Andric Perez

Link here: http://www.swggun.org/resources/docs/Ballistic%20Imaging%20Exec%20Summary.pdf If you liked that one you will love this one, in the words of Professor of Law in UCLA, Jennifer Mnookin (A.B. from Harvard College and a J.D. from Yale Law School, Visiting professor at Harvard School of Law): The same Professor above is currently working on a U.S. Department of Justice-funded project aimed at finding an error rate on the discipline of fingerprint examination, which will be out in the summer of 2012. As you may remember, the FBI once claimed that some Oregon Muslim blew up a Madrid train, when in fact it turned out some other dude did it. This and other scandals left the US Government with no other choice but to find out what the hell is going on with this "expert" testimony. http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/two-ucla-professors-awarded-national-153642.aspx

Oh, I see. I think you think the HSCA firearms panel toolmarks identification technique yielded an "ironclad" conclusion. Too bad the National Academy of Sciences does not have the same confidence in firearms identification as you do: So this means that in 2004 nobody knew how many marks are necessary in order to link a questioned bullet to a specific gun, yet you believe that a 1979 conclusion to that effect was an "ironclad" fact? Very interesting. Can you tell us what is the probability that the badly damaged CE-567 may share the same number of matching striae with a test-bullet fired from a rifle other than CE-139 as it did with CE-399? Was there a database with statistics regarding marks left by different rifles? Do you think the HSCA was wrong when it disagreed with Joseph Nicol regarding one of the Tippit bullets? (Nicol said the bullet was fired from Oswald's revolver while HSCA found it inconclusive). If you agree with Nicol, why do you trust the HSCA panel so?

I think you finally made your point clear. In your article about NAA, you based your conclusions on outside evidence (i.e. the autopsy) that has nothing to do with the NAA technique. I never thought anyone would follow that train of thought so it did not cross my mind that you were using that kind of logic. I assume you were going to do what Speer did: Analyze NAA tests in a NAA-related thread. You mentioned the HSCA conclusion about the two bullets, but don't you remember that Blakey said Guinn's tests were the "linchpin" of the single bullet theory? There's even a book titled, "Blakey's "Linchpin" ~ Dr Guinn, Neutron Activation Analysis, and the Single Bullet Theory": http://www.amazon.co.uk/Blakeys-Linchpin-Neutron-Activation-Analysis/dp/B001DU5IIA And don't you remember that this "linchpin" then became "junk science" according to the chief counsel of HSCA?

That conclusion would be "ironclad," only if NAA were not "junk science." the HSCA Chief Counsel once called Guinn's testimony the " 'linchpin' which held the single-bullet theory together," http://www.assassinationweb.com/linchpin1.htm ... Years later, the same guy would call NAA "junk science." Isn't it an understatement to say that NAA was "a bit" more solid in 1986 t han it is now, in light of the analysis conducted during the 21st century exposing its flaws?

Mr. Von Pein said the following: I did not say that you claimed that Guinn's NAA analysis was "ironclad and indisputable." I said that based on his analysis, you thought that it was an ironclad and indisputable fact that two bullets came from CE-139. Here is my quote again, with the relevant portion in bold this time: The statement in bold refers more specifically to your statement that "there are positively TWO distinguishable bullets that definitely came out of Lee Oswald's rifle," which was proved in your opinion (correct me if I'm wrong) by Guinn's analysis, which you deem to be super accurate like DNA matching.

In my search for articles on the same topic I found a 2007 piece written by David Von Pein, where he concluded--based on his analysis of Guinn's NAA tests--that it was an "ironclad and indisputable" "fact" that two bullets came out of Lee Oswald's rifle, and compared the accuracy of NAA to the accuracy of DNA testing: The problem with the comparison above is that DNA typing is an extremely accurate and well-regarded technique while NAA is neither. In his article, Mr. Von Pein did not mention any of the following important things: -The NAS report dealing a blow to NAA -The HSCA Chief calling NAA "junk science." -Articles written by Tobin of the FBI, cited by Speer, dealing a blow to NAA. -The fact that the FBI stopped using NAA in court.

Fair point.

Here's my confusion: I believe CE-399 was planted. Most CT believe that Tomlinson found the bullet on the little boy's stretcher. If the bullet in the little boy's stretcher was a lead-colored pointed-nose bullet, then one would have to believe that two bullets were planted, as a result of a mistake made by the conspirators, who planted the wrong bullet in the first place. Isn't this scenario a little hard to believe? Isn't it more reasonable to believe that the copper bullet was planted in the wrong stretcher, period? Didn't the conspirators know what kind of ammunition and rifle they were going to use as decoy?

Ted Callaway, witness to Tippit's murder, is an example of how unreliable eyewitness testimony often is. He was shown exhibit 150 of the Warren Commission, which is the brown long-sleeve shirt that Oswald was allegedly wearing at the time. Callaway responded that he did not see this shirt--that he only a t-shirt under a jacket; but he immediately added that the brown shirt was open. The statements in bold are contradictory. http://www.jdtippit.com/html/callaway_nov.htm Callaway's thought process, influenced by outside information, can easily be described as follows: Obviously, Callaway had no evidence to state that the killer was wearing an open shirt, since he did not see the shirt at all. It did not occur to him that the killer was wearing nothing but a jacket and a white t-shirt. Only one witness (out of what, 8 or 9?) Has claimed to have seen a brown shirt (correct me if I'm wrong). His name is Sam Guinard. Wasn't Guinard standing very close to Callaway?

It's amazing how most CT and LN are much more interested about the issue of where Moorman was standing, than about the fact that she heard two shots after the head shot. Let's drive that point home. She would be a great witness for the defense in a hypothetical trial against LHO.

Some CT researchers often tout an interview for the book Six Seconds in Dallas where the second person to handle the stretcher bullet in Parkland (O.P. Wright) described it as having a pointed nose and being lead-colored instead of copper-colored. While this description should not be dismissed, it is in conflict with Darrell Tomlinson's recollection that it was copper-colored ( , date unknown, interviewer unknown, 47 second mark). Tomlinson was the person who found it.Either Tomlinson or Wright is wrong. In every article I've read that includes Wright's description, Tomlinson's words go unmentioned, which is unfair in my opinion and puts more weight on Wright's testimony than it deserves.

Vincent Scalice was the NYPD Fingerprint Expert hired by the HSCA. In 1993, while employed as consultant to the PBS documentary "Who was Lee Harvey Oswald?" Scalice claimed to have found 18 points of identity between photographs of the Mannlicher Carcano's trigger housing and a fingerprint card known to be Oswald's. This opinion is touted by LN such as Gary Savage and Vincent Bugliosi (In his book Reclaiming History); however, both fail to mention that a separate fingerprinting expert and consultant to the same documentary (George Bonebrake) could not find sufficient matching points to reach a conclusion. In their minds, George Bonebrake doesn't exist. Here are Bonebrake's qualifications, according to the book Forensic Evidence, Science and the Criminal Law," by Terrence F. Kiely: How Scalice saw what the legendary Bonebrake couldn't see is a question that needs to be answered. What enhancing methods were used by Scalice and Bonebrake? Is one method superior to the other? Did they both use the same process and reach ed a different conclusion? Scalice is also known for endorsing the kooky conspiracy theory that Vincent Foster's suicide note was forged. Foster worked in Bill Clinton's staff before committing suicide in 1993. Scalice and two other examiners were hired for their analysis by the Western Journalism Center, a group financed by the ultra-rightwing Clinton hater Richard Melon Scaiffe, and co-founded by Joseph Farah (founder of the right-wing WorldnetDaily website and still unconvinced that Obama's birth certificate is genuine). For Farah's views on birtherism see this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42786288/ns/politics-decision_2012/t/publisher-upcoming-birther-book-makes-no-apologies/ Scalice's conclusion is seriously undermined by the fact that "three separate handwriting analyses were performed -- one by the Capitol Police and two by the FBI lab -- comparing the note to three different sets of samples of known handwriting of Vince Foster. Each of the three analyses concluded the handwriting was Foster's. link: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/icreport/final/v3e.pdf In light of the above, I would like to ask Scalice-worshipping LN if they endorsed Scalice's conclusion on the suicide note and whether you think his handling of that case undermines his overall credibility.

Mike Williams says Nicol found 7 points of match between the Tippit bullet in question and the test-fired bullet. A Couple of questions: 1) Can you identify these matches in the photograph provided by Nicol, which is Commissin Exhibit 625? I can't. At least once in the past, a firearms examiner tried to make the court believe that a toolmark was present in both a test bullet and the bullet in evidence. It was United States vs. Green a few years ago, and the judge was smarter than the prosecution thought. The judge (Gertner) told the firearms examiner how puzzled he (the judge) was by the fact he could not see the alleged match. . Source: Firearm and Toolmark Identification, by Cunha and Holcomb, Attorneys at Law, Boston, MA, at page 58) Does United States vs. Green give us an indication of the kind of snake oil Nicol was trying to sell? 2) Are you aware that bullets fired from different Smith and Wesson Specials typically have 15-20% match when it comes to striations while bullets fired from the same such revolver have a 21-38% match according to a study in 1959? link Now that you know that different bullets can produce many similar marks in bullets, can you tell us how Nicol knew that these matching marks (which I cannot see by the way, but assuming they are there) did not come from different revolvers? What is the number of matching lines that are sufficient in order to arrive to the conclusion that a bullet was fired from a certain firearm? Why did the other 8 experts conclude they did not have sufficient matches to reach a conclusion?

Frazier had 23 years of experience in firearms identification as of 1964, a number similar to Nicol's 22 years. Frazier swore in an affidavit that he independently examined the same items examined by C.C., and agreed with his conclusions. If you can explain what kind of examination Frazier could have done on these bullets other than trying to find matches, please tell me. link

What an exaggeration. Being an alterationist is not a requirement to be a hard-core CT. From what I've read in Speer's work, he believes a silencer was used in the assassination. Would you care mentioning any WC lawyer who came close to raising that possibility? Which WC lawyer believed in a shot after frame 312? Which WC lawyer believed the bag in the archives is not the original? Which WC lawyer believes Howard Hughes financed the assassination? Which WC lawyer believed in a shot from the DalTex building and a shot (or diversionary firecracker) from behind the arcade area? Those are all positions held by Pat Speer.

This is my first post. I'm glad to be part of this great community. Most of you probably know Paul Stombaugh, FBI examiner who testified that the fibers found in the Mannlicher Carcano "could have" come from Oswald's dark brown long sleeve shirt. I recently found a New York Times' article reporting on the fact that in 1985, the KGB lured an American into a meeting in Russia, with the sole purpose of outing him as the CIA agent that he was. His name was Paul Stombaugh. Is this a coincidence or are we talking about the same guy? Or a relative maybe? Thanks in advance. Excerpt:

I live in Upstate New York. I began reading about the subject many years ago. What I believe in: *More than 1 shooter *shots at frames 190, 224, 312 and some time after 312. Maybe even more shots than that. *Oswald as a fake defector (CIA, ONI or both) and FBI informant. Unsure about: *Oswald's participation in the plot. *LBJ's participation in the plot. *Zapruder Film alteration. *Authenticity of backyard photos.