The Rifle And The Paper Bag

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-783.html

[Robert Harris]

David Von Pein wrote:
>
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-783.html
>

From this we can draw the conclusion that Oswald was probably one of
the shooters.

But the evidence is rather overwhelming, that he didn't act alone.



Robert Harris

[Tom Ross Lee]

On Monday, August 25, 2014 1:05:52 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-783.html

Oswald lied and said he didn't own a rifle. He lied when he said that he didn't tell Buell Wesley Frazier anything about bringing back some curtain rods. What was in the bag?

a)Curtain rods (never bought and never found)
b)Cheese sandwich and an apple (must have been a submarine sandwich and an apple
computer to fit in that bag)
c)Oswald's rifle (the one that he never owned)

[claviger]

On Monday, August 25, 2014 12:05:52 PM UTC-5, David Von Pein wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-783.html

Where did you find the photo of Linnie Mae Randle?

[David Von Pein]

It's a screen capture that I grabbed from the '64 CBS Warren Report
special. Linnie Mae is interviewed on camera very briefly (at 18:00)....

http://dvp-video-audio-archive.blogspot.com/2012/03/warren-report-1964-cbs-tv.html

[mainframetech]

From the evidence of the bag and the rifle, we can assume that Oswald
brought the rifle in and probably hid it. As to his reasons why, we have
only speculation, since he can't be shown to have ever bought any
ammunition for it, and the condition of the rifle was not good for aiming,
much less hitting anything. The scope had a misalignment, probably from
mounting carelessly. The gunsmith that did the work didn't think much of
the rifle, and he used the word "junk".

Was it brought in to sell? To trade? To show someone? Who knows.
Since he wasn't on the 6th floor when the shots rang out, he didn't use
the rifle to shoot anyone, but probably someone fired it out the window.
not that they intended to hit anything. It was just necessary that that
particular rifle be used during the murder of JFK to lay the murder on
Oswald.

Chris

[David Von Pein]

Keep avoiding the obvious implications of the "Rifle / Bag" evidence,
Chris. It's what all good CTers do 24/7 -- i.e., avoid the obvious.

And I wonder how CE567 & CE569 (from Oswald's gun) managed to get into the
President's car if that gun's bullets never hit JFK on Nov. 22? Let's see
you avoid the obvious again re CE567/569.

[Tom Ross Lee]

CE567 & CE569 were planted by Jack Ruby.

[mainframetech]

Ah DVP, you didn't think it through! Because there were fragments from the MC rifle in the limo front seat, doesn't mean that an MC bullet killed JFK. Only that it was possible that someone fired the MC rifle toward the limo and hit the chrome overhead, which was clearly a first strike and not a ricochet.

Go back to the 'record'. All day the SS agents drove the limo from the murder scene o the hospital, to the airport, into the C-130, back from the airport to the garage. And all that time in the front seat of the limo, after searching the limo, no one saw the 2 bullet fragments that were there. Then late at night Robert Frazier shows up and does a search of the limo and lo and behold, he finds the obvious bullet fragments in the middle of the front seat that no one else could see! Frazier also happened to be custodian of the bullet evidence, and he also went with the FBI agents the next day and was involved in the testing of the MC rifle, where they no doubt generated a number of test bullets while testing the rifle.

First, there is the possibility that the bullet that hit the chrome overhead became the 2 fragments found in the front seat of the limo. But it would mean the SS agents that did the search and were in and out of the limo all day and into the evening, were just too dumb to notice the fragments. This is the best possibility, and it wouldn't be Oswald that fired the rifle out the window.

Second possibility is that Frazier, who was custodian of the bullets, found 2 fragments in the limo, but replaced them later with a damaged bullet from the testing so that it would implicate Oswald's rifle as the shooter's weapon.

http://www.jfklancer.com/pub/CE/CE2011.JPG

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

And you avoid the dent in the chrome topping and the smashed in back of
the rear view mirror. You constantly beg the question. You ASSuME what
you nee to prove. Those fragments could have come from a bullet that it
Connally or hit the chrome topping. And where did your miss shot go?
What did it hit? Show me the bullet.

[David Von Pein]

Chris/Mainframe,

Maybe you'd better learn the case a little better. Robert Frazier isn't
the person who found CE567 and CE569. The Secret Service agents who
searched the car after it arrived back at the White House garage found
those fragments [see Frazier's testimony shown below]. And that was the
first time anyone was searching the car in any detail for any evidence, so
it's no surprise to me that the fragments weren't found prior to the
search at the White House.

From Bob Frazier's Warren Commission session.....

Mr. SPECTER - Now, where, according to information provided to you then,
was the fragment designated Commission Exhibit 567 found?

Mr. FRAZIER - That was found by the Secret Service upon their examination
of the limousine here in Washington when it first arrived from Dallas, and
Commission No. 567 was delivered by Deputy Chief Paul Paterni and by a
White House detail chief, Floyd M. Boring, to a liaison agent of the FBI,
Orrin Bartlett, who delivered them to me in the laboratory at 11:50 p,m.,
on November 22, 1963.

Mr. SPECTER - Does that constitute the total chain of possession then from
the finder with the Secret Service into your hands, as reflected on the
records of the FBI?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER - Was there another fragment, was there any other fragment
found in the front seat of the car?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. Alongside the right side of the front seat, Commission
Exhibit No. 569, which is the base portion of the jacket of a bullet was
found, and handled in identical manner to the Exhibit 567.

Mr. DULLES - And the front seat is the seat which would be the driver's
seat?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes.

Mr. DULLES - And the Secret Service man on his right, I believe?

Mr. SPECTER - Mr. Kellerman.

Mr. DULLES - That was the seat from which this came?

Mr. FRAZIER - Commission Exhibit 567 was found on the seat right beside
the driver, and Exhibit 569 was found on the floor beside the right side
of the front seat.

Mr. SPECTER - The right side of the front seat, Mr. Dulles, as the prior
testimony shows was occupied by Roy Kellerman and the driver was William
Greer.

Mr. DULLES - Right, Thank you.

Mr. SPECTER - Would you state what the chain of possession was from the
time of discovery of Exhibit 569 until the time it came into your
possession, based on the records of the FBI, please, if you have those
records available?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. It was delivered by Secret Service Deputy Chief
Paul Paterni, and SAC of the White House detail Floyd M. Boring of the
Secret Service again, to Special Agent Orrin Bartlett of the FBI who
delivered it to me at 11:50 p.m. on November 22, 1963.

Mr. SPECTER - Are the records which you have just referred to relating to
the chain of possession of Exhibits 567 and 569 maintained by you in the
normal course of your duties as an examiner of those items?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

----------------

[END W.C. QUOTES.]

----------------

And when we examine the potential CAUSES for that bullet to fragment and
break apart the way CE567/569 did, the only reasonable conclusion is --
the bullet hit JFK's head first, before breaking apart.

If a bullet had struck the chrome at full velocity, it would have torn a
hole clear through the chrome and its underlying metal surface (see Robert
Frazier's testimony on this point).

More:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/25/2014 5:15 PM, Tom Ross Lee wrote:
> On Monday, August 25, 2014 1:05:52 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-783.html
>
> Oswald lied and said he didn't own a rifle. He lied when he said that he didn't tell Buell Wesley Frazier anything about bringing back some curtain rods. What was in the bag?
>
> a)Curtain rods (never bought and never found)

They are in the National Archives.
BTW, the DPD did not find Oswald's jacket until a couple of weeks later.

> b)Cheese sandwich and an apple (must have been a submarine sandwich and an apple
> computer to fit in that bag)

Some stores sold two foot long sandwiches for parties.

[Anthony Marsh]

Excuse me? Frazier did not find the two large fragments. The Secret
Service did.

> First, there is the possibility that the bullet that hit the chrome overhead became the 2 fragments found in the front seat of the limo. But it would mean the SS agents that did the search and were in and out of the limo all day and into the evening, were just too dumb to notice the fragments. This is the best possibility, and it wouldn't be Oswald that fired the rifle out the window.
>

Not likely. A direct hit would have done more damage than just the dent.

> Second possibility is that Frazier, who was custodian of the bullets, found 2 fragments in the limo, but replaced them later with a damaged bullet from the testing so that it would implicate Oswald's rifle as the shooter's weapon.
>

What Frazier admitted into evidence was two large fragments, not a whole
bullet. It is almost impossible to duplicate their condition in a lab.

> http://www.jfklancer.com/pub/CE/CE2011.JPG
>
> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

That is not the only possibility.

> If a bullet had struck the chrome at full velocity, it would have torn a
> hole clear through the chrome and its underlying metal surface (see Robert
> Frazier's testimony on this point).
>

Not quite. The underlying metal surface is the frame of the car. You
can't fire a Carcano FMJ through the car frame. Try it sometime.
'Also consider Mark Furhman's solution.

> More:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html
>

[mainframetech]

Ah! I apologize. My own evidence that I left for you said as much that
the SS agents found the stuff. That means that one of my 2 possibilities
is probably right.

1. Robert Frazier was custodian of the bullets and was in a perfect position
to replace any of them with whatever he wanted, including test bullets
from the testing of the MC rifle he was part of the next day after the murder.

2. The MC bullet fired from the TSBD 6th floor hit the chrome overhead,
broke into 2 pieces, and wasn't seen by the SS agents that sat in the car
all day.

http://www.jfklancer.com/pub/CE/CE2011.JPG


As to using JFK's head to break a bullet in half, I'm not going there.
That's ridiculous, since the kill shot hit the head from the front and
entered a small wound on the right temple and passed through the head to
blow out the 'large hole' in the BOH of JFK. This was shown by an X-ray
made by Jerrol Custer and mentioned in his ARRB testimony. He noticed
that from the small entry wound in the right temple, there was a cone of
small fragments expanding toward the 'large hole', showing the passage of
the bullet and clearly showing the entry and exit. Look at Page 101:

http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/pdf/Custer_10-28-97.pdf

Chris

[David Von Pein]

ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

The underlying metal surface is the frame of the car. You can't fire a
Carcano FMJ through the car frame.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That's not what Robert Frazier said. Let's have a gander. (And, yes, I
realize that Frazier does preface his remarks here with the words "I can
only assume".)....


Mr. FRAZIER - It would have torn a hole in the chrome, penetrated the
framing both inside and outside of the car. I can only assume, since I
haven't tested the metal of that particular car, I would assume that the
bullet would completely penetrate both the chrome, the metal supporting
the chrome, on the inside, and the body metal on the outside which
supports the windshield of the car.

[Anthony Marsh]

Yes, as I said hge ASSuMED. I dare you to fire a Carcano bullet into a
car frame and have it perforate the frame.

[mainframetech]

We don't know if there was a steel support behind the chrome, though
chrome hit head on can be plenty solid. It would give enough for a bullet
to embed in it, but not go further in most cases.

Here's a close up photo of the strike. Enlarge it and see that this
was the first strike and surely the only strike, since the bullet went in
a ways.

http://www.jfk-lecomplot.com/doc_fichiers/Impact_in_the_chrome_frame_redim.jpg

As to the idea that the bullet was a ricochet from JFK's skull, I don't
believe it for a moment, never mind that the angle would be way off if you
wanted to say it originated at the TSBD 6th floor...:)

Chris

[donald willis]

On Monday, August 25, 2014 10:05:52 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-783.html

Nice you have a pic of the bag in evidence. Too bad there's only a pic of
dotted lines indicating where the bag was supposed to have been on the 6th
floor....

dcw

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/28/2014 5:21 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 11:13:53 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
>>
>>
>>
>> The underlying metal surface is the frame of the car. You can't fire a
>>
>> Carcano FMJ through the car frame.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>>
>>
>>
>> That's not what Robert Frazier said. Let's have a gander. (And, yes, I
>>
>> realize that Frazier does preface his remarks here with the words "I can
>>
>> only assume".)....
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mr. FRAZIER - It would have torn a hole in the chrome, penetrated the
>>
>> framing both inside and outside of the car. I can only assume, since I
>>
>> haven't tested the metal of that particular car, I would assume that the
>>
>> bullet would completely penetrate both the chrome, the metal supporting
>>
>> the chrome, on the inside, and the body metal on the outside which
>>
>> supports the windshield of the car.
>
>
>
>
> We don't know if there was a steel support behind the chrome, though
> chrome hit head on can be plenty solid. It would give enough for a bullet
> to embed in it, but not go further in most cases.
>

Of course we do because real researchers have seen the photos of the
building and rebuilding of the limo. Guess you've never seen a car being
built. All you ever do is guess your way through life.

> Here's a close up photo of the strike. Enlarge it and see that this
> was the first strike and surely the only strike, since the bullet went in
> a ways.

A nose fragment would be a better candidate.

>
> http://www.jfk-lecomplot.com/doc_fichiers/Impact_in_the_chrome_frame_redim.jpg
>
> As to the idea that the bullet was a ricochet from JFK's skull, I don't
> believe it for a moment, never mind that the angle would be way off if you
> wanted to say it originated at the TSBD 6th floor...:)
>

I don't think ricochet is the correct word. Their idea is that the bullet
broke up in the head and some pieces diverged and hit the chrome topping
and windshield. The WC denied that the dent was caused by a bullet and the
HSCA didn't even address the issue. In my letter to the HSCA I pointed out
that their diagram of an intact exiting bullet from the head did not
account for the dented chrome. I hounded Dale Myers for almost 5 years
about his diagram which showed an intact bullet headed for the floor until
he changed it to show two exit trajectories.

> Chris
>