Harold Weisberg And Shots From The Sixth Floor

[David Von Pein]

HAROLD WEISBERG:

TOP-NOTCH RESEARCHER?

OR JUST ANOTHER

"ANYBODY BUT OSWALD"

CONSPIRACY THEORIST?

The audio clip linked below was taken from a radio interview in the 1980s featuring famous JFK assassination researcher Harold Weisberg. And it's a clip that should make any reasonable person have serious doubts about the accuracy of anything else Mr. Weisberg had to say concerning the assassination of President Kennedy, because it's a clip that has Weisberg saying something so incredibly silly and provably incorrect that you'd almost have to ask yourself this question after hearing Weisberg make such a stupid claim: Is Weisberg really talking about the JFK case here, or is he referring to some other case entirely?....

HAROLD WEISBERG AUDIO CLIP

Here's what Harold Weisberg said in the above radio interview:

"I'm inclined to think that Oswald did no shooting at all, and I have no reason to believe that any of the shooting came from the sixth floor. All of the evidence that tends to indicate that is corrupted in one way or another."

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

Now I know that the late Mr. Weisberg is considered by many JFK conspiracy theorists to be one of the "deans" among the first generation of Warren Commission critics, with many people propping up Weisberg as the very best of all assassination researchers -- but when a critic makes statements like the ones I just quoted above, I have to scratch my head and wonder why on Earth ANYONE would place any faith in this guy whatsoever and prop him up as some kind of "God" among researchers?

The part about Weisberg actually believing that NO SHOTS AT ALL were fired from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on 11/22/63 is so far out and so provably wrong that I have to wonder whether all of Mr. Weisberg's marbles were present and accounted for when he made such a patently crazy statement in the 1980s.

For, the evidence that proves that multiple gunshots were fired from the southeast corner window on the sixth floor of the Depository is not just beyond any reasonable doubt, the evidence to prove that fact has unquestionably been established beyond all possible doubt. And even most conspiracy theorists will acknowledge that some shots were, indeed, fired from the sixth floor.

Only a person who wants to ignore or deliberately mangle and misrepresent ALL of the following physical evidence and eyewitnesses can possibly believe that no shots at all came from the sixth floor of the TSBD:

1.) The first-day (11/22/63) interviews and affidavits and statements from several eyewitnesses, in which various witnesses told their story about having seen a gunman (or a gun) in the southeast window on the sixth floor of the Book Depository.

These witnesses include: Howard Brennan, Amos Euins, Robert Jackson, and Mal Couch (and a couple of others). And most (if not all) of these people told their eyewitness accounts within literally hours of the shooting (or even less), either via written affidavits that they filled out at the Dallas Sheriff's Department, or by way of live radio interviews, such as WFAA-TV cameraman Mal Couch's live report that was broadcast on WFAA-Radio very shortly after the assassination on 11/22/63 (which can be heard below).

The above Mal Couch interview, all by itself, totally destroys Weisberg's fantasy (or anyone else's similar fantasy theory) about NO SHOTS coming from the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building. Couch's statement on live Dallas radio on the very day of the assassination has Couch confirming (for all time) that he actually saw a rifle being pulled in from an upper floor of the TSBD.

Couch said it was the "fifth or sixth floor" of the Depository, and he also said this: "There were people underneath the rifle, who looked up to see where the shots had come from."

And that can mean only one thing: Mal Couch had to have seen the rifle protruding from the SIXTH floor of the building, because the people he saw "underneath the rifle" were on the fifth floor, a fact that is confirmed by

Tom Dillard's photograph.

Therefore, in order to believe (as Weisberg believed) that no shots were fired from the sixth floor at all, you'd have to believe in one of these two things (both of which stretch reasonable thinking to the breaking point):

Mal Couch was either a xxxx or was mistaken when he said that he saw a rifle being pulled back into the sixth-floor window.

Or:

The person who was sticking a rifle out of the sixth-floor window was not really using his rifle as an assassination weapon that day -- the gunman was merely pointing it out the window as a prop or just for "show", but he didn't really fire any shots with that rifle.

Both of the options above, of course, are just plain silly.

2.) Three spent shells from Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle were found underneath the sixth-floor window -- i.e., underneath the very same window that eyewitnesses said they saw a rifle protruding from.

3.) Oswald's very own Carcano rifle was also found on the same sixth floor. And it was proven that that exact Carcano rifle of Oswald's was the weapon that fired bullets at JFK, via the fact (among other things) that bullet fragments from that exact gun were found in the front seat of the limousine. (Did Mr. Weisberg really think that bullet fragments CE567 and CE569 were planted in the President's car in order to frame Oswald?)

4.) Witnesses on the fifth floor of the TSBD, Harold Norman in particular, heard a rifle being fired directly over their heads as the shooting was occurring, with Norman even hearing three cartridge cases hitting the plywood floor above him. (Is Harold Norman a xxxx too?)

In the face of all of this evidence, Harold Weisberg (who knew this case like the back of his hand) actually had the nerve to utter this statement on a San Francisco radio station:

"I'm inclined to think that Oswald did no shooting at all, and I have no reason to believe that any of the shooting came from the sixth floor. All of the evidence that tends to indicate that is corrupted in one way or another."

There's only one additional thing that needs to be said here:

Un-be-liev-able.

David Von Pein

October 6, 2011

Edited June 23, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Josephs]

What a pile of junk science you offer David...

All of the evidence that tends to indicate that is corrupted in one way or another.

You restating the same tired evidence does not make it anymore authentic or any less corrupt... To do so you need to ADDRESS the evidence - which your posts alwasys lack... So let's check your offered Evidence and show you how indeed it is corrupted.

1) 1.) The first-day (11/22/63) interviews and affidavits and statements from several eyewitnesses, in which various witnesses told their story about having seen a gunman (or a gun) in the southeast window on the sixth floor of the Book Depository.

These witnesses include: Howard Brennan, Amos Euins, Robert Jackson, and Mal Couch

A "gunman in the window" is not the same as "shots fired from that window"... so let's see how these "various witnesses" do....

Brennen did not see shots

Euins claims to have seen at least two shots fired... yet like Brennen does not see the rifle in evidence

Mr. SPECTER. How far was it sticking out of the window would you say then, Amos?

Mr. EUINS. I would say it was about something like that.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 3 feet?

Mr. EUINS. You know--the trigger housing and stock and receiver group out the window.

Mr. SPECTER. For example, could you see whether or not there was a telescopic lens on the gun?

Mr. EUINS. No, sir

Mr Jackson does NOT see anyone firing a rifle

Mr. SPECTER - Did you see anyone's hands on the rifle?

Mr. JACKSON - No, sir.

Mr. SPECTER - Now, as best as you can recollect it, what exact words did you state at or about the time you made the observation of the rifle, if any?

Mr. JACKSON - I said, "There is the gun" and somebody said "Where?" And I said, "It came from that window" and I pointed to that window.

Mr. SPECTER - Do you recollect who it was who said "Where?"

Mr. JACKSON - Somebody in the car, I don't recall who.

Mr. SPECTER - Did anybody else in the car say anything else at the time?

Mr. JACKSON - Nothing that I could remember. I am sure they were all talking.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you say anything else at about that time?

Mr. JACKSON - If I did, I don't remember.

Mr. SPECTER - Did anyone in the automobile state that he, too, had seen the rifle from the window?

Mr. JACKSON - No, sir.

Then after the last shot, I guess all of us were just looking all around and I just looked straight up ahead of me which would have been looking at the School Book Depository and I noticed two Negro men in a window straining to see directly above them, and my eyes followed right on up to the window above them and I saw the rifle, or what looked like a rifle approximately half of weapon, I guess I saw. and just looked at it, it was drawn fairly slowly back into the building, and I saw no one in the window with it. I didn't even see a form in the window

Couch does not see anyone firing a shot

Mr. COUCH - Nothing unusual between the shots. Uh - as I say, the first shot, I had no particular impression; but the second shot, I remember turning - several of us turning - and looking ahead of us. It was unusual for a motorcycle to backfire that close together, it seemed like. And after the third shot, Bob Jackson who was as I recall, on my right, yelled something like, "Look up in the window! There's the rifle!" And I remember glancing up to a window on the far right, which at the time impressed me as the sixth or seventh floor. And seeing about a foot of a rifle being - the barrel brought into the window. I saw no one in the window - just a quick 1-second glance at the barrel.

So of all the conclusions you offer, only Euins claims to have seen someone firing a shot... Euins also is quoted as saying the man was bald on top and a black man.

2) three spent shells.... Since you have not been able to associate the rifle with Oswald other than using the rifle itself as its own evidence (a tautology which is devious yet proves nothing)

You see David, the problem is not just bad evidence, it's that the FBI's own reports contradict the final evidence offered. Since we are not given any June 1962 shipment to Kleins records other than from Feldsott... how does the FBI know any specific info from the June 1962 order?

You see, Feldsott - with the records turned over to the FBI - tells us that C2766 was shipped in June 1962. That even though the Kleins ORDER BLANK says they shipped C2766, there is no r3ecord of Kleins ever receiving that rifle... only two others with similar #'s. Since Rupp never kept records of serial numbers and then stopped naming the specific cases he removed from Harborside... there is NO EVIDENCE to prove that Rupp ever handled or shipped Kleins that rifle.

As it says. "ALSO SHIPPED TO KLEINS on 3/27/63 RIFLE WITH SN C2746" David, do you have a copy of the 3/27/63 shipment to Klein's? It's not in the evidence yet Feldsott obviously gave them info related to these shipments...

If you can't ever prove Oswald was in possession of the rifle (fingerprints after the fact don't count unless you can get the rifle to him in the first place)then the "three spent shells" have nothing at all to do with him.

#3 is just a repeat of # 2 without evidence as well - Until you prove the connection David, you saying it was his rifle is a misrepresentation of the evidence offered.

4) If the shots were fired 10 feet from their heads, there is no way in physical reality that they could hear much of anything, let alone the working of a bolt and dropping of shells...

Their own testimony DISPROVES that the shots could have come from above them... in that they repeatedly are not sure where the shots came from and are amazed to suggest it was right above them.

Mr. NORMAN. I believe it was his right arm, and I can't remember what the exact time was but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard the shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something, and then another shot and I believe Jarman or someone told me, he said, "I believe someone is shooting at the President," and I think I made a statement "It is someone shooting at the President, and I believe it came from up above us."

With their ears ringing from a 150dB sound, they "believe"? and yet another 150dB shot and they still are guessing? and yet a 3rd loud noise and Norman can hear shells? Believe whatever you like.

So really David, at the end of the day all you have is Euins seeing shots, and Brennen seeing most of a rifle that had no scope... Couch and Jackson only saw aftermath. And you still cannot prove a connection between Oswald and that rifle.

[Jon G. Tidd]

DVP,

I suggest that when you post a diary like this, in presenting your contentions you simply quote from the Warren Report. That way, all you have to do is defend the Warren Report.

The way you've done it here, you have to defend your contentions against the likes of David Josephs, who is formidable, If you defend your contentions by relying on the Warren Report, you simply assume the conclusions of the Warren Report and then use the Warren Report to support your conclusions. Which is a logical fallacy I'm sure you wish to avoid.

[David Von Pein]

DVP,

I suggest that when you post a diary like this, in presenting your contentions you simply quote from the Warren Report. That way, all you have to do is defend the Warren Report.

The way you've done it here, you have to defend your contentions against the likes of David Josephs, who is formidable, If you defend your contentions by relying on the Warren Report, you simply assume the conclusions of the Warren Report and then use the Warren Report to support your conclusions. Which is a logical fallacy I'm sure you wish to avoid.

Jon,

What the "formidable" David Josephs presents above is nothing but pure out-and-out garbage (i.e., DENIAL of the evidence).

It seems as if David Josephs, like the late Mr. Weisberg, is actually also suggesting that NO SHOTS AT ALL were fired from the sixth floor. Even though Josephs KNOWS that there are four witnesses who ALL put a RIFLE in that sixth-floor window. And yet, still, we get crackpottery like the total junk spewed by David Josephs above.

It's beyond belief the lengths CTers will go to clean Oswald's skirts. Mind-boggling, in fact. Some of the CTers on the Internet these days must take daily lessons in "How To Avoid The Obvious".

And let me ask you directly, Jon Tidd....

Do you think any shots at all were fired from the sixth floor Sniper's Nest? Or anywhere else on the sixth floor?

Edited June 23, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Jon G. Tidd]

I don't know, David.

I know shots were fired from behind.

[David Josephs]

So you don't even bother reading rebuttals to your poor attempts at WCR apology..

So of all the conclusions you offer, only Euins claims to have seen someone firing a shot... Euins also is quoted as saying the man was bald on top and a black man.

I posted the actual evidence which shows that the other three men did not see any shots fired... only Euins.

And yet the rifle Euins sees does not appear to have been the scoped Carcano....

Your contention is that OSWALD FIRED from that WINDOW with the CARCANO... and so far all you;ve got is one person saying they saw shots fired from that window... and one man FAILING TO IDENTIFY who he saw to the Dallas Police.

I only posted the actual evidence offered by the WCR - "total JUNK" is one way to describe the WCR evidence for sure David... yet if you are going to use the same WCR evidence to support your claims... your "total junk" is no different than my "total junk"..

Since that's a draw... all that's left is for you to post your evidence which shows he paid for and picked up said rifle, transported it home, transported it to New Orleans and then transported it to Irving... that Ruth basicallyproves he never was in the garage that night... you have your work cut out.

Ball is in your court David... can't be THAT rifle in Oswald's hands until you get them both there to begin with...

[David Von Pein]

....Euins said, at various times, the sixth-floor sniper was a BLACK man and a WHITE man. (He, of course, saw a white man--OSWALD--with the gun on the sixth floor. And he likely saw either Norman or Williams on the fifth floor below Oswald too. Several witnesses seemed to "merge" the fifth-floor and sixth-floor windows. Understandable, since there were men in all of those windows of the building.)

....Brennan also said he couldn't tell whether the sixth-floor rifle had a SCOPE on it. The same thing must have happened to Euins. From that distance, and seeing the gun for only a few fleeting seconds, it's not surprising that the scope wasn't noticed by those witnesses. Big deal. They missed seeing the scope. But they saw a RIFLE being pointed out of the sixth-floor SN window --- the same window where other incriminating evidence of a sniper was found...like CE510, those 3 shells. (Now, tell me, David J., you think those three shells were planted, right? Tell me you KNOW they were "planted". I love hearing that fantasy theory/myth over and over again---year after year after year. And, of course, if you don't believe those shells were planted, then it's impossible to believe the fairy tale about NO shots at all emanating from that sixth-floor window. So, naturally, you HAVE to think they were planted there. Correct?)

....Many, many witnesses HEARD SHOTS coming from the Book Depository and NO OTHER PLACE. Now, David, tell me how those MANY "TSBD" earwitnesses are not relevant to determining if there were actually shots fired from that TSBD Building.

....So there's Euins, Brennan, Jackson, Couch (plus Mrs. Cabell and James Worrell, whom I did not mention before, but also go into the "I Saw A Rifle Or A "Projection" In An Upper-Story TSBD Window" category. .... Plus those many witnesses who heard shots coming from the TSBD Building. .... Plus Norman, who heard shots coming from over his head and heard three shells hitting the floor above him. .... Plus the 3 bullet shells on the floor. .... Plus Rifle C2766 being found on the same SIXTH FLOOR.

And yet all of the above, in aggregate form, somehow means I should start believing Harold "The Original Mr. Denial" Weisberg when he uttered these words 30 years ago?.....

"I have no reason to believe that any of the shooting came from the sixth floor."

No thanks, Harold. I'd prefer to remain among the sane.

Edited June 23, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Josephs]

In other words... you cant prove anything so you repeat the same things only with more emphasis...

y'know like a person talking louder to someone who doesn't understand English... completely ineffective.

How can Norman hear anything with his ears ringing from rifle shots just above his head?

People immediately ran to the OPEN END of the plaza where there would be NO ECHOES, as opposed to the TSBD side where , if a shot was fiored from the RR yard area, would echo thru the buildings at the TOP of Elm...

No matter what you do or say or what you offer it is all based in the lies of he WCR based on the lies of the FBI.

Until you actual authenticate a single piece of evidence you have nothing... Do you believe Layea when he says the shells were lined up all facing the same way and in a tight group until FRITZ picks them up, handles them, and throws them back down... kinda like the photos of the sniper's gun rest boxes which was reinacted days later for the "official" photos...

Keep digging David... just keep digging.

Edited June 23, 2015 by David Josephs

[David Von Pein]

How can Norman hear anything with his ears ringing from rifle shots just above his head?

WTF? Why on Earth would anyone think Norman's ears had to be "ringing" from the shots? Is that a new theory by some CT Denialist?

If that were the case, Oswald would have been deaf by the time he reached DPD Headquarters on 11/22.

You sound like Robert "Z285" Harris now. Harris thinks the entire crowd in Dealey Plaza would have been "jumping out of their skins" (a Harris quote) if Oswald had been firing his Carcano from the sixth floor. Almost SIXTY FEET up, and Harris thinks people would have had no choice but to be jumping out of their skins with fright and "startle reactions", which, of course, we don't see ANY of in the Zapruder Film at all. And because of this lack of "startle reactions", Harris has decided there were no audible shots fired at all prior to Z285 of the Z-Film. (Yes, he really said that---thousands of times at aaj and MacRae's place.)

You probably concur with such junk too, eh David J.?

Keep digging David... just keep digging.

And keep denying the obvious, David. Just keep on denying it. After all, it's what CTers do best. (Just ask Kenneth Drew....or the late Harold Weisberg.)

And I've always loved the "Shells all pointing the same way and only an inch apart" claptrap. Better than a barrel full of monkeys. What we have here, then, is the tidiest team of Patsy Framers known to man. They wanted to make SURE to advertise the fact that the shells were planted there, so they took the time to make sure the shells were in a nice neat row, all pointing the same way. The plotters should have been presented with the 1963 Good Housekeeping Award for such neatness and efficiency. (And yet David Josephs believes it.)

Edited June 23, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Ray Mitcham]

How can Norman hear anything with his ears ringing from rifle shots just above his head?

WTF? Why on Earth would anyone think Norman's ears had to be "ringing" from the shots? Is that a new theory by some CT Denialist?

If that were the case, Oswald would have been deaf by the time he reached DPD Headquarters on 11/22.

We agree totally, David. But he wasn't.

You sound like Robert "Z285" Harris now. Harris thinks the entire crowd in Dealey Plaza would have been "jumping out of their skins" (a Harris quote) if Oswald had been firing his Carcano from the sixth floor. Almost SIXTY FEET up, and Harris thinks people would have had no choice but to be jumping out of their skins with fright and "startle reactions", which, of course, we don't see ANY of in the Zapruder Film at all. And because of this lack of "startle reactions", Harris has decided there were no audible shots fired at all prior to Z285 of the Z-Film. (Yes, he really said that---thousands of times at aaj and MacRae's place.)

You probably concur with such junk too, eh David J.?

Putting words in other people's mouth again?

Keep digging David... just keep digging.

And keep denying the obvious, David. Just keep on denying it. After all, it's what CTers do best. (Just ask Kenneth Drew....or the late Harold Weisberg.)

And I've always loved the "Shells all pointing the same way and only an inch apart" claptrap. Better than a barrel full of monkeys. What we have here, then, is the tidiest team of Patsy Framers known to man. They wanted to make SURE to advertise the fact that the shells were definitely planted there, so they took the effort to make sure the shells were in a nice neat row, all pointing the same way. The plotters should have been awarded the Good Housekeepiong Award for 1963 for such neatness and efficiency. (And yet David Josephs believes it.)

David, did Fritz pick up the shells and then replace them or not?

[David Von Pein]

David, did Fritz pick up the shells and then replace them or not?

No, of course he didn't. That's Conspiracy Myth No. 1,121.

BTW, Ray, is it your opinion that anyone who has ever fired a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle without ear protection would be rendered totally deaf after firing three shots from their MC rifles?

Edited June 23, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David G. Healy]

David, did Fritz pick up the shells and then replace them or not?

... That's Conspiracy Myth No. 1,121. ...

actually it's closer to 3,576... Simply goes to show nutter-trolls like yourself just how seriously most take the 1964 WCR conclusion(s). Bull-pookey comes to mind... You need another hobby, Von Pein!

[David Josephs]

David... even you know how to look up the sound levels at distance or a rifle such as the MC... ??

Are you saying they were not 10 feet from the barrel sticking out of the window?

Are you saying that no shots were fired from that corner with that rifle?

Are you saying that 150dB or even 125 dB at 10 feet from the muzzle is unrealistic?

Are you claiming that a person can hear tiny sounds like the working of a bolt and a shell hitting the floor after experiencing 1-2-3 of these blasts?

what part of these simple physics do you contest?

For most people, the pain threshold is about 120 db; deafening ear damage can result at 150 db. But damage of various kinds can come from much lower exposures. Temporary hearing impairment can result from sounds over the 85 db now found in modern kitchens with all appliances going. If the ears do not get a chance to recover, the impairment will become permanent. http://www.faqs.org/health-encyc/The-Environment-and-Health/The-Environment-and-Health-Effects-of-sound-on-the-eardrum.html

[David Von Pein]

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

According to Robert Harris' theory about the extreme loudness of a Carcano gunshot, it would stand to reason that anyone who was actually firing shots from a Carcano rifle should be rendered nearly deaf by firing those shots (if the shooter wasn't wearing any ear protection, that is).

But that is nonsense, as demonstrated on film by CBS-TV in June of 1967, when we see several people firing a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle without any ear protection being used whatsoever (certainly no visible earmuffs or other ear-protecting devices being worn by any of these shooters, at any rate). [see Part 1; 37:00.]

In addition, there's this video [below] of a man firing a series of shots using a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle similar to Lee Oswald's (with very accurate results, BTW, at more than SIX TIMES the distance of Oswald's longest Dealey Plaza shot).

And while the gunman in that video is, indeed, wearing ear-protection gear, the microphone (situated very close to the muzzle of the rifle) is picking up the sound of each shot very clearly, and the shots don't sound extremely ear-piercing to me (even when standing right next to the gun, which is where the cameraman is standing).

So, as usual, Robert Harris' subjective theories fall flat, especially when weighed against the BEST PHYSICAL EVIDENCE in the JFK case -- i.e., THREE spent bullet shells FROM OSWALD'S MANNLICHER-CARCANO RIFLE being found in the TEXAS SCHOOL BOOK DEPOSITORY (not in the Dal-Tex Building), coupled with the important corroborating "THREE SHOTS" fact that more than NINETY PERCENT of the earwitnesses heard THREE SHOTS OR FEWER during the assassination in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.



David Von Pein
November 30, 2009 Edited June 23, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Josephs]

According to Robert Harris' theory about the extreme loudness of a Carcano gunshot, it would stand to reason that anyone who was actually firing shots from a Carcano rifle should be rendered nearly deaf by firing those shots (if the shooter wasn't wearing any ear protection, that is).

If you took a few seconds and looked it up you'd know why David. The sound is 25 or more dB lower in the firing position than in front of the muzzle.

And is the reason those at a range do use ear protection.

It is simply not logical to understands that a man 10 feet under that muzzle wouldn't be able to hear much of anything after 3 shots... so if the shots were from the Dal Tex roof for example, it would still sound as if it was above and behind and the sound waves would not render them temporarily deaf or with ringing ears.

Someone on the 6th floor with a rifle working a bolt and dropping some shells may very well be heard... especially if he was walking around causing dust to fall...