think they issued any rifles without
serial numbers. Possibly some barrels could have been stocked without
yet being given a serial number.
>
>
>
>
Anthony Marsh
> On Feb 14, 11:31 am, yeuhd <wall...@mailbag.com> wrote:
>> From the Warren Commission Report, p. 119:
>>
>> The specific rifle shipped against the order [from "A. Hidell"] had
>> been received by Klein's from Crescent [Crescent Firearms, Inc., of
>> New York City] 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. 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. 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.
>>
>> http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter...
>
> What I am trying to reconsile is the difference between what the ad
> stated and what was found on the sixth floor.
>
> If Kein's shipping order form states that one Italian carbine with
> control number VC836, serial number C2766 was sent to the Hidell
> address. Is that the 40.2 inch version or the shorter 36 inch?
>
No, that is NOT what Klein's shipping order states. It did not state
"CARBINE." They sent the rifle.
> If they sent the longer rifle where does it state that? Was it an
> error? Was the ad wrong?
>
No, the ad was not wrong. It was old. By that time they had run out of
carbines and were substituting short rifles.
> Did anyone else who ordered that product from Klein's ad receive the
> 36 inch version? Did anyone else receive the 40.2 inch rifle?
>
Yes, early customers received the carbine. Later customers received the
short rifle.
>
tomnln
Lattimer is on YOUR side yeuhd.
http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
cdddraftsman
Quote Marina Oswald :
" Whats that ? An altered Fidell ? (Laugh)
LHO told her to :
" Shut Up "
Frontline 'Who was LHO'
tl
Anthony Marsh
Anthony Marsh
As far as I know no one has ever found a real person named Alex Hidell.
Anthony Marsh
>
> "yeuhd" <wal...@mailbag.com> wrote in message
> news:01e6599b-b33a-4650...@o77g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 14, 7:10 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Totally Impossible! ! !
>>
>> The Manlicher-Carcano with serial number C2766 was owned by Doctor Johnj
>> Lattimer.
>>
>> SEE>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
>
> What a shame that Dr. Lattimer failed to include a photograph as proof of
> this, or say anything about how he obtained the rifle. You would think
> something as startling as that would be worth more than be mentioned in
> passing.
>
He does include photos of his rifle, but how would you be able to see
his serial number? He already admitted that he lied.
Anthony Marsh
Thanks. Any Alex Hidell's?
Anthony Marsh
Oswald's rifle was stamped "MADE ITALY." All the imported rifles were
supposed to be stamped "MADE IN ITALY." I have never been able to find
any other M-C rifle stamped "MADE ITALY."
http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/GMCcu.jpg
Anthony Marsh
Lattimer admitted that he lied. He does have photographs of his rifle, but
you can't read the serial number. I think he said that he bought it from
Klein's. There is a lot more than just his book.
Anthony Marsh
> Vincent Bugliosi, "Reclaiming History", endnotes, p. 392:
>
> The Warren Commission overlooked putting the American Rifleman
> advertisement in its volumes. But conspiracy theorist Sylvia Meagher
> points out that the advertisement was for a $12.88 Carcano ($19.95 with
I think you mean $12.78.
> scope) that was 36 inches long, weighed 5 1/2 pounds, and had a catalog
> number of C20-T750, though we know the $19.95 Caracno that was sent to
> Oswald was 40 1/5 inches long and weighed 8 pounds, which was closed to
> the 40-inch Caracano weighing 7 pounds advertised in the November 1963 ad
> in a different magazine, Field and Stream. But Meagher fails to state the
> significance of this discovery.... In other words, so what? We know Oswald
> was shipped his Carcano, serial number C2766 (whether or not it was the
> same weapon he had ordered, and whether or not he was even aware he
> received a Carcano a little over 4 inches longer and 3 1/2 pounds heavier
> than he had ordered), we know it was found in the sniper's nest, and we
> know it was the murder weapon.
>
It doesn't have to be conspiratorial, but it is a curiosity.
tomnln
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:drydnfOAEpn7jija...@comcast.com...
MARSH WROTE;
> He admitted that he lied.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I WRITE;
Produce that statement on video please?
>> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
>>
>>
>
Marty
No where in the 26 volumes is there mention of a 36" Italian rifle.
Now for a little background: Researchers found original American Rifleman
magazine that featured the 36". The advertisement, which listed a 36"
Italian rifle also contained an order blank Dept. Number: 358 (which can be
seen in 21 H 704 - which also shows the envelope which arrived at Klein's
with order coupon listing Dept. Number 358) Mr. Waldman, representative of
Klein's told the WC the firm's advertising program was set up to be able to
identify the month and magazine in which a specific advertisement appeared
through the department number on the ordering coupon. Waldman identified
Department 358 from the "Hidelll" coupon as coming from the American
Rifleman, February,1963 issue. (3 H 366-369, See also 21 H 704, Ex, 8)
While the ordering coupon does show up in WC exhibits - there is no matching
advertisement from February, 1963 issue of AR.
However, what is found is a "duplicate" Klein's advertisement, listed in the
Holmes exhibits. Holmes, local Dallas Postal Inspector, told WC he had sent
his secretary out on Saturday, November 23, to buy up outdoor-type
magazines, thinking that he might "locate this gun to identify it, and I
did". (7 H 294) However - in the Holmes exhibit we see the order coupon
Dept. Number is 486. The Holmes exhibit did not come from AR but rather from
November, 1963 issue of Field and Stream. (See 22 H 174, Ex. 2) In addition,
the Klein (Holmes) advertisement does not mention a 36" Italian rifle - but
it does show a 40" Italian rifle.
Surely the FBI, with all its resources, could have checked out and found the
February, 1963 issue of American Rifleman. One simple WC question to Waldman
would have settled the dust: Why does this magazine, with accompanying
order coupon in Oswald's handwriting, list a 36" Italian rifle - and we
have a 40.2" rifle as the murder weapon? Never asked and, therefore, never
answered.
Another instance of a mis - identified advertisement can be found in Dallas
Police Chief Jesse E. Curry's book. Utilizing material from the DPD files
the advertisement appears on page 99 (ex 43) The ordering coupon is
Department 472. The identity of this magazine came to light in a book
written by former Dallas Police Crime Lab detective. R. W. (Rusty)
Livingston. JFK, FIRST DAY EVIDENCE. (Rusty apparently took duplicate
pictures of evidence then stowed them away as souvenirs for the next 30
years.) Not only does this advertisement feature a 6.5 Italian rifle, "an
overall 40" long, but also displays a .38 Smith and Wesson revolver, both of
which were circled. When Rusty copied the he caught the bottom of the page
which showed the Department Number: 472 and name of magazine "Guns and
Ammo".
Another Klein coupon was found in Oswald's possessions. According to Judy
Bonner, INVESTIGATION OF HOMICIDE,
". . . Detective Stovall discovered ". . . . a page that appeared to have
been torn from a magazine. It was an advertisement of guns . . . from
Klein's Sporting goods . . .." Department Order number: 425! This coupon
came from American Rifleman issue, June, 1963. Thanks to noted researcher
Paul Hoch - we now know this order coupon was torn from a magazine taken by
FBI on November 23 from Alba's garage in New Orleans. Advertisement from
that issue featured a 40.2" Italian rifle. - no 36"!!
And around and around we go!!
Marty
"Tall guy" <dean...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:863a9d06-b75c-47d1...@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Marty
referencing the 36". Matter of fact I do not know the difference between a
rifle and a BB gun - and don't want to - I hate guns (although I confess
that I do have an Italian Carbine):)
Marty
"Marty" <jam...@verizon.net> wrote in message news:...
Marty
the newsgroup I referred to 36" gun as a "rifle" knowing full well it was
advertised as a "carbine". Chalk it up to age and lateness of the hour. :)
Marty
"Tall guy" <dean...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2cde779a-b7ca-4cc6...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> The rifle found on the sixth floor was 40.2 inches long and the rifle
> Hidell ordered was 36 inches long.
>
> Is there proof that Klein's substituted the longer rifle?
>
yeuhd
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:drydnfOAEpn7jija...@comcast.com...
>
> > tomnln wrote:
>
> >> "yeuhd" <wall...@mailbag.com> wrote in message
> >>news:8da17518-400f-45e9...@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >>> From the Warren Commission Report, p. 119:
>
> >>> The specific rifle shipped against the order [from "A. Hidell"] had
> >>> been received by Klein's from Crescent [Crescent Firearms, Inc., of
> >>> New York City] 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. 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. 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.
>
>
> >> Totally Impossible! ! !
>
> >> The Manlicher-Carcano with serial number C2766 was owned by Doctor Johnj
> >> Lattimer.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MARSH WROTE;
>
> > He admitted that he lied.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I WRITE;
>
> Produce that statement on video please?
>
> >> SEE>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
If someone's statement isn't on videotape, then it never happened? Do
you apply this level of evidence to all statements? Or just ones you
don't like?
tomnln
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLEASE SHOW US WHERE lATTIMER LIED ABOUT THE SERIAL NUMBER ON HIS
MANLICHER-CARCANO???
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
> yeuhd wrote:
>> On Feb 14, 7:10 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> Totally Impossible! ! !
>>>
>>> The Manlicher-Carcano with serial number C2766 was owned by Doctor Johnj
>>> Lattimer.
>>>
>>> SEE>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
>>
>> What a shame that Dr. Lattimer failed to include a photograph as proof of
>> this, or say anything about how he obtained the rifle. You would think
>> something as startling as that would be worth more than be mentioned in
>> passing.
>>
>
> Lattimer admitted that he lied. He does have photographs of his rifle, but
> you can't read the serial number. I think he said that he bought it from
> Klein's. There is a lot more than just his book.
Please show me WHERE Lattimer Lied about his Manlicher-Carcano???
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Marsh
>
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:dLadnYGJ7q0UOCja...@comcast.com...
>> tomnln wrote:
>>>
>>> "yeuhd" <wal...@mailbag.com> wrote in message
>>> news:01e6599b-b33a-4650...@o77g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> On Feb 14, 7:10 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> Totally Impossible! ! !
>>>>
>>>> The Manlicher-Carcano with serial number C2766 was owned by Doctor
>>>> Johnj
>>>> Lattimer.
>>>>
>>>> SEE>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
>>>
>>> What a shame that Dr. Lattimer failed to include a photograph as
>>> proof of
>>> this, or say anything about how he obtained the rifle. You would think
>>> something as startling as that would be worth more than be mentioned in
>>> passing.
>>>
>>
>> He does include photos of his rifle, but how would you be able to see
>> his serial number? He already admitted that he lied.
>
>>> Lattimer is on YOUR side yeuhd.
>>>
>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> MANLICHER-CARCANO???
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
In his book Lattimer claims that his rifle serial number is C2766,
exactly like Oswald's. Year later he admitted that he lied.
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/Lattim1.jpg
>> > > "In 1974 and 1975, my sons and I had conducted a series of experiments
>> > > using a 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano carbine, model 91-38, serial number
>> > > C2766, equipped with an Ordnance Optics Company four-power telescope
>> > > exactly like Oswald's. This was mounted exactly as on the rifle from the
tomnln
YEUHD wrote;
If someone's statement isn't on videotape, then it never happened? Do you
apply this level of evidence to all statements? Or just ones you don't
like?
I write;
What proof CAN you offer?
Other than your word?
********************************************************************
Anthony Marsh
> OOPS - before Tony jumps all over me for being so careless - In my reply to
> the newsgroup I referred to 36" gun as a "rifle" knowing full well it was
> advertised as a "carbine". Chalk it up to age and lateness of the hour. :)
>
Jump, jump. Darn it, you were too quick.
Did DVP ever correct his error?
alt.assassination.jfk
Message from discussion Kennedy and Lincoln - Lattimer
View parsed - Show only message text
From: "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
Subject: Re: Kennedy and Lincoln - Lattimer
Approved: jmcad...@shell.core.com
X-Peer-Info: remote-ip 207.89.252.195 local-ip 199.125.85.152
Delivered-To: jmcad...@shell.core.com
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <1166751082.7...@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>
References: <1166294905.1...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
<%U2hh.124413$G87....@newsfe14.lga>
<4586f038$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>
<51Hhh.1524$RJ....@newsfe17.lga>
<1166679588....@t46g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
<r7adnWq2Z8ujBBfY...@comcast.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In-Reply-To: <r7adnWq2Z8ujBBfY...@comcast.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.8.0.9) Gecko/20061206 Firefox/1.5.0.9,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: 80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.29.91.72;
posting-account=sgUHew0AAADuQuRCEBrYpAHDv2Wzy39d
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.125.85.152
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.125.85.152
Date: 22 Dec 2006 23:13:25 -0600
X-Trace: mcadams.posc.mu.edu 1166850805 199.125.85.152 (22 Dec 2006
23:13:25 -0600)
X-Original-Trace: 22 Dec 2006 23:13:25 -0600, 199.125.85.152
Path:
g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!news.albasani.net!mcadams.posc.mu.edu!jmcadams
>>> "Lattimer says "carbine." Oswald bought a short rifle." <<<
Wrong. Oswald bought a carbine and everybody knows it. The
Klein's order form used by Oswald to purchase the gun even says "6.5
Italian Carbine"...plain as day. .....
http://www.johnkennedy.it/imm32big.jpg
Anthony Marsh
> OOPS - don't jump all over me Tony. I should have said "carbine" when
> referencing the 36". Matter of fact I do not know the difference between a
> rifle and a BB gun - and don't want to - I hate guns (although I confess
> that I do have an Italian Carbine):)
>
Just for fun look up progressive gain twist and look down your carbine's
barrel and see it is has progressive gain twist. Is your serial number
also C2766?
Anthony Marsh
> Good questions, Tall Guy
>
> No where in the 26 volumes is there mention of a 36" Italian rifle.
>
> Now for a little background: Researchers found original American Rifleman
> magazine that featured the 36". The advertisement, which listed a 36"
> Italian rifle also contained an order blank Dept. Number: 358 (which can be
> seen in 21 H 704 - which also shows the envelope which arrived at Klein's
> with order coupon listing Dept. Number 358) Mr. Waldman, representative of
> Klein's told the WC the firm's advertising program was set up to be able to
> identify the month and magazine in which a specific advertisement appeared
> through the department number on the ordering coupon. Waldman identified
> Department 358 from the "Hidelll" coupon as coming from the American
> Rifleman, February,1963 issue. (3 H 366-369, See also 21 H 704, Ex, 8)
>
Links please.
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364b.htm
> While the ordering coupon does show up in WC exhibits - there is no matching
> advertisement from February, 1963 issue of AR.
Does this just mean that Waldman was not able to find copy of the Feb.
1963 American Rifleman?
> However, what is found is a "duplicate" Klein's advertisement, listed in the
> Holmes exhibits. Holmes, local Dallas Postal Inspector, told WC he had sent
> his secretary out on Saturday, November 23, to buy up outdoor-type
> magazines, thinking that he might "locate this gun to identify it, and I
> did". (7 H 294) However - in the Holmes exhibit we see the order coupon
> Dept. Number is 486. The Holmes exhibit did not come from AR but rather from
> November, 1963 issue of Field and Stream. (See 22 H 174, Ex. 2) In addition,
> the Klein (Holmes) advertisement does not mention a 36" Italian rifle - but
> it does show a 40" Italian rifle.
>
> Surely the FBI, with all its resources, could have checked out and found the
> February, 1963 issue of American Rifleman. One simple WC question to Waldman
> would have settled the dust: Why does this magazine, with accompanying
Nah, leave that to the WC critics.
> order coupon in Oswald's handwriting, list a 36" Italian rifle - and we
> have a 40.2" rifle as the murder weapon? Never asked and, therefore, never
> answered.
>
> Another instance of a mis - identified advertisement can be found in Dallas
> Police Chief Jesse E. Curry's book. Utilizing material from the DPD files
> the advertisement appears on page 99 (ex 43) The ordering coupon is
> Department 472. The identity of this magazine came to light in a book
> written by former Dallas Police Crime Lab detective. R. W. (Rusty)
> Livingston. JFK, FIRST DAY EVIDENCE. (Rusty apparently took duplicate
> pictures of evidence then stowed them away as souvenirs for the next 30
> years.) Not only does this advertisement feature a 6.5 Italian rifle, "an
> overall 40" long, but also displays a .38 Smith and Wesson revolver, both of
> which were circled. When Rusty copied the he caught the bottom of the page
> which showed the Department Number: 472 and name of magazine "Guns and
> Ammo".
>
> Another Klein coupon was found in Oswald's possessions. According to Judy
> Bonner, INVESTIGATION OF HOMICIDE,
> ". . . Detective Stovall discovered ". . . . a page that appeared to have
> been torn from a magazine. It was an advertisement of guns . . . from
> Klein's Sporting goods . . .." Department Order number: 425! This coupon
> came from American Rifleman issue, June, 1963. Thanks to noted researcher
> Paul Hoch - we now know this order coupon was torn from a magazine taken by
> FBI on November 23 from Alba's garage in New Orleans. Advertisement from
> that issue featured a 40.2" Italian rifle. - no 36"!!
>
Yes, by then they had run out of carbines. I'd be interested to know when
the change in the ad was sent out and when it first appeared. In their
April 1963 ad in American Rifleman they were still offering the 6.5 mm
Italian Carbine:
Only 40" overall, weighs only 7-lbs.
Anthony Marsh
I didn't say video. I think someone has the letter.
>
>
>
>
>>> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Anthony Marsh
> yeuhd wrote:
>> Vincent Bugliosi, "Reclaiming History", endnotes, p. 392:
>>
>> The Warren Commission overlooked putting the American Rifleman
>> advertisement in its volumes. But conspiracy theorist Sylvia Meagher
>> points out that the advertisement was for a $12.88 Carcano ($19.95 with
>
> I think you mean $12.78.
>
My bad. It was another which had it for $12.78.
claviger
> On Feb 14, 11:31 am, yeuhd <wall...@mailbag.com> wrote:
>
>
> > The specific rifle shipped against the order [from "A. Hidell"] had
> > been received by Klein's from Crescent [Crescent Firearms, Inc., of
> > New York City] 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. 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. 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.
>
>
> What I am trying to reconsile is the difference between what the ad
> stated and what was found on the sixth floor.
>
> If Kein's shipping order form states that one Italian carbine with
> control number VC836, serial number C2766 was sent to the Hidell
> address. Is that the 40.2 inch version or the shorter 36 inch?
>
> If they sent the longer rifle where does it state that? Was it an
> error? Was the ad wrong?
>
> Did anyone else who ordered that product from Klein's ad receive the
> 36 inch version? Did anyone else receive the 40.2 inch rifle?
How do we know LHO even noticed the difference? Or if he did, he
probably realized he got a better deal. A longer barrell delivers
higher velocity. Maybe he didn't care either way. If I remember
correctly, the MC came in 3 different lengths. The one LHO got was the
medium length.
tomnln
"claviger" <histori...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:07f43339-5a80-4b94...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 14, 6:11 pm, Tall guy <dean....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 14, 11:31 am, yeuhd <wall...@mailbag.com> wrote:
>
> > From the Warren Commission Report, p. 119:
>
> > The specific rifle shipped against the order [from "A. Hidell"] had
> > been received by Klein's from Crescent [Crescent Firearms, Inc., of
> > New York City] 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. 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. 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.
>
> >http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter...
>
> What I am trying to reconsile is the difference between what the ad
> stated and what was found on the sixth floor.
>
> If Kein's shipping order form states that one Italian carbine with
> control number VC836, serial number C2766 was sent to the Hidell
> address. Is that the 40.2 inch version or the shorter 36 inch?
>
> If they sent the longer rifle where does it state that? Was it an
> error? Was the ad wrong?
>
> Did anyone else who ordered that product from Klein's ad receive the
> 36 inch version? Did anyone else receive the 40.2 inch rifle?
CLAVIGER WROTE;
How do we know LHO even noticed the difference? Or if he did, he
probably realized he got a better deal. A longer barrell delivers
higher velocity. Maybe he didn't care either way. If I remember
correctly, the MC came in 3 different lengths. The one LHO got was the
medium length.
I WRITE;
The rifle in the back yard photo is NOT the same rifle found in the 6th
floor of the TSBD.
http://whokilledjfk.net/Rifle.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MJarsh wrote;
> I didn't say video. I think someone has the letter.
I write;
Authenticate the letter then, Produce it! ! !
Until then, Lattimer is a Fool.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Marsh
>
>> I didn't say video. I think someone has the letter.
>
>
> I write;
>
> Authenticate the letter then, Produce it! ! !
>
> Until then, Lattimer is a Fool.
>
Lattimer is always a fool, so what?
I don't have the letter. Ask John Canal.
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
Anthony Marsh
>
> How do we know LHO even noticed the difference? Or if he did, he
> probably realized he got a better deal. A longer barrell delivers
> higher velocity. Maybe he didn't care either way. If I remember
> correctly, the MC came in 3 different lengths. The one LHO got was the
> medium length.
>
>
>
> I WRITE;
>
> The rifle in the back yard photo is NOT the same rifle found in the 6th
> floor of the TSBD.
>
More nonsense. The HSCA proved it was Oswald's rifle.
> http://whokilledjfk.net/Rifle.htm
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
bigdog
> On Feb 14, 11:31 am, yeuhd <wall...@mailbag.com> wrote:
>
> > From the Warren Commission Report, p. 119:
>
> > The specific rifle shipped against the order [from "A. Hidell"] had
> > been received by Klein's from Crescent [Crescent Firearms, Inc., of
> > New York City] 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. 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. 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.
>
> >http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter...
>
> What I am trying to reconsile is the difference between what the ad
> stated and what was found on the sixth floor.
>
> If Kein's shipping order form states that one Italian carbine with
> control number VC836, serial number C2766 was sent to the Hidell
> address. Is that the 40.2 inch version or the shorter 36 inch?
>
> If they sent the longer rifle where does it state that? Was it an
> error? Was the ad wrong?
>
> Did anyone else who ordered that product from Klein's ad receive the
> 36 inch version? Did anyone else receive the 40.2 inch rifle?
I have a theory which is nothing more than an educated guess. I don't
think Oswald knew or even cared he got the longer rifle. He got a cheap
rifle, which was probably all he really cared about. The fact that he made
the rifle bag only 38 inches long leads me to believe he thought he had
the shorter rifle when he made the bag. Imagine his surprise when he
returned to Ruth Paine's house on Thursday night and discovered the bag
was too short. I hate when that happens. He could easily have made the bag
a few inches long had he known the true length of his rifle but would not
have realized the discrepancy until he went to retrieve the rifle from the
blanket in the garage either late Thursday night or early Friday morning.
At that point, it would have been too late to reconstruct the bag so he
improvised and broke the rifle down so it would fit in the bag. Had he
know how long his rifle actually was, I think he would have made the bag
long enough to hold it without breaking it down. It would have been much
easier than breaking the rifle down and reassembling it in the TSBD.
Marty
TOP POST
Tony - I have the following in my notes about the carbine (36") and rifle
(40.2"):
American Rifleman Klein ads had the 36" advertised as far back as October
'62. The 40.2" rifle was found in April '63 issue of AR; Field & Stream
ads were checked '62 Sept and Oct carried 36" carbine; the 40" was not
found until Sept, Oct, and November of '63.
I can't recall where I got this info - maybe from Ian Griggs or the
"Marketing of a Weapon" by Gary Nivaggi. Gary looked up all the back
issues of AR from 1958-1964 and perhaps that was part of my source.
Marty
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GrmdnVBbj6_b8ira...@comcast.com...
Anthony Marsh
Anthony Marsh
> TOP POST
>
> Tony - I have the following in my notes about the carbine (36") and rifle
> (40.2"):
>
> American Rifleman Klein ads had the 36" advertised as far back as October
> '62. The 40.2" rifle was found in April '63 issue of AR; Field & Stream
> ads were checked '62 Sept and Oct carried 36" carbine; the 40" was not
> found until Sept, Oct, and November of '63.
>
Thanks. The funny part I was pointing out was that the AR April 1963 ad
was for the 6.5 ITALIAN CARBINE. I can't prove it, but I think this is a
clue that KLEIN'S knew by the end of February 1963 that they were running
out of the carbines and would have to substitute the short rifles. The
picture was not changed. It still shows the carbine. The order number was
not changed. The only change was from 36" to 40".
Anthony Marsh
Hey, stop copying me. I copyrighted that!
> rifle, which was probably all he really cared about. The fact that he made
> the rifle bag only 38 inches long leads me to believe he thought he had
> the shorter rifle when he made the bag. Imagine his surprise when he
You think he made the bag in March 1963? Or just never bothered to
measure his rifle?
> returned to Ruth Paine's house on Thursday night and discovered the bag
> was too short. I hate when that happens. He could easily have made the bag
> a few inches long had he known the true length of his rifle but would not
> have realized the discrepancy until he went to retrieve the rifle from the
> blanket in the garage either late Thursday night or early Friday morning.
> At that point, it would have been too late to reconstruct the bag so he
> improvised and broke the rifle down so it would fit in the bag. Had he
> know how long his rifle actually was, I think he would have made the bag
> long enough to hold it without breaking it down. It would have been much
> easier than breaking the rifle down and reassembling it in the TSBD.
>
You need to copyright your new theory.
Marty
> Marty wrote:
>> OOPS - don't jump all over me Tony. I should have said "carbine" when
>> referencing the 36". Matter of fact I do not know the difference between
>> a rifle and a BB gun - and don't want to - I hate guns (although I
>> confess that I do have an Italian Carbine):)
>>
>
> Just for fun look up progressive gain twist and look down your carbine's
> barrel and see it is has progressive gain twist. Is your serial number
> also C2766?
Yes - there is a spiral twist in the barrel. C2766? Surely you jest.:)
M
Raymond
> yeuhd wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 7:10 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >> Why was Oswald's rifle the only rifle in the world stamped "MADE ITALY"?
>
> > Your evidence for this claim?
>
> Oswald's rifle was stamped "MADE ITALY." All the imported rifles were
> supposed to be stamped "MADE IN ITALY." I have never been able to find
> any other M-C rifle stamped "MADE ITALY."
>
> http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/GMCcu.jpg
Under the terms of the contract, Riva was required to renovate and
repair damaged or defective weapons and, where appropriate, to shorten
or lengthen the barrels of weapons to meet the needs of the US
sporting and target shooting fraternities. Additionally, and most
importantly, all identifying markings on the weapons were to be
removed and the words "Made in Italy" stamped on each barrel.
As Bloomgarden wrote in his book:
"A very simple operation, Riva said: To shorten the 91's with long
barrels, to lengthen those with short barrels...and to remove the
markings and inscribe "Made in Italy" on each weapon - these were easy
tasks. Shortening was a matter of sawing; lengthening was a matter of
inserting a sleeve; the various digits and letters could be removed by
grinding."
So it was that Luciano Riva accepted the contract from Adam
Consolidated, repaired, renovated and restored the Carcano rifles
entrusted to him and removed all the unique identifying marks,
including serial numbers, replacing these with the simple legend "Made
in Italy". By reputation, Luciano Riva was a proud and dedicated
craftsman who would produce workmanship of the very highest standard
for his new benefactors.
tomnln
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:CiHtj.2012$f8....@newsfe23.lga...
STILL no proof from yeuhd.
------------------------------------------------------
Raymond
> The rifle found on the sixth floor was 40.2 inches long and the rifle
> Hidell ordered was 36 inches long.
>
> Is there proof that Klein's substituted the longer rifle?
>
> Was the 40.2 inch Carcano sent to Hidell instead?
"Who had deceived thee so often as thyself ? "
----- Benjamin Franklin
The Mannlicher Carcano in the National Archives is not the weapon
owned by Lee Oswald and is not the weapon that he purchased in the
spring of 1963 to kill General Walker. However, it is the murder
weapon that was used to murder President Kennedy and found on the
sixth floor of the TSBD,
There was a second MC purchased to frame LHO after the serial number
of his rifle was known. The original serial number of the second
weapon was removed from the barrel and C-2766 was re stamped on the
barrel to be the ONLY evidence connection to Oswald after the
shooting
event in Dallas. The weapon owned by Oswald was still in the rolled
up
Russian blanket when Oswald left the Paine home for work on the
morning of Nov. 22, 1963 and it was removed after he left for work.
Perhaps Ms. Ruth Paine will someday tell us about WHO removed the
Oswald rifle from the blanket and left the light on in her garage.
Could it have been Bardwell D.Odum.... "Bard to Ruth..."He stopped by
often." Was he in the empty house next door to the Paine home that
was
used to monitor the Oswalds while they stayed as guests of Ruth and
Mike Paine?. Was he there waiting for Lee to leave so he could remove
the Oswald rifle? Mike also knew Odum "well" and before Nov. 22.
See Mike's testimony
To change the serial number was an easy task. The rifle can be
disassembled in minutes and the barrel, where the serial number was
stamped on, can be removed with ease and a new serial number can be
replaced by anyone with simple tools and a metal number stamping kit.
And, with acid, the original serial number can be recovered.
The two different weapons are as different as day is to night. Even a
blind may could discover the difference .
SEE; The Second Carcano:
http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html
The Oswald rifle was 34" long. The murder weapon was 39" long. the
sling mounts on the Oswald weapon were on the bottom while the sling
mounts on the murder weapon were on the side. SEE PHOTOS
Even Marina Oswald, who knew nothing about guns noticed the
difference:
"Another witness to receive extraordinary treatment in the Oswald
case
was his wife, Marina. She was taken to the jail while her husband was
still alive and shown a rifle by Chief of Police Jesse Curry. Asked
if
it were Oswald's, she replied that she believed Oswald had a rifle
but
that it didn't look like that".
http://www.davemckay.co.uk/philosophy/russell/russell.php?name=16.que...
Summary
The existence of two rifles with the serial number C-2766 in evidence
means that no one can prove that the rifle found in the Texas School
Book Depository belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald. In fact, it is highly
unlikely. The only photographs of Oswald with the rifle shows that
it
had a bottom sling mount -- the rifle found in the Depository did
not.
Since the Warren Commission concluded that there was only one rifle
of
that type to bear that serial number, it seems safe to conclude that
the second C-2766 was a forgery. And what other reason could there
be
to forge the serial number other than to frame Oswald ?
" I'm just a patsy."
Anthony Marsh
Riva did not remove the serial numbers. He was supposed to remove other
marks, but he did not always. Many still had their Fascist dates.
The stamping of "MADE IN ITALY" was not in the same location as the
serial number.
yeuhd
> "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:CiHtj.2012$f8....@newsfe23.lga...
>
>
>
>
>
Proof of what? Once again you're confused. I'm not the person who
claimed Lattimer lied about having a rifle with the same serial number.
Anthony Marsh
Not what I asked. Do you know what progressive gain twist is? If not,
look it up. Then see if your particular rifle has the progressive gain
twist. I'm just curious to know which rifle you have.
What does your rear sight look like? Can you post a photo of your rifle?
> M
Anthony Marsh
> On Feb 13, 11:41 pm, Tall guy <dean....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> The rifle found on the sixth floor was 40.2 inches long and the rifle
>> Hidell ordered was 36 inches long.
>>
>> Is there proof that Klein's substituted the longer rifle?
>>
>> Was the 40.2 inch Carcano sent to Hidell instead?
>
> "Who had deceived thee so often as thyself ? "
> ----- Benjamin Franklin
>
> The Mannlicher Carcano in the National Archives is not the weapon
> owned by Lee Oswald and is not the weapon that he purchased in the
> spring of 1963 to kill General Walker. However, it is the murder
> weapon that was used to murder President Kennedy and found on the
> sixth floor of the TSBD,
>
More nonsense.
> There was a second MC purchased to frame LHO after the serial number
> of his rifle was known. The original serial number of the second
> weapon was removed from the barrel and C-2766 was re stamped on the
> barrel to be the ONLY evidence connection to Oswald after the
> shooting
> event in Dallas. The weapon owned by Oswald was still in the rolled
> up
Which rifle do you think had the serial number removed? The one now in
the National Archives? It would be easy to check that one and see it
that had been done. Well, by golly that's exactly what they did and
there is no indication that the serial number was removed and restamped.
What else you got?
> Russian blanket when Oswald left the Paine home for work on the
> morning of Nov. 22, 1963 and it was removed after he left for work.
> Perhaps Ms. Ruth Paine will someday tell us about WHO removed the
> Oswald rifle from the blanket and left the light on in her garage.
> Could it have been Bardwell D.Odum.... "Bard to Ruth..."He stopped by
> often." Was he in the empty house next door to the Paine home that
> was
> used to monitor the Oswalds while they stayed as guests of Ruth and
> Mike Paine?. Was he there waiting for Lee to leave so he could remove
> the Oswald rifle? Mike also knew Odum "well" and before Nov. 22.
> See Mike's testimony
>
Well, that is a cute theory for someone stealing Oswald's rifle, but I
don't see how it needs a second rifle.
> To change the serial number was an easy task. The rifle can be
> disassembled in minutes and the barrel, where the serial number was
> stamped on, can be removed with ease and a new serial number can be
> replaced by anyone with simple tools and a metal number stamping kit.
> And, with acid, the original serial number can be recovered.
>
Unfortunately you have no idea what you are talking about. Why don't you
demonstrate it for us and show how it is undetectable?
> The two different weapons are as different as day is to night. Even a
> blind may could discover the difference .
>
> SEE; The Second Carcano:
> http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html
>
> The Oswald rifle was 34" long. The murder weapon was 39" long. the
I don't know where you get YOUR numbers from, but the ad said 36" for
the carbine and 40" for the rifle.
> sling mounts on the Oswald weapon were on the bottom while the sling
> mounts on the murder weapon were on the side. SEE PHOTOS
>
More nonsense. Same rear sight, short rifle.
The HSCA found the same wear marks.
> Even Marina Oswald, who knew nothing about guns noticed the
> difference:
>
> "Another witness to receive extraordinary treatment in the Oswald
> case
> was his wife, Marina. She was taken to the jail while her husband was
> still alive and shown a rifle by Chief of Police Jesse Curry. Asked
> if
> it were Oswald's, she replied that she believed Oswald had a rifle
> but
> that it didn't look like that".
>
Sure, it had a different sling. BFD.
> http://www.davemckay.co.uk/philosophy/russell/russell.php?name=16.que...
>
> Summary
>
> The existence of two rifles with the serial number C-2766 in evidence
> means that no one can prove that the rifle found in the Texas School
> Book Depository belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald. In fact, it is highly
> unlikely. The only photographs of Oswald with the rifle shows that
> it
> had a bottom sling mount -- the rifle found in the Depository did
> not.
>
No.
tomnln
Proof of what? Once again you're confused. I'm not the person who
claimed Lattimer lied about having a rifle with the same serial number.
Then, WHY did you stick your nose into the thread?
Would you care to address evidence tampering?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Marsh
I am. Lattimer claimed in his book that his rifle's serial number is
C2766. That is a lie. That serial number belonged ONLY to Oswald's
rifle. Please tell everyone that you can't figure that that that is a lie.
yeuhd
> Would you care to address evidence tampering?>>>
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
I already did. At length.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/d2aee9981b7071e0
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/daeda6adb464f8d4
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/2aca1537914a3d3b
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a15f9cdad135569a
Anthony Marsh
What gives YOU the right to tell me what I can post and what I can't
post? If I see some incorrect information I post to correct it. It's
that simple.
tomnln
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/d2aee9981b7071e0
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/daeda6adb464f8d4
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/2aca1537914a3d3b
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a15f9cdad135569a
--------------------------------------------------------------
What you offered are Excuses for Crimes.
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------------
yeuhd
> > Would you care to address evidence tampering?>>>
>
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
>
> I already did. At length.
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/daeda6adb464...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/2aca1537914a...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a15f9cdad135...
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> What you offered are Excuses for Crimes.
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
No, to the contrary, I showed that:
1. The Walker photo already had the hole in it when it was found in the
Paines' garage. And in any case, under the rules of evidence it would not
have been relevant and admissible at trial to the question of whether
Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b), which
followed an existing body of Texas case law.
2. The chain of custody of JFK's brain from November 22, 1963 to April 22,
1965 was known, and the brain would have been available for Oswald's
trial. The courts, not the Kennedys, would have the ultimate say on its
use as evidence.
3. The transcript of Oswald's radio debate was prepared by the radio
station's secretary, not the Warren Commission, and the differences
between the sound recording and the transcript are trivial and
insubstantial. Both the transcript *and* the sound recording were
submitted in evidence by the Warren Commission. And in any case, under the
rules of evidence neither the transcript nor the recording would have been
relevant and admissible at trial to the question of whether Oswald shot
the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b), which followed an
existing body of Texas case law.
4. Oswald's letter to FBI agent Hosty was destroyed after Oswald's death.
So yes, when the Dallas FBI office destroyed the letter, the authorities
DID know that there would be no trial of Oswald. And once again, the Hosty
letter would not have been relevant and admissible at trial to the
question of whether Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence
404(b), which followed an existing body of Texas case law. By the way, I'm
still waiting for the article number of the Texas statute re destruction
of evidence. What is that article number?
tomnln
On Feb 22, 12:31 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> > Would you care to address evidence tampering?>>>
>
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
>
> I already did. At length.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/d2aee9981b70...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/daeda6adb464...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/2aca1537914a...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a15f9cdad135...
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> What you offered are Excuses for Crimes.
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
yuehd wrote;
No, to the contrary, I showed that:
1. The Walker photo already had the hole in it when it was found in the
Paines' garage. And in any case, under the rules of evidence it would not
have been relevant and admissible at trial to the question of whether
Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b), which
followed an existing body of Texas case law.
**********
WRONG AGAIN;
Read Marina's testimony where she said there was NO hole in the photo when
the FBI showed it to her.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The chain of custody of JFK's brain from November 22, 1963 to April 22,
1965 was known, and the brain would have been available for Oswald's
trial. The courts, not the Kennedys, would have the ultimate say on its
use as evidence.
When the brain turned up Missing for the HSCA, the WC supporters said that
RFK took it when the autopsy finished,
so it could be burried with JFK's body.
We know that's a Lie because Dr. Finke testified to the HSCA that he was
called back to Bethesda a week later to examine the brain.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The transcript of Oswald's radio debate was prepared by the radio
station's secretary, not the Warren Commission, and the differences
between the sound recording and the transcript are trivial and
insubstantial. Both the transcript *and* the sound recording were
submitted in evidence by the Warren Commission. And in any case, under the
rules of evidence neither the transcript nor the recording would have been
relevant and admissible at trial to the question of whether Oswald shot
the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b), which followed an
existing body of Texas case law.
The "inserted" word NOT gave a REVERSE meaning to Oswald's answer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Oswald's letter to FBI agent Hosty was destroyed after Oswald's death.
So yes, when the Dallas FBI office destroyed the letter, the authorities
DID know that there would be no trial of Oswald. And once again, the Hosty
letter would not have been relevant and admissible at trial to the
question of whether Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence
404(b), which followed an existing body of Texas case law. By the way, I'm
still waiting for the article number of the Texas statute re destruction
of evidence. What is that article number?
BULLSHIT!
Are you telling us that the FBI never thought there would be an Official
Investigation?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
English
> So yes, when the Dallas FBI office destroyed the letter, the authorities
> DID know that there would be no trial of Oswald. And once again, the Hosty
> letter would not have been relevant and admissible at trial to the
> question of whether Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence
> 404(b), which followed an existing body of Texas case law.
What if Oswald was later found to have acted in collusion with someone
else? Would that letter not then be relevant?
Anyhoo, it does seem a bit rash to go destroying evidence just because
a suspect is dead (although I do realise that you can't keep
everything).
yeuhd
> "yeuhd" <wall...@mailbag.com> wrote in message
Marina was wrong. She says the FBI showed her the photo when she was
in Washington, which would be in 1964. But the DPD photo of Oswald's
possessions, taken in late November 1963, before the collection was
transferred to the FBI, shows that the Walker photo already had the
hole at that time: the Walker photo is sitting on top of a letter, and
the writing is visible through the hole, which has the same shape and
size as it did when it was later photographed against a black
background. Two of the six DPD detectives who found the Walker photos
in Ruth Paine's garage clearly remembered that the photo had a hole in
it when they found it.
> When the brain turned up Missing for the HSCA, the WC supporters said that
> RFK took it when the autopsy finished,
> so it could be burried with JFK's body.
>
> We know that's a Lie because Dr. Finke testified to the HSCA that he was
> called back to Bethesda a week later to examine the brain.
The chain of custody of all the autopsy materials, including JFK's
brain, is known from November 22, 1963 to April 22, 1965. They were
kept in the Executive Office Building where they were maintained in
the custody Robert I. Bouck, Special Agent in Charge of the Protective
Research Division,
U.S. Secret Service, and under the control of Admiral Burkley, JFK's
personal physician. Therefore, your claim that Oswald's case would
have been "dismissed" because the brain was missing is wrong.
Robert Kennedy did not take possession of the autopsy materials until
April 22, 1965.
> The "inserted" word NOT gave a REVERSE meaning to Oswald's answer.
Both the transcript *and* the sound recording were submitted in
evidence by the Warren Commission. And in any case, under the rules of
evidence neither the transcript nor the recording would have been
relevant and admissible at trial to the question of whether Oswald
shot the president. All evidence must have relevancy to question in
issue, and tend to prove it, and if not a link in chain of proof, it
is not properly receivable. Therefore, your claim that the radio
debate transcript would have, all by itself, led to the dismissal of
the case against Oswald *at trial*, is wrong.
> Are you telling us that the FBI never thought there would be an Official
> Investigation?
Your argument on your website is that the FBI's destruction of the
Hosty letter would have, all by itself, led to the dismissal of the
case against Oswald *at trial*. ("Destroying Oswald's note to Dallas
FBI Office CASE DISMISSED") Your argument on your website is *not*
about a post-mortem investigation of Oswald, it is about what would
have happened had Oswald lived and gone to trial. ("Oswald Never would
have been convicted at Trial for 2 reasons.") Yet Hosty did not
destroy the letter until *after* Oswald's death.
And you still haven't explained how, under the Texas rules of
evidence, such a letter (or lack of it) would even be entered in
evidence had Oswald gone to trial. The Hosty letter gave no evidence
one way or another on the question at trial of whether Oswald killed
JFK. The Texas rules of evidence (§ 404(b)) clearly forbid admission
of character evidence, i.e., evidence of a trait of character to show
action in conformity with that trait on a particular occasion.
"Propensity" evidence was ruled inadmissible by the U.S. Supreme Court
in Thompson v. Bowie (1866).
By the way, you also claimed above in this thread that the alleged
destruction of evidence was a "crime" and a "felony". What is the
article number of the Texas statutes that says that?
claviger
> The rifle found on the sixth floor was 40.2 inches long and the rifle
> Hidell ordered was 36 inches long.
>
> Is there proof that Klein's substituted the longer rifle?
>
> Was the 40.2 inch Carcano sent to Hidell instead?
Tall Guy,
Paraviccini - Carcano made four basic models of military rifles in
WWII:
6.5mm Carcano M91 Fucile Lungo (long rifle) 1295mm (50.5")
6.5mm Carcano M91/38 Fucile Corto (short rifle) 1015mm (39.5")
6.5mm Carcano M91TS Moschetto per Truppe Speciali (Special Troops
carbine) 952mm (37.2")
6.5mm Carcano M91 Moschetto da Cavalleria (cavalry carbine) 914.4mm
(36")
As you can see the short rifle is not much longer than a carbine.
tomnln
******************************************************************
Marina was wrong. She says the FBI showed her the photo when she was in
Washington, which would be in 1964. But the DPD photo of Oswald's
possessions, taken in late November 1963, before the collection was
transferred to the FBI, shows that the Walker photo already had the hole
at that time: the Walker photo is sitting on top of a letter, and the
writing is visible through the hole, which has the same shape and size as
it did when it was later photographed against a black background. Two of
the six DPD detectives who found the Walker photos in Ruth Paine's garage
clearly remembered that the photo had a hole in it when they found it.
REALLY YEUHD?
Tell us what that writing says? (It's "White-Out")
Show us the "Ragged" hole in the DPD picture of the Walker photo?
Was there a "Black Letter" under the photo with the Ragged Hole in it?
Because BOTH were Obvious Evidence Tampering, the FBI "Blacked Out the WHOLE
Thing.
ALL Seen HERE http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
Marina SAW the liscense plate on the photo when FBI/WC Showed it to her.
(see her testimony http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm )
The authorities "Altered" the photo THREE Times.
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
yeuhd
> Show us the "Ragged" hole in the DPD picture of the Walker photo?
I already did. Here it is again:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/plate.htm
> Was there a "Black Letter" under the photo with the Ragged Hole in it?
The Walker photo was photographed against a black background for the
Warren Commission exhibit. The black background can be seen around the
edges of the Walker photo:
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0016a.htm
> Because BOTH were Obvious Evidence Tampering, the FBI "Blacked Out the WHOLE
> Thing.
The license plate area of the Walker photo isn't "blacked out". It's a
hole.
The Dallas Police Department photo of Oswald's belongings -- you know,
the same photo you cite as evidence for your argument -- was taken in
late November 1963 *before* Oswald's belongings were transferred to
the FBI on November 26, and it *already* shows the hole in the Walker
photo.
And two DPD detectives, Richard B. Stovall and Guy F. Rose, clearly
remembered that the hole was there when they found it in the Paines'
garage on November 23:
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0016a.htm
tomnln
The WC Exhibit shows the "Jagged Edges where they "Punched" a hole min the
photo.
READ Marina's testimony;
She saw the liscense plate in the photo when it was shown to her by FBI AND
WC.
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
"yeuhd" <wal...@mailbag.com> wrote in message
news:a0931ae0-60b2-428f...@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
Show me this writing and tell me what the words are.
>
>> When the brain turned up Missing for the HSCA, the WC supporters said that
>> RFK took it when the autopsy finished,
>> so it could be burried with JFK's body.
>>
>> We know that's a Lie because Dr. Finke testified to the HSCA that he was
>> called back to Bethesda a week later to examine the brain.
>
> The chain of custody of all the autopsy materials, including JFK's
> brain, is known from November 22, 1963 to April 22, 1965. They were
> kept in the Executive Office Building where they were maintained in
> the custody Robert I. Bouck, Special Agent in Charge of the Protective
> Research Division,
> U.S. Secret Service, and under the control of Admiral Burkley, JFK's
> personal physician. Therefore, your claim that Oswald's case would
> have been "dismissed" because the brain was missing is wrong.
>
It would have gone missing by the time of the trial. And you would have
approved of that.
Do you think the CIA would have come forward at trial with a tape
recording of Oswald threatening to shoot the President?
Anthony Marsh
>> 4. Oswald's letter to FBI agent Hosty was destroyed after Oswald's death.
>> So yes, when the Dallas FBI office destroyed the letter, the authorities
>> DID know that there would be no trial of Oswald. And once again, the Hosty
>> letter would not have been relevant and admissible at trial to the
>> question of whether Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence
>> 404(b), which followed an existing body of Texas case law.
>
> What if Oswald was later found to have acted in collusion with someone
> else? Would that letter not then be relevant?
>
The letter does not hint of conspiracy. It suggests that the FBI knew
that Oswald was dangerous and failed to notify either the DPD or the SS
as it should have.
> Anyhoo, it does seem a bit rash to go destroying evidence just because
> a suspect is dead (although I do realise that you can't keep
> everything).
>
What about destroying evidence before the prime suspect is dead? That's ok?
>
>
>
>
Anthony Marsh
> The rifle found on the sixth floor was 40.2 inches long and the rifle
> Hidell ordered was 36 inches long.
>
Hidell did not order the rifle. Hidell ordered the carbine, 36" long,
weighing 5-1/2 pounds, from Klein's. Hidell was the alias Oswald used.
There was no real person named Alex Hidell.
> Is there proof that Klein's substituted the longer rifle?
>
Proof. Not directly. Indirectly.
For example, in the court case about Intelligent Design the plaintiffs
found a clue in revised documents which shows intent.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3416_id_10.html
NARRATOR: After much digging, she hit pay dirt. Buried in these documents
were two drafts of Pandas straddling the 1987 case of Edwards versus
Aguillard, in which the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to teach
creationism in public school science class. One draft was written before
the case and the other revised just after.
BARBARA FORREST: In the first 1987 draft, which is the pre-Edwards draft,
the definition of creation reads this way "Creation means that various
forms of life began abruptly, through the agency of an intelligent
creator, with their distinctive features already intact: fish with fins
and scales, birds with feathers, beaks and wings, et cetera." The same
definition in this draft, after the Edwards decision, reads this way:
"Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly
through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already
intact: fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, et cetera."
Same definition, just one is worded in terms of creationism, the other one
worded in terms of intelligent design.
NICK MATZKE: Everyone said intelligent design is creationism re-labeled.
Never in our wildest dreams, though, did we think that this would actually
be recorded in paper in a way that could be documented in a court case.
ERIC ROTHSCHILD: And that became probably our best single piece of
evidence at trial.
NARRATOR: Barbara Forrest's testimony would make a strong case that the
Dover school board was thrusting religion into the classroom. And in
comparing the Of Pandas and People drafts, Forrest discovered that the
authors had apparently made their revisions in haste.
BARBARA FORREST: In cleansing this manuscript, they failed to replace
every word properly. I found the word "creationists." And instead of
replacing the entire word, they just kind of did this, and got "design
proponents" with the "c" in front and the "ists" in the back from the
original word.
NICK MATZKE: So the correct term for this transitional form is "Cdesign
proponentsists." And everyone now refers to this as the "missing link"
between creationism and intelligent design. You've got the direct physical
evidence there of a transitional fossil.
Likewise in the ads that Klein's placed in The American Rifleman we can
see the same type of slipup and incomplete change.
In the December 1962 ad Klein's describes it as a 6.5 ITALIAN CARBINE with
a 36" barrel weighing 5-1/2 pounds.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/AR_DEC62_75.gif
That is an accurate description of the Mannlicher-Carcano carbine which
they started selling and the photo shows the carbine model.
Then in the April 1963 ad they changed only the description to 40"
weighing 7 pounds. That is the short rifle, not the carbine. But the ad
still says 6.5 ITALIAN CARBINE and the photo shows the same carbine as
before.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/AR_APR63_55.gif
This change in the wording proves that Klein's knew that they were running
out of the 36" carbines and would be substituting with the 40" short
rifles. How many customers would know that 40" was not a carbine? Whether
it is a carbine or a rifle does not depend on the overall length, only on
the barrel length.
Given the typical lead time for ads, this indicates that they knew in late
February/early March that they were running out of carbines, so they were
changing their ad.
> Was the 40.2 inch Carcano sent to Hidell instead?
>
>
Yes, to Oswald.
>
>
tomnln
See her testimony>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
The liscense plate was Visable while in the posession of the authorities.
The authorities Tasmpered with Evidence.
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0aGdnTuARuBgmV_a...@comcast.com...
Anthony Marsh
> On Feb 23, 11:42 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Show us the "Ragged" hole in the DPD picture of the Walker photo?
>
> I already did. Here it is again:
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/plate.htm
>
>> Was there a "Black Letter" under the photo with the Ragged Hole in it?
>
> The Walker photo was photographed against a black background for the
> Warren Commission exhibit. The black background can be seen around the
> edges of the Walker photo:
> http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0016a.htm
>
Do you know what cringling is? How does a black hole become white out?
>> Because BOTH were Obvious Evidence Tampering, the FBI "Blacked Out the WHOLE
>> Thing.
>
> The license plate area of the Walker photo isn't "blacked out". It's a
> hole.
>
How can you put white out on a black hole?
Raymond
> On Feb 22, 12:31�pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Would you care to address evidence tampering?>>>
>
> > >http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> > >http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
>
> > I already did. At length.
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/d2aee9981b70...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/daeda6adb464...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/2aca1537914a...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a15f9cdad135...
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > What you offered are Excuses for Crimes.
>
> > �http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> > �http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No, to the contrary, I showed that:
>
> 1. The Walker photo already had the hole in it when it was found in the
> Paines' garage.
The photo as published in Chief Curry's book shows NO hole in the
photo when it was found.
Retired Dallas police chief, Jesse Curry reveals his personal JFK
assassination file
by Jesse E Curry (Author)
THE WALKER SHOOTING:
Posner accepts that Oswald shot at Walker, and also states that the
photo of Walker's house had a hole in it when originally found, based
on "a photo of evidence taken from Oswald's flat," (64) but the photo
as published in Chief Curry's book shows NO hole in the photo when it
was found. (65) Posner's statement is demonstrably false, which raises
questions about other aspects of his account of the Walker shooting.
Posner again lists critics who don't discuss the Walker shooting,
failing to note that the subject matter of their books wouldn't
naturally cover it. (66)
>And in any case, under the rules of evidence it would not
> have been relevant and admissible at trial to the question of whether
> Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b), which
> followed an existing body of Texas case law.
> 2. The chain of custody of JFK's brain from November 22, 1963 to April 22,
> 1965 was known, and the brain would have been available for Oswald's
> trial. The courts, not the Kennedys, would have the ultimate say on its
> use as evidence.
>
> 3. The transcript of Oswald's radio debate was prepared by the radio
> station's secretary, not the Warren Commission, and the differences
> between the sound recording and the transcript are trivial and
> insubstantial. Both the transcript *and* the sound recording were
> submitted in evidence by the Warren Commission. And in any case, under the
> rules of evidence neither the transcript nor the recording would have been
> relevant and admissible at trial to the question of whether Oswald shot
> the president. �See Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b), which followed an
> existing body of Texas case law.
>
> 4. Oswald's letter to FBI agent Hosty was destroyed after Oswald's death.
> So yes, when the Dallas FBI office destroyed the letter, the authorities
> DID know that there would be no trial of Oswald. And once again, the Hosty
> letter would not have been relevant and admissible at trial to the
> question of whether Oswald shot the president. See Texas Rule of Evidence
> 404(b), which followed an existing body of Texas case law. By the way, I'm
> still waiting for the article number of the Texas statute re destruction
> of evidence. What is that article number?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
yeuhd
> > Marina was wrong. She says the FBI showed her the photo when she was
> > in Washington, which would be in 1964. But the DPD photo of Oswald's
> > possessions, taken in late November 1963, before the collection was
> > transferred to the FBI, shows that the Walker photo already had the
> > hole at that time: the Walker photo is sitting on top of a letter, and
> > the writing is visible through the hole, which has the same shape and
> > size as it did when it was later photographed against a black
> > background. Two of the six DPD detectives who found the Walker photos
> > in Ruth Paine's garage clearly remembered that the photo had a hole in
> > it when they found it.
>
> Show me this writing and tell me what the words are.
>
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0306b.htm
See p. 2-4 of the report:
"On May 18, 1964, Mr. RICHARD B. STOVALL, Detective, Homicide and
Robbery Bureay, Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, advised he
was one of the four officers who searched the residence of Mrs. RUTH
PAINE in Irving, Texas, for material that belonged to LEE HARVEY
OSWALD.... After viewing the photograph depicting the residence of Major
General EDWIN A. WALKER, which has been marked as Commission Exhibit
Number 5 and as Federal Bureau of Investigation Inventory Number 369,
he advised he recalled observing this photograph on November 23, 1963.
He stated this photograph had been found in a cardboard box, along
with several other photographs, which was allegedly the property of
LEE HARVEY OSWALD.
"He stated at the time he observed this particular photograph, he
surmised that OSWALD had evidently taken the license plate number out
of the photograph to keep anyone from identifying the owner of that
automobile. He advised he is positive the photograph was mutilated as
shown in Commission Exhibit Number 5 at the time they recovered it at
the PAINE residence."
"On May 18, 1964, Mr. GUY F. ROSE, Detective, Homicide and Robbery
Bureau, Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, advised he had been
present and assisted in the search of the residence of Mrs. RUTH PAINE
... for property and evidence belonging to LEE HARVEY OSWALD.... He
advised he recalls finding a box containing photographs at the
residence and taking it to the police station.
"After viewing the photograph depicting the residence of Major General
EDWIN A. WALKER, which has been marked as Commission Exhibit Number 5
and as Federal Bureau of Investigation Inventory Number 369, ROSE
stated he recalls observing this photograph at the time they had
seized OSWALD's material from the PAINE residence. He advised at the
time, he had noted that someone had torn out a section on the
automobile, which area contains the license plate for the 1957
Chevrolet.... He stated he definitely recalls that this photograph,
marked as Commission Exhibit Number 5, was one of the photographs
recovered from the PAINE residence and that it had been mutilated at
the time they had recovered the box containing the photographs."
tomnln
> yeuhd wrote:
>> On Feb 23, 11:42 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Show us the "Ragged" hole in the DPD picture of the Walker photo?
>>
>> I already did. Here it is again:
>>
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/plate.htm
>>
>>> Was there a "Black Letter" under the photo with the Ragged Hole in it?
>>
>> The Walker photo was photographed against a black background for the
>> Warren Commission exhibit. The black background can be seen around the
>> edges of the Walker photo:
>> http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0016a.htm
>>
>
> Do you know what cringling is? How does a black hole become white out?
>
>>> Because BOTH were Obvious Evidence Tampering, the FBI "Blacked Out the
>>> WHOLE
>>> Thing.
>>
>> The license plate area of the Walker photo isn't "blacked out". It's a
>> hole.
>>
WCR Apologist Marsh wrote;
> How can you put white out on a black hole?
I write;
#1 The Walker photo on the floor is "Whited Out"
#2 They Then put a HOLE in the photo. (see Marina's testimony)
#3 They then "Blacked Out" the liscense portion of the photo.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yeuhd
> The photo as published in Chief Curry's book shows NO hole in the
> photo when it was found.
The photo as published in Chief Curry's book is a low-resolution
reproduction of the DPD photo of Oswald's belongings. When the DPD photo
is seen in a higher-resolution reproduction, the hole in the Walker photo
is visible. See:
claviger
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:cp6dnaM6iuATzl_a...@comcast.com...
>
> > yeuhd wrote:
> >> On Feb 23, 11:42 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >>> Show us the "Ragged" hole in the DPD picture of the Walker photo?
>
> >> I already did. Here it is again:
>
> >>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/plate.htm
>
> >>> Was there a "Black Letter" under the photo with the Ragged Hole in it?
>
> >> The Walker photo was photographed against a black background for the
> >> Warren Commission exhibit. The black background can be seen around the
> >> edges of the Walker photo:
>
> > Do you know what cringling is? How does a black hole become white out?
>
> >>> Because BOTH were Obvious Evidence Tampering, the FBI "Blacked Out the
> >>> WHOLE
> >>> Thing.
>
> >> The license plate area of the Walker photo isn't "blacked out". It's a
> >> hole.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------
> WCR Apologist Marsh wrote;
>
> > How can you put white out on a black hole?
>
> I write;
> #1 The Walker photo on the floor is "Whited Out"
> #2 They Then put a HOLE in the photo. (see Marina's testimony)
> #3 They then "Blacked Out" the liscense portion of the photo.
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> The Dallas Police Department photo of Oswald's belongings -- you know,
>
> >> the same photo you cite as evidence for your argument -- was taken in
> >> late November 1963 *before* Oswald's belongings were transferred to
> >> the FBI on November 26, and it *already* shows the hole in the Walker
> >> photo.
>
> >> And two DPD detectives, Richard B. Stovall and Guy F. Rose, clearly
> >> remembered that the hole was there when they found it in the Paines'
> >> garage on November 23:
>
tomnin,
Are you trying to say because there is a hole in this photograph that
LHO didn't fire a shot at General Walker?
tomnln
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/plate.htm
You stated that you can READ the writing on the envelope Under that photo.
Please tell what it says?
Anthony Marsh
No, the hole is not visible and the crinkling around the license plate
is not there.
Maybe what you see is white out. You can't read the license plate number.
tomnln
"claviger" <histori...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:97013017-3a51-4599...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
claviger wrote;
tomnin,
Are you trying to say because there is a hole in this photograph that
LHO didn't fire a shot at General Walker?
I write;
The "EVIDENCE" states thast Oswald did NOT shoot at Walker>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yeuhd
> You stated that you can READ the writing on the envelope Under that photo.
>
> Please tell what it says?
No, once again you're confused. I did not state that you can read the
writing on the envelope. The DPD photograph is not of high enough
resolution to read what the writing on the envelope says.
I guess that means Oswald didn't shoot Walker, right?
Raymond
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
>
> > Marty wrote:
> >> OOPS �- don't jump all over me Tony. I should have said "carbine" when
> >> referencing the 36". Matter of fact I do not know the difference between
> >> a rifle and a BB gun - and don't want to - I hate guns (although I
> >> confess that I do have an Italian Carbine):)
>
> > Just for fun look up progressive gain twist and look down your carbine's
> > barrel and see it is has progressive gain twist. Is your serial number
> > also C2766?
>
> Yes - there is a spiral twist in the barrel. C2766? Surely you jest.:)
>
> M
All of the pre WW II 6.5 weapons have right-hand gain twist
(progressive)
19.25 to 8.25; 7.35 mm weapons have constant right-hand 10 inch
twist.All weapons use 6 roumd Mannlicher type clips. The round size is
marked on the sight base of all 1938 series weapons. And some weapons
had the identification on the stock so the soldiers knew what ammo was
required.
tomnln
RIGHT! ! !
According to official evidence/testimony>>>
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
Anthony Marsh
Yes, my questions stands. Does that particular rifle have progressive gain
twist. A simple yes or no.
Anthony Marsh
Actually are correct without realizing it. Oswald did not SHOOT Walker. He
missed. He shot AT Walker. Slight difference, though Walker might not call
it slight.
tomnln
Oswald did NOT shot at Walker>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
yeuhd
> > I guess that means Oswald didn't shoot Walker, right?
>
> Actually are correct without realizing it. Oswald did not SHOOT Walker. He
> missed. He shot AT Walker. Slight difference, though Walker might not call
> it slight.
Walker's right forearm was bleeding from a few slivers of metal from
the bullet's jacket, which was partially torn off by the window frame.
Marty
Raymond wrote:
> On Feb 19, 12:06?am, "Marty" <jam...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:KMudne5INIEVyira...@comcast.com...
>>
>>> Marty wrote:
>>>> referencing the 36". Matter of fact I do not know the difference
>>>> between
>>>> a rifle and a BB gun - and don't want to - I hate guns (although I
>>>> confess that I do have an Italian Carbine):)
>>> Just for fun look up progressive gain twist and look down your carbine's
>>> barrel and see it is has progressive gain twist. Is your serial number
>>> also C2766?
>> Yes - there is a spiral twist in the barrel. C2766? Surely you jest.:)
>>
>> M
>
> All of the pre WW II 6.5 weapons have right-hand gain twist
> (progressive)
> 19.25 to 8.25; 7.35 mm weapons have constant right-hand 10 inch
> twist.All weapons use 6 roumd Mannlicher type clips. The round size is
> marked on the sight base of all 1938 series weapons. And some weapons
> had the identification on the stock so the soldiers knew what ammo was
> required.
>
Yes, my questions stands. Does that particular rifle have progressive gain
twist. A simple yes or no.
I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!! I can look down the barrel and
see a spiral twist - it appears to go right. If that is a progressive
twist then my rifle has it -
signed
simple yes or no
claviger
Marty,
"A barrel with gain twist rifling starts with a slow rate of twist at
the breech of the barrel, but the rate of twist is increased as the
bullet reaches the muzzle. This feature increases accuracy but is
expensive to manufacture."*
Rifling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Occasionally firearms are encountered with a gain twist, where the
rate of spin
increases from chamber to muzzle. While intentional gain twists are
rare, ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifling
Barrel Twist Calculator
Gain twist is a recurring fad. The theory is that with little twist at
bullet
start, the bullet will engrave easier allowing one to use more
powder. ...
http://kwk.us/twist.html
ASSRA Forum - "Gain-Twist"
Ron Smith's gain twist barrels are cut rifled. Each groove takes 40
passes to
cut, so a six groove barrel takes 240 passes (or more than a half day
just to ...
http://www.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1203185567/18
Spencer*
His design, patented in 1856, had a roating breech block and the
advanced "gain-twist"
rifling. A barrel with gain twist rifling starts with a slow rate
of ...
http://www.aotc.net/Spencer.htm
Anthony Marsh
That is my point and why I asked you if you even KNOW what progressive
gain twist is. But you won't admit if you do or not. I said that if you
don't, you should read up on it.
Just seeing that your bore rifling has twist does not answer the
specific question I asked. I am very curious to know if your particular
rifle barrel has progressive gain twist.
Anthony Marsh
Maybe, but the bullet did not hit him and maybe it was the glass or
window frame shards.
Anthony Marsh
Very good. At the time the Mannlicher-Carcano was the only rifle to use
progressive gain twist. Now, for extra credit, what happens when you take
a very long barrel with progressive gain twist and cut it down?