Common Sense (Revisited) -- All Bullets That Hit Victims Came From Oswald's Rifle
David Von Pein
>>> "The latest Texas A&M research does NOT preclude multiple bullets. So you cannot say definitively that only bullets and fragments from Oswald's gun were found." <<<
Let's get this straight too.....the latest NAA studies certainly do
NOT *EXCLUDE* Lee Oswald's WCC/MC bullets in the mix either. Those
bullets are just as much in the mix as they ever were. They haven't
all of a sudden been excluded and tossed out.
The ONLY thing those recent studies on NAA have done is to slightly
reduce the probability factor of the lead in the 5 Guinn samples
having come from the same batch of bullet lead.
But COMMON SENSE is still on Dr. Guinn's side, Richard. Use your
head...and these facts:
Only 2 bullets struck victims in the car. (Argue this point till
doomsday; but the official WC/HSCA versions say this is absolutely a
FACT; not a theory, but a fact!)
2 of the 5 Guinn samples tested were POSITIVELY from Oswald's rifle
(CE399 and CE567). And that doesn't require NAA to conclude that, as
you well know. Regular ballistics IDing of those 2 specimens says
those came from C2766 "to the exclusion".
So, we're left with three other Guinn samples...none big enough to be
tested by more-conventional land/groove analysis, right? Right. (Which
is pretty remarkable by itself...I mean the fact that NO OTHER
FRAGMENTS from all of those other THREE guns you say were popping away
at JFK that day left any pieces of bullet large enough to be tested to
PROVE they could not have come from LHO's weapon; amazing right
there.)
But, anyway, we have 40% of the samples positively from TWO DIFFERENT
C2766 bullets. And three smaller samples that COULD have come from
C2766. And since the victims were hit by JUST TWO BULLETS -- do the
math!
The odds that ANY of those three remaining fragments came from ANY gun
other than Oswald's C2766 are extremely remote, at best.
How can anyone argue with the basic, common-sense analysis I've just
laid out above?
David Von Pein
September 11, 2007
Gil Jesus
rifle" were fired in Dealey Plaza, you'll start to make your case.
First of all, the ONLY whole bullet ballistically matched to Oswld's
rifle, CE 399, was NOT found on Connally's stretcher. The Commission
LIED.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA68-rlXVIY
Secondly, the bullet FRAGMENTS removed from the limousine were NOT
photographed in place, making the "locations" of those fragments, as
told by the law enforcement people who "discovered" them, without
verifying proof. It is SOP to photograph bullets and fragments in a
murder case.
Thirdly, FRAGMENTS cannot be compared for ballistic matches. Up until
a few years ago, the only way to prove that a fragment was made by a
certain manufacturer was to subject the fragment to Spectrographic
analysis, or Neutron Activation Analysis.
THE FBI'S SPECTROGRAPHIC TEST
On November 23, 1963, the FBI conducted a spectrographic test to
measure the 11 elements
present in the recovered bullet fragments to determine if they were
related to bullets allegedly found in the TSBD and on the stretcher at
Parkland Hospital (CE 399). Under such testing, the percentage of
basic elements such as lead, copper, antimony, etc. are compared.
The fragments tested were those which had been recovered from JFK's
brain during the autopsy, from Governor Connally's wrist during his
surgery, from the metal smear on the limousine's windshield, and from
under Mrs. Connally's jump seat. The test failed to provide clear,
irrefutable proof that connected the bullet fragments to CE 399,
causing the Warren Commmission to choose not to ask one single
question of the spectrographic expert who conducted the test.
They were simply content to report that several bullet fragments were
"similar in metallic composition", which proved nothing.
In the years following the assassination, researcher Harold Weisberg
fought hard with the
government to have those results released. Government attorneys argued
that revealing the
results was not in the "national interest". In a Warren Commission
document released in 1973,
FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover reported that the composition of the
fragments were "similar" and
that "no significant differences were found".
THE FBI'S NAA TEST
Not satisfied with the results of the spectrographic test, Hoover
asked the Atomic Energy
Commission to perform a more sophisticated test called the Neutron
Activation Analysis (NAA).
This method, the specimen is bombarded with neutrons, which causes it
to give off gamma rays.
The gamma rays are then measured to determine any differences in the
composition of the
specimen. In another document made public in 1973, Hoover stated:
"While minor variations in composition were found by this method,
these were not considered
to be sufficient to permit positively differentiating among the larger
fragments and thus positively determining from which of the larger
bullet fragments any of the smaller fragments may have come."
In other words, this test supported the conclusion of the
spectrographic test: that there
was a difference in composition between the fragments and the whole
bullets.
THE NAA TEST FOR THE HSCA
Faced with the prospect that President Kennedy and Governor Connally
had been struck by
different bullets, the House Select Committee in 1978 decided to
conduct its own test. It secured the services of Dr. Vincent Guinn,
who had been an informal consultant in such matters for the FBI prior
to the assassination. Dr. Guinn's test measured the level of antimony
in the specimens.
Usually, the acceptable variation of antimony, according to Guinn is
3% (plus or minus), and
pretty consistent between bullets in the same box. However, he would
have us believe that the lack of uniformity of these specimens was
such that it led him to conclude that all of the fragments came from
two bullets.
He stated that it was "highly probable" that the fragments removed
from Governor Connally's
wrist had come from CE 399, and that three fragments found on the
floor of the limousine
matched those removed from the President's brain.
The problem is that when Guinn received the wrist fragments from the
National Archives, he
found that their number and weight was vastly different from those
which had been tested by the
FBI in 1964. He then realized that he was not examining the original
fragments removed from
Governor Connally (they were missing) and he was forced to publically
admit that fact. Guinn
further stated that the original wrist fragments would not have been
destroyed during testing in 1964. No one seems to know what happened
to the original fragments. They remain part of the
"missing" evidence in this case.
CONCLUSION
We NOW know that the NAA test, like the one used to "identify" the
fragments "removed" from "Connally's wrist" and the fragments
"removed" from " the JFK limo" is completely unreliable.
The FBI admitted such.
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/201207Oswald.htm
In fact, the test is so "full of holes", they no longer use it:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2007/11/17/ST2007111701983.html
Since the test is unreliable and no longer vaild as evidence, the
"common sense" that says that "all bullets that hit victims came from
Oswald's rifle" is NOT supported by the evidence.
David Von Pein
>>> "We NOW know that the NAA test...is completely unreliable." <<<
And even if that were proven to be 100% true (which, of course, it
isn't), how can any CTer possibly explain away the common-sense,
Occam's-like observations I talked about previously regarding the
bullet evidence? I.E., these observations:
Gil Jesus
>
> How can anyone argue with the basic, common-sense analysis I've just
> laid out above?
Lurkers, check out the links I posted.
The FBI ADMITTED the test was unreliable. So much so, they stopped
using it.
Therefore, the information Von Pinhead is citing is worthless.
Man, he is REALLY in denial.
David Von Pein
>>> "The information Von Pinhead is citing is worthless." <<<
My previous post had NOTHING to do with "NAA". Nothing. It was,
instead, about the bullets that positively were linked to CE139
(Oswald's MC rifle). And CE399 and CE567 and CE569 WERE linked to
CE139. Period. And no amount of Gil's foot-stomping and attempted
NAA-"debunking" can change those facts re. those CE numbers.
At the end of the day we're still left with 5 specimens having been
examined by Guinn, and 40% of those five (CE399 & CE567) positively
are from TWO separate bullets which came out of Rifle C2766 (CE139).
Period. No escaping those facts.
And JFK & JBC were (via the best evidence and per the WC and the HSCA)
struck by just--voila!--TWO BULLETS on 11/22.
So what are the chances that any of the remaining 3 bullet specimens
(too tiny for standard type ballistics tests) came from any gun other
than CE139?
Answer: Virtually nil.
This is 3rd-grade math here. But to a CT-Kook, it's calculus.
Gil Jesus
after President John F. Kennedy's assassination in 1963. The technique
used chemistry to link crime-scene bullets to ones possessed by
suspects on the theory that each batch of lead had a unique elemental
makeup.
In 2004, however, the nation's most prestigious scientific body
concluded that variations in the manufacturing process rendered the
FBI's testimony about the science "unreliable and potentially
misleading."
Specifically, the National Academy of Sciences said that decades of
FBI statements to jurors linking a particular bullet to those found in
a suspect's gun or cartridge box were so overstated that such
testimony should be considered "misleading under federal rules of
evidence."
A year later, the bureau abandoned the analysis.
Most of the estimated 2,500 instances in which the FBI performed
bullet-lead exams involved homicide cases that were prosecuted at the
state and local levels, where FBI examiners often were summoned as
expert witnesses for the prosecution.
FBI examiner John Riley told a Florida jury: "It is my opinion that
all of those bullets came from the same box of ammunition." A New
Jersey prosecutor suggested that the bullets matched by the FBI were
as unique as a "snowflake or fingerprint."
Today, the FBI regards all such testimony as inaccurate. "The science
does not and has never supported the testimony that one bullet can be
identified as coming from a particular box of bullets," said Dwight E.
Adams, the retired FBI lab director.
In Maryland, the Court of Appeals last year reversed the murder
conviction of Gemar Clemons and ordered a new trial, concluding that
the FBI's bullet-lead conclusions "are not generally accepted within
the scientific community and thus are not admissible."
The FBI first used the technique after Kennedy's assassination, hoping
to determine whether various bullet fragments came from the same gun.
In July 1964, then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover wrote to the
commission investigating the assassination that the bureau's findings
were "not considered sufficient" to make any matches.
The bureau conducted a study in 1991 that called bullet-lead analysis
a "useful forensic tool" that produced "accurate" and "reproducible"
matches.
The study, however, raised two concerns.
First, it found that bullets packaged 15 months apart -- a span that
assumed separate batches of lead -- had the exact composition,
potentially undercutting the theory that each batch was unique.
Second, it found that bullets in a single box often had several
different lead compositions. That finding, it cautioned, should have
"significant impact on interpretation of results in forensic cases."
Adams asked the National Academy of Sciences in 2002 to examine the
FBI's work, temporarily halting new bullet-lead matches. Two years
later, the academy's findings stunned the bureau.
The panel concluded that although the FBI had been taking accurate
bullet-lead measurements in its lab, the statistical methods and its
expert testimonies were flawed.
The science "does not . . . have the unique specificity of techniques
such as DNA," and "available data does not support any statement that
a crime bullet came from a particular box of ammunition," the panel
concluded.
All the FBI could say going forward was that bullets made from the
same batch "are more likely" to match in chemical makeup than those
made from different batches. Adams soon declared that such testimony
was so general that it had no value to jurors, and he ended the
technique.
"They said the FBI agents who went after Al Capone were the
untouchables, and I say the FBI experts who gave this bullet-lead
testimony were the unbelievables," said Clifford Spiegelman, a
statistician at Texas A&M University who reviewed the FBI's
statistical methods for the science academy.
David Von Pein
previously, Gil-Kook (instead of that junk you just posted, which had
NOTHING at all to do with the non-NAA stuff I was referring to)?
(Will I get a sermon from Gilbert on the Reagan shooting next? That's
got about as much relevance here.)
Gil Jesus
>
> This is 3rd-grade math here. But to a CT-Kook, it's calculus.
The science is unreliable and you can't make it reliable no matter how
many statistics or how much testimony you use.
Case closed. Move on to your next piece of foolishness.
Typical troll response. When backed into a corner, insult your
opponent.
You're killing whatever credibility you have David.
Keep up the good work.
David Von Pein
something?! Or do you REALLY not realize that I am NOT TALKING ABOUT
N.A.A. in my most-recent posts at all?
Throw out the NAA for the benefit of my latest posts. Go ahead and
chuck it. Who cares?!
I'm talking about the MERE ODDS of the other 3 Guinn specimens (apart
from CE399 & 567 and apart from all actual NAA tests that were done)
being from non-LHO guns when we KNOW that the other 40% of the
specimens that Guinn examined were 2 items that came positively from
Oz's gun.
Just tell me Gil -- what do you think those odds would be in Vegas? Do
you really think it would be LIKELY to have the other 3 specimens
coming from non-Oswald guns when we KNOW that the ONLY bullets that
were capable of being tested by non-NAA means lead straight back to
Oswald's gun via TWO distinctly separate bullets (the same number of
bullets said by the WC & HSCA to have struck the victims)?
Tell me with a straight face Gil -- are the odds very GOOD for a
"second gun" or "third gun" to have been involved, given the
parameters I just mentioned (which are parameters and verified FACTS
that you cannot avoid and/or deny)?
robcap...@netscape.com
> www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/TxR9QNQTFC20JF/15/ref=cm_cd_et_m...
Which bullet and fragments were shown to be inside JFK and JBC again?
Gil Jesus
wrote:
> Which bullet and fragments were shown to be inside JFK and JBC again?-
Rob:
Any prosecutor will tell you that once a test is proven to be
unreliable to the extent that the testing authority terminates using
it, the evidence obtained from such testing is null and void.
It makes no difference when the test was conducted. The evidence is
null and void.
Von Pein's trying to use "evidence" obtained from a procedure that the
FBI NOW considers completely unreliable and no longer uses.
And his denial doesn't make it any more reliable.
It doesn't matter where they allegedly came from, the car, the
Governor, the President,..... it just doesn't matter.
The point is that the fragments, and everything about them, as
evidence are WORTHLESS because the test used to identify them was
unreliable.
And Hoover KNEW it.
justm...@gmail.com
Chicos full of crap again...I can smell him from here
YoHarvey
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Chico? When you type back and forth between yourself and Robcap, do
you get up each time and change clothes for the two personalities you
attempt to defraud this newsgroup with??????? lol.
David Von Pein
Of course, that's not at all what I was doing in my last several posts
on this subject. I was totally SEVERING the NAA tests from the
entire argument. I even told Gil to "chuck" the NAA stuff for the
purpose of my latest posts.
To repeat (again) for the thick-headed Gilbert J.:
For the purpose of my latest posts on this subject, I wasn't relying
on ANY "NAA" procedures at all. I was relying on NON-NAA stuff
concerning CE399, CE567, and CE569, which are all linked conclusively
to CE139 (Oz's MC rifle) "to the exclusion" (even WITHOUT NAA entering
into the equation).
I then pointed out the other 3 smaller bullet specimens that are a
proven part of the JFK case too (but I wasn't even considering the
actual NAA tests as far as these other 3 specimens are concerned).
I then asked Gil this logical question (which has NOTHING to do with
any NAA tests at all):
"Do you really think it would be LIKELY to have the other 3
specimens coming from non-Oswald guns when we KNOW that the ONLY
bullets that were capable of being tested by non-NAA means lead
straight back to Oswald's gun via TWO distinctly separate bullets (the
same number of bullets said by the WC & HSCA to have struck the
victims)?" -- DVP
But Gil evidently had several large servings of Kellogg's Kook
Krispies for breakfast this morning, and therefore he was unable to
assess the logical point I was making...which is a point that has
absolutely nothing to do with "a procedure that the FBI NOW considers
robcap...@netscape.com
So Dave, again, which bullet and fragment(s) were shown to have been
INSIDE JFK and/or JBC?
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a4ea6d52a960e042
>>> "Big enough? You think it is a matter of being big enough. Which proves that you don't know what the Hell you are talking about. Your three other samples are just bullet lead. Ballistics is done on the copper jacket, not the lead core." <<<
LOL time.
So what?
My main point, of course, is: It's incredible to have ONLY OSWALD
BULLETS OR FRAGMENTS THEREOF (whether they be "lead only" or "copper"
pieces) ending up being big enough to be tested by traditional non-NAA
means IF there were truly 2, 3, or 4 guns involved in shooting JFK and
JBC.
Can I get you to admit to the above basic, common-sense "It's
Incredible" observation, Tony?
(Prob'ly not, huh? Tony always seems to prefer the extraordinary vs.
anything coming from Occam's drawer of sanity and reason.)
>>> "Not at all, if one shot missed entirely and the other was an explosive bullet." <<<
Good boy, Tony. Stick to those "Ifs" as "if" they meant something when
compared to the actual physical, ballistics evidence.
IOW -- Remain in Chaff-land. I'll continue to eat my wheat. (Tasty
too.)
>>> "No evidence that they were hit by just two bullets." <<<
Nah. There's merely ALL of the actual ballistics evidence which
indicates that fact to be true. Plus, of course, both of the Official
U.S. Govt. inquiries, which both said that JFK & JBC were very likely
struck by only "two" bullets, and no more. Plus the autopsists and
their autopsy report.
But all of that stuff should be ignored in favor of a barrel of
"Ifs"....right Anthony?
>>> "Because you are always wrong." <<<
Oh, surely not "always", Tony. One thing I'm right about is Tony
Marsh. He's definitely kind of a chaff-happy kook.