Jump to content
The Education Forum

The rifle of TSBD and the rifle CE139 and their scopes had different lengths


Recommended Posts

Andrej...

Thanks for looking into that...  As for planting it after the shooting I'd suggest not coming to any conclusion just yet...

Read Boone's timeline as he tells it...   From my reading of it it appears to me that everyone waits until Boone arrives before the rifle is found... And I thought I remembered thqat Boone came to the TSBD with someone...  I'd have to go look.  Now I remember...  Mooney is credited with finding the rifle... Alyea cxorrects his statement claiming Mooney had nit yet even arrived...

What strikes me as strange is that, despite the similarities between the BOONE and WEITZMAN statements, the timing of their statements appears to conflict.

Mr. BALL - Where did you view the parade?
Mr. BOONE - Right in front of the sheriff's office. (Corner of Main & Houston)
Mr. BALL - You turned to your right and went west?
Mr. BOONE - Well, there is a big cement works out there. We went on west across Houston Street, and then cut across the grass out there behind the large cement works there. Some of the bystanders over there seemed to think the shots came from up over the railroad in the freight yards, from over the triple underpass. So there was some city officer, I don't know who he was, motorcycle officer had laid his motorcycle down and was running up the embankment to get over a little retaining wall that separates the freight yards there. He went over the wall first, and I was right behind him, going into the freight yards. We searched out the freight yards. We were unable to find anything.

Mr. BOONE - Well, I finally went around and was talking to some of the spectators that were in the area there, located a boy by the name of Betzer(sic). He had taken what he thought was some photographs, or there were photo-graphs--he thought he might have had a portion of the building. Later on we were able to ascertain that the shots had come from the building, from that southeast corner over there. And he had some photographs, but they didn't extend past the second floor on the building.
Mr. BALL - Did you go up into the building then?
Mr. BOONE - I took him on over to the sheriff's office, and placed him in the sheriff's office, took his camera, to bring it back to the ID Bureau to be developed. Placed him in the sheriff's office at that time to await somebody to take a statement from him. Then some other officers, Ralph Walters and Officer Gramstaff, and I don't know
whether--I don't remember Officer Mooney was with them or not at that time they headed back to get some heavy power flashlights. They said they wanted to look around in the attic. And there were a bunch of pallets, that they moved the books around, and it was dark and they couldn't see. So we got the lights and went over to the building. At that time, we proceeded directly to the sixth floor.
Mr. BALL - Somebody tell you to go to the sixth floor?
Mr. BOONE - Well, that is just where everybody was going. And they said five floors below that--I believe Inspector Sawyer with the city was out there, and he said the other floors were in the process of being searched or had been already searched. This was after Officer Mooney found the shells.

Except ALYEA corrected his statement:  "I do however know that Officer Mooney was present when the rifle was found because I took film of him at the scene."  with the following: (Important correction) Take out the sentence that starts with :" I do however know that Officer Mooney…"

"Mooney was a Sheriff's Deputy, not a police officer. He did not arrive on the sixth floor until after the rifle was found and the search was over."

Mr. MOONEY - It was a push button affair the best I can remember. got hold of the controls and it worked. We started up and got to the second. I was going to let them off and go on up. And when we got there, the power undoubtedly cut off, because we had no more power on the elevator. So I looked around their office there, just a short second or two, and then I went up the staircase myself. And I met some other officers coming down, plainclothes, and I believe they were deputy sheriffs. They were coming down the staircase. But I kept going up. And how come I get off the sixth floor, I don't know yet. But, anyway, I stopped on six, and didn't even know what floor I was on.
Mr. BALL - You were alone?
Mr. MOONEY - I was alone at that time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ray

Do an internet search using the words Tomlinson, bullet found on stretcher and JFK assassination.

I've included several internet articles I read that may interest you.

www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/EvenMoreMagical.htm

22november1963.org.uk/ce-399-magic-bullet-planted-or-genuine

jfkhistory.com/bell/bellarticle/BellArticle.html

The first two articles discuss chain of possession while the last one discusses Tomlinson finding the bullet on stretcher 'B', which was Kennedy's stretcher.

I hope this answers your question. If not ask again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Ray

Do an internet search using the words Tomlinson, bullet found on stretcher and JFK assassination.

I've included several internet articles I read that may interest you.

www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/EvenMoreMagical.htm

22november1963.org.uk/ce-399-magic-bullet-planted-or-genuine

jfkhistory.com/bell/bellarticle/BellArticle.html

The first two articles discuss chain of possession while the last one discusses Tomlinson finding the bullet on stretcher 'B', which was Kennedy's stretcher.

I hope this answers your question. If not ask again.

The first link doesn't work.

The second link says that the bullet could NOT have come from JFK's stretcher.

The third link say nothing about its being JFK's stretcher. If I am missing something please post the quote which says it was form JFK's stretcher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ray

It's in the third link. jfkhistory.com/bell/bellarticle/BellArticle.html

Below the diagram drawn by Tomlinson is an interview. He states in the last sentence of the interview that he found the bullet on stretcher "B". Stretcher "B" is the stretcher in which Kennedy was on when he was taken into the hospital. Stretcher "A" was used for Connally.

Read it carefully.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrej

The SBT and the magic bullet and the discussion of the validity of the theory has taken center stage and the shot to Kennedy's back is all but forgotten. This could be by design or it could be the SBT is much more interesting to study.

If one was to take off one's layman hat and put on his mathematics hat one would see the folly of the SBT. In reality the SBT defies logic and science and it should be dismissed without prejudice.

But we are left with the bullet found on Kennedy's stretcher. Where does it fit within the puzzle called the JFK assassination. I say it fits in as the bullet that caused Kennedy's back wound and realizing that it does fit there it becomes a normal bullet, no more magic.

And then realizing that the bullet was tested to have been used in CE 169, there is only one explanation. The sniper in the Dal Tex building must have used CE 169 in the assasination. No way did the sniper on the sixth floor TSBD use CE 169 or any other rifle to shoot Kennedy in the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Ray

It's in the third link. jfkhistory.com/bell/bellarticle/BellArticle.html

Below the diagram drawn by Tomlinson is an interview. He states in the last sentence of the interview that he found the bullet on stretcher "B". Stretcher "B" is the stretcher in which Kennedy was on when he was taken into the hospital. Stretcher "A" was used for Connally.

Read it carefully.

 

George, who said Stretcher B was JFK's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ray

JFK was in the EOR, the door of which opened up to the hallway where stretcher "B" was located. Stretcher "B" was used to bring in Kennedy from the limo.

Before you ask me who said stretcher "B" was used to bring in Kennedy, the answer is ... I did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry George, but opinion don't make evidence. You can think that it was JFK's stretcher was stretcher B if you want, but it don't make it so.

 

"It is certainly true that the bullet could not have come from Kennedy’s stretcher, which remained in a different part of the hospital until after the bullet was discovered, but it is far from certain that the bullet came from Connally’s stretcher."

Edited by Ray Mitcham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Ray

I've read at least two different stories regarding the stretcher. Your's is a third.

Sorry but I don't believe either of them.

George, just tell me how you know it was JFK's stretcher. Or are you just guessing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To see this photo in full you may have to click on it then click again to pause. The butt of the rifle is the issue but it is cutoff.  Thanks
 Here is an interesting result I got from leaning a rifle at about 10 degrees(same rifle in both images). Not looking for pinpoint accuracy here, just making a point about image distortion when the camera is close to the subject. I photoshopped them to align at the triggers. The upper part of the rifle is doing what is expected, it is just a little smaller than the straight image. But the bottom of the rifle on the left has increased in length dramatically. The top has gotten smaller and the bottom has become bigger because percentage wise it is much closer to the camera. If the rifle had been forty feet away the lower part would only be slightly closer and the distortion would be next to nothing. It is the proximity to the camera that is the culprit. 
 This creates a problem when you compensate for the reduced vertical dimension of the leaning rifle. If the rifle was 40 ft from the camera you could just resize the vertical to correct the length of the rifle. But if you try to resize a distorted picture like the rifle on the left you will only make a larger distorted image. Resizing the vertical image is done in a proportional way so it will not correct the large lower portion. Resizing a leaning object to it's original length will work as long as the image was not distorted by its proximity to the camera.
 If you then try and resize either rifle so the lengths match for comparison more problems become evident. First the bigger rifle butt is longer and when aligned at the bottom the larger butt displaces the scope forward. That is most of the reason the scope does not line up at the rear. Oh ya couldn't find the scope, that is a zero power paper roll tube.
 There is also a tricky third distortion problem. After increasing the length to compensate for the rifle leaning away from the camera you still have a rifle that is a bit too long due to the longer butt. This means when you go to match the length of the two images the distorted image will start off larger than it should be. This means it can't be enlarged to its real size(In Comparison to the other rifle) and parts other than the oversized butt will end up looking small in comparison.
The proof is the parts will be smaller in BOTH the vertical and horizontal because the image could not be enlarged fully. If you look at the comparison that is the subject of this thread you will find the eyepiece on the scope is not only shorter it is about 12% smaller in height too! Conversley if you measure the relative sizes of the butt you will find the opposite. The butt of the gun in the image taken in front of the TSBD is larger in every dimension, yet the scope on that same image is smaller in both dimensions.This means the scope is smaller only because it is a smaller image. 
  So I think this strange mismatch in the leaning rifle with the larger butt and smaller scope occurring in both the vertical and horizontal is strong evidence that this is just a case of photographic distortion.

Edited by Chris Bristow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ray, yes the enlarged portion of the rifle tappers off as you move up but includes some the scope. The smaller scope is in the OP photos but not in my comparison. That is because my leaning rifle has not been resized. If I shrunk the leaning one to match the size of the other rifle the scope would also shrink. My comparison only illustrates the increase in size of the butt end. the proofs can be measured in the OP's original photo comparison. 
 I messed up when I made the photos and cut off the end of the barrel.  I have to use the end of the stock to see the shrinking of the barrel end of the gun. The butt ends are visible if you click on it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...