ROBERT HARRIS SAID:
>>> "And when will you be up for talking about Wade, Nolan, Stinson and Bell?" <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
#1 (Wade) -- He never saw a WHOLE BULLET at the hospital, and you know
it, Bob. He was talking about FRAGMENTS. If the word "bullet" was used
to describe the fragments, it's exactly the same type of semantics
error that was made by Sibert & O'Neill in their FBI report concerning
the supposed "missile" that they saw during JFK's autopsy. But Sibert
later admitted that "No large bullet of any kind...was found" during
the President's autopsy. (That's a verbatim quote from James Sibert on
June 30, 2005; listen to him say it at the link below. And yes, I know
I changed the subject a bit there, but only to demonstrate how easily
that SAME type of "bullet"/"fragment" mistake can occur, and DID occur
elsewhere in the very same murder investigation.)
#2 (Nolan) -- Bobby Nolan, like Wade, never saw any WHOLE BULLET at
Parkland Hospital on 11/22/63. And even HE admitted that very fact to
YOU, didn't he, Bob (in a telephone interview you had with him)?
Correct me if I'm wrong about that, but didn't Nolan say he NEVER
OPENED THE ENVELOPE that he took to the DPD and gave to Will Fritz?
Therefore, how can he know for certain WHAT was inside that envelope
#3 (Stinson) -- I'm going to need a refresher on Stinson's
observations concerning this supposed "extra bullet" matter, Bob.
Frankly, I just plain forgot what his role is in this. Did Stinson
supposedly see an extra whole bullet too?
#4 (Bell) -- Nurse Audrey Bell is ON TAPE telling the world that the
handwriting we see on the envelope in CE842 (which is clearly and
plainly marked "Bullet fragments" from Connally's "Right arm") is
Audrey Bell's own handwriting. She said she positively recognized her
own writing on that foreign body envelope. And I think she also stated
that she did not handle (and write on) more than ONE such envelope on
11/22/63. So your theory about Bell is moribund on that basis alone.
Naturally, you have other ideas. But, as usual, you can't PROVE that
any hanky-panky was going on with any "erased" initials on CE842. And
I think Mike Williams did a fairly decent job of debunking your
"erased initials" theory many months ago at another forum.
Sum total --- Bob Harris cannot prove that ANYONE actually SAW an
extra "whole bullet" at Parkland Memorial Hospital on November 22,
And, of course, the only "official" evidence in the case indicates
that the only whole "bullet" that was found at Parkland that day that
was in any way connected to the wounding of JFK and/or John B.Connally
was CE399. And nobody has been able to PROVE that that bullet was
planted or used as a substitute for any other bullet. CTers can
pretend that they've "proven" that CE399 is a fraudulent bullet, but
even Bob Harris knows that nobody has truly PROVEN that 399 is phony.
Let's face it -- the CTers of the world just flat-out WANT CE399 to be
fraudulent. Therefore, in their eyes, it is.
But the chain of possession of a WHOLE BULLET going from the hands of
Tomlinson, to Wright, to Johnsen, to Rowley, to Todd, to Frazier IS
INTACT -- and it always has been intact. None of those men ever said
anything that breaks that consistent chain. Each man received a whole
bullet from the previous man in the chain. That establishes a CHAIN OF
POSSESSION for the stretcher bullet.
Yes, most conspiracists think that the lack of Johnsen's and Rowley's
initials on CE399 constitutes a break in the chain. But, as John
McAdams has pointed out numerous times in the past, that just simply
is not so. The chain isn't broken due to a lack of marking the
evidence. There are other ways to establish the chain of possession,
and that's been done by the FBI, in asking each man in the "chain" if
they did, in fact, receive a bullet from the previous person in the
chain. And that chain is, indeed, intact. Whether the conspiracy
theorists like it or not.
And Elmer Todd DID mark Bullet CE399. We know he marked it, because
there's FBI documentation that tells us he marked it. And, no, I'm not
willing to concede that the FBI was playing fast and loose with the
words we find in CE2011. And my recent battles with Jim DiEugenio
regarding Darrell Tomlinson and his role in CE2011 should prove
something to at least a few CTers -- that being: the FBI did not lie
about Tomlinson when the FBI said in CE2011 that Tomlinson said that
CE399 resembled the stretcher bullet. And even Robert Harris has now
acknowledged the fact that the FBI did not lie about that.
Therefore, why should anyone really think that CE2011 contains ANY
lies at all (including the section in that document which reveals that
Elmer Todd positively identified his own initials on Bullet CE399)?
The initials that are visible on CE399 (even via the NARA's high-
quality color photos) are very difficult to discern (IMO). I can
hardly make out anyone's initials on that bullet. I can see some faint
markings, but they ARE hard to see. That's a fact. So why is it so
hard to believe that perhaps Todd put his mark on the bullet in such a
way where his initials are even MORE difficult to find than are Bob
Frazier's or Cunningham's or Killion's? Perhaps Todd didn't mark it as
"deeply" into the surface of the bullet as those other men did. Who
can know for sure?
But one thing I do know (because this fact exists in the written
record of this case) -- On June 24, 1964, Elmer Todd said he SAW HIS
OWN INITIALS on CE399. And before you're willing to claim that the
"Todd" portion of CE2011 is a complete lie, Bob, you might want to
think about what you were forced to admit on December 9, 2011 -- you
admitted on that date that the FBI actually told the TRUTH about
Darrell Tomlinson. That admission should make you pause at least for a
few extra seconds before you make any further claims of FBI misconduct
concerning that SAME document known as Commission Exhibit #2011.