Alberto Miatello

The "inconvenient" POMMEL on the scope of the 7.65 MAUSER

35 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Ah yes, I see - the reticule adjuster...(well, I still don't see, if you know what I mean)...

 

Even better!!!...Can't see one of these either!!!

reticule2.JPG

Edited by Ian Lloyd
Update

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

In the Mark Lane production "Two Men In Dallas" Roger Craig states that "stamped right on the barrel was 765 Mauser "

referring to the rifle that constable Seymour Weitzman and he ( Craig ) were just inches from when "gun buff" Weitzman IDd the rifle as a Mauser.

The DPD obviously stated such also as the national media reported the rifle as a Mauser and who do you think the national media got this information from...Roger Craig himself?

It is stated in one post here that Craig and Weitzman could not see the Mauser stamp because of the positioning of the scope covering this?

Isn't it common sense that many DPD personnel looked at that gun in the first 24 hours of discovering it before sending it off to the FBI and

would have noticed such an obvious ( and hugely important ) mistake Weitzman claims he made much sooner than before the national media was reporting the gun as a Mauser to millions of viewers?

Why would Roger Craig cling to his Mauser stamp claim the rest of his life if he knew he was lying and how easily this lie could be exposed?

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

In the Mark Lane production "Two Men In Dallas" Roger Craig states that "stamped right on the barrel was 765 Mauser "

referring to the rifle that constable Seymour Weitzman and he ( Craig ) were just inches from when "gun buff" Weitzman IDd the rifle as a Mauser.

The DPD obviously stated such also as the national media reported the rifle as a Mauser and who do you think the national media got this information from...Roger Craig himself?

It is stated in one post here that Craig and Weitzman could not see the Mauser stamp because of the positioning of the scope covering this?

Isn't it common sense that many DPD personnel looked at that gun in the first 24 hours of discovering it before sending it off to the FBI and

would have noticed such an obvious ( and hugely important ) mistake Weitzman claims he made much sooner than before the national media was reporting the gun as a Mauser to millions of viewers?

Why would Roger Craig cling to his Mauser stamp claim the rest of his life if he knew he was lying and how easily this lie could be so easily exposed?

Excellent post Joe!

This point stands out: "The DPD obviously stated such also as the national media reported the rifle as a Mauser and who do you think the national media got this information from...Roger Craig himself?"

 

I have wondered..... What happened to the ejected bullet? Someone would have picked it up and held it for mutual inspection. If it were a rounded 6.5, it would have been obvious. Did anyone make a statement as to the ejected round? Is it a WC exhibit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And I am confused as to the clip type. As I understand it, A Manlicher Carcano uses an en bloc clip and a Mauser uses a stripper clip.

Also, as I understand it....

An En Bloc (MC) clip would have fallen or been ejected from the gun when the last round was loaded or ejected.

A Mauser stripper clip would have been free upon loading the internal/integral magazine. Such a clip would have been pocketed by the rifleman upon loading the gun. 

An MC En bloc clip would have fallen to the floor with the ejected round.

 

I've been tooling around the forum for a while and I have not previously seen this issue raised. My apologies if it has been through the mill on numerous occasions.

Cheers,

Michael

 

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking that too, but if you magnify the image, you can clearly see that the item is STUCK in the middle of the scope, it is NOT the "knob" of the bolt handle in the background.

But anyway, apart from this, just 2  little  question to David (who wrote in his study that "the scope look different", I'm still missing his explanation why and where - in his opinion - the scope was different), and Others.

1) Why,  if the 2 rifles were different, (a 7.65 Mauser and a 6.5 MC) they should have mounted on  them THE SAME SCOPE??? One should logically  expect that 2 different rifles have 2 different scopes.

2) Even supposing that Day + Fritz + Weitzman were right, and Roger Craig was wrong, why did they all mention a 7.65 Mauser? There are MANY models of Mauser rifles, why did they mention precisely that one? Roger Craig said he mentioned that model, because he SAW the brand name stamped on the barrel.

 

Edited by Alberto Miatello
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Ian Lloyd

@ Michael Clark

I forgot...

in the article I mentioned above http://ps-2.kev009.com/ohlandl/Cast_Bullet/Lyman_Super_TargetSpot/Lyman_Super_ TargetSpot.html

Lyman_STS_Front_Mount_Rib.jpg
 

you may find a reticule adjuster screw  to the right. As you can see, from a distant, little, a bit blurred  photo you can confuse it with the spherical hand bolt. But it is a round little wheel placed (stuck) on the scope, it is not a spherical knob...I know that  confusion can arise due to the fact that probably in the US this item is called in many places micrometer screw, whereas in Europe and Great Britain it is called "reticule adjuster screw"

@ Joe Bauer

Of course you are 100% correct! Moreover, it is not so easy to be mistaken on the brand name and type of a Mauser 7.65, because it is written WHITE ON BLACK!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a heads up

Craig backed off of his claim that he saw mauser on the barrel in an interview (LA Free Press) in 1968 and in his book "When they kill the President" of 1971. Earlier Wietzman said he made a mistake when he identified the rifle as a mauser.

The above is not a rebuttal of David's or Alberto's work. I've not read David's article on the rifle and I'm not sure of Alberto's claim, mainly because my computer is an old one and I haven't been able to download all the evidence presented by Alberto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Just a heads up

Craig backed off of his claim that he saw mauser on the barrel in an interview (LA Free Press) in 1968 and in his book "When they kill the President" of 1971. Earlier Wietzman said he made a mistake when he identified the rifle as a mauser.

The above is not a rebuttal of David's or Alberto's work. I've not read David's article on the rifle and I'm not sure of Alberto's claim, mainly because my computer is an old one and I haven't been able to download all the evidence presented by Alberto.

George, Roger Craig was interviewed in May of 1974, days after Weitzman was interviewed, and 3 months before Nixon resigned. Weitzman identified Bernard Barker (Watergate Burgler) as a Grassy Knoll Suspect. Craig was suicided before he was called to testify, days after the Weitzman interview. In that May of 1974 interview, Two men in Dallas, Craig was on camera, and very clear, that the rifle  he saw was, a Mauser.

 

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael

Thank you for the video.

IDK, Lane's voice must have changed. It appears the voice of the interviewer is other than Lane's.

The video of Craig is from another time, not 1974.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Michael

Thank you for the video.

IDK, Lane's voice must have changed. It appears the voice of the interviewer is other than Lane's.

The video of Craig is from another time, not 1974.   

The interviewer is identified, as per Mark Lane, Lincoln Carle ( spelling of his name is as per IBDM profile, and the film credits).

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Michael

Thank you for the video.

IDK, Lane's voice must have changed. It appears the voice of the interviewer is other than Lane's.

The video of Craig is from another time, not 1974.   

Craig was suicided In May of 1975, days after Weitzman was interviewed, testifying to Bernard Barker's (Watergate Burgler) presence at the scene of the JFK assassination, on the Grassy Knoll.

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As per below. The interview was April, 1974.

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At 3:00 inI this video, the interviewer  is identified as Lincoln Carle , April, 1974

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael

The Lane video probably was made in 1974, but when was the interview of Craig and Carle?

I think that interview took place before Craig's book was published, sometime in 1971. I could be wrong however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now