Did Lee Harvey Oswald Order The Rifle? The Answer Is Yes

[Bruce Fernandez]

Let's try again ... "Did LHO order 'the' rifle?"

Marina said she took at least one of the back yard photos

The photos depict LHO holding a rifle she thought he owned

We have no evidence that he ever owned more than one rifle (whatever the source)

The rifle in the photos appears to be a MC

A 6.5 MC was said to be found (by police) on the 6th floor on the day of the assassination and is presently in evidence

The rifle in evidence is not the same one or the same as the rifle in the BYPs (at a minimum, sling and sling mounts)

Ergo, the rifle thought to have fired at JFK was not owned by LHO

? Just bad patsying ?

Hence the question "which rifle", we have two to be concerned about

From the evidence available, I can't find that LHO ordered the rifle found in the TSBD

[David Von Pein]

...the rifle thought to have fired at JFK was not owned by LHO...

Bruce,

The JFK murder weapon had the exact same serial number as the rifle Klein's mailed to Oswald's P.O. Box.

Why deny the obvious? Klein's shipped Oswald/Hidell the same weapon that ended up being used by an assassin to murder the President.

And who is more likely to have used a rifle that was mailed to Oswald/Hidell than Oswald/Hidell himself --- be it November 22, 1963, or any other day?

Edited May 31, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Kenneth Drew]

So you're going to tell me that I didn't see what I said I saw in 1963?

It's not uncommon at all for people to think they had seen something on television that we know they could not have possibly seen. But in that person's mind, they would swear on a stack of bibles that they saw it. It's part of their memory forever---even though it's a distorted and inaccurate chunk of their memory.

I provided one such example of this type of false memory when I talked about the woman who said she saw "the whole thing on television", which we know was impossible.

Another example emerged during a radio interview with a JFK author (it was probably in one of Vincent Bugliosi's many interviews in 2007, but I can't recall exactly which interview this occurred in). A caller claimed that he heard Jack Ruby shouting several things to Oswald before Ruby fired the shot that killed LHO. And the caller insisted he heard Ruby's voice as he was watching the live TV coverage of the shooting on November 24, 1963. The caller's memory is vividly clear on this point.

Of course, we know from the videotape TV footage and from the Ike Pappas audio recording that Ruby's voice is never heard once. Ruby never uttered a sound that was audible on either television or radio. But a man has a clear memory of Ruby shouting stuff at Oswald nonetheless. And his false memory will likely never change---even though he probably knows he is wrong.

"(it was probably in one of Vincent Bugliosi's many interviews in 2007," Everything Bug man wrote has been proven to be horseradish. You may as well quote McAdams.

your quoting of things people said that they may have been wrong on are fine for people like you that only want to sell one version of events. As long as you think LHO was involved, just think of all the things your memory is misleading you about. It even allows you to think there are some 'real' back yard photos. It allows you to think that A HIdell is a alias for LHO. It allows you to think LHO shot Tippit with an automatic weapon when he only had a revolver with him. Why, it even allows you to think that Marina Oswald didn't have to be coerced into saying she took one of the BY photos. You can just continue to allow your imagination run away with you. Why you can even imagine that LHO fired a rifle that day,

[Kenneth Drew]

Let's try again ... "Did LHO order 'the' rifle?"

Marina said she took at least one of the back yard photos

The photos depict LHO holding a rifle she thought he owned

We have no evidence that he ever owned more than one rifle (whatever the source)

The rifle in the photos appears to be a MC

A 6.5 MC was said to be found (by police) on the 6th floor on the day of the assassination and is presently in evidence

The rifle in evidence is not the same one or the same as the rifle in the BYPs (at a minimum, sling and sling mounts)

Ergo, the rifle thought to have fired at JFK was not owned by LHO

? Just bad patsying ?

Hence the question "which rifle", we have two to be concerned about

From the evidence available, I can't find that LHO ordered the rifle found in the TSBD

You are correct, there is no evidence that LHO ever ordered that rifle or any other rifle. We know that Marina didn't know anything about the BYphotos until after the Warren commission reminded her that she must have taken them or she could get her travel arrangements together for a trip back to Russia. Other than that......

Of course there is no evidence tying any MC rifle to having fired a shot that hit JFK.

So my summation would be like this:

There is no proof that LHO ever owned or fired any rifle (in Dallas)

There is no forensics that tie any particular weapon to having shot JFK

There is no evidence that any shots were fired from the snipers nest

The rifle purported to have fired at JFK has never been proven to have actually been fired at anyone.

The rifle from the 6th floor is not known to have also been behind the picket fence that day.

The real question is,, who is the Warren commission covering for?

[Kenneth Drew]

...the rifle thought to have fired at JFK was not owned by LHO...

Bruce,

The JFK murder weapon had the exact same serial number as the rifle Klein's mailed to Oswald's P.O. Box.

Why deny the obvious? Klein's shipped Oswald/Hidell the same weapon that ended up being used by an assassin to murder the President.

And who is more likely to have used a rifle that was mailed to Oswald/Hidell than Oswald/Hidell himself --- be it November 22, 1963, or any other day?

"The JFK murder weapon" Oh, now we may be getting somewhere. Ok DVP, tell us which weapon killed JFK? Now remember, you actually have to be able to show that the bullet that hit JFK was fired from the weapon. And remember that weapon had to have been somewhere near the picket fence area ahead and to the right of JFK.

You don't even know what type or caliber weapon shot JFK so you can't possibly know the serial number or where it came from or who was holding it when it was fired. We do know that LHO was given a parafin test on his right cheek and both hands and there was no gun shot residue. Every other person that test fired the MC weapon that they attribute to LHO had gun shot residue on their cheek. What kind of magic did LHO employ that allowed him to not have any evidence of firing a weapon?

which rifle fired the shot that came through the windshield and hit him in the throat? Did LHO order that one from Klein's also?

[David Von Pein]

Kenneth,

Maybe it's time for you to stop believing in so many myths about this case.

There was no hole in the windshield.

Paraffin tests are essentially worthless as evidence.

And there is no proof that there was any gunman on the Knoll.

The next thing you'll be posting is that Mr. Umbrella Man was an assassin too.

[Kenneth Drew]

Kenneth,

Maybe it's time for you to stop believing in so many myths about this case.

There was no hole in the windshield.

Paraffin tests are essentially worthless as evidence.

And there is no proof that there was any gunman on the Knoll.

The next thing you'll be posting is that Mr. Umbrella Man was an assassin too.

"Maybe it's time for you to stop believing in so many myths about this case." Is believing in myths worse than attempting to spread them? So they just replaced the windshield for the heck of it? Paraffin tests are worthless? Then why did EVERY cheek that fired the weapon test positive and no one that didn't fire it test negative? the presence of a small amount indicates 'might' have fired. large amount, probably did. no residue, probably did not. If they are worthless, why do judges allow that evidence be allowed in shooting cases?

"And there is no proof that there was any gunman on the Knoll." Well, you got one right. True, it certainly could have been a gunwoman. Since we don't know who it was we certainly can't claim it to be a 'man'. We certainly do know that a rifle was fired from behind the fence with the bullet hitting JFK in the right temple, but we don't know any details of what type of weapon fired it or whether it was a man or a woman firing that weapon.

[Stephen Roy]

Robert and David are right. No such footage has ever emerged.

Thanks Stephen, but it was there in 1963, I saw it, myself. I have seen it since. I'm not interested in it. It has nothing to do with 'who shot John".

Sorry, Kenneth, no you didn't. I have an extensive collection of post-assassination films (although maybe not as extensive as DVP's), and I'm fully aware of all the film inventories made from that time. There is NO FILM such as you describe. You're right, it's irrelevant, but you are misremembering.

BTW, there is "evidence which would prove something in court," and there is "evidence which is not conclusive but which strongly suggests what really happened." Just because the original evidence has been challenged at every turn doesn't mean that we can't draw reasonable inferences from it, for historical rather than evidenciary purposes. If one believes the evidence faked, one has to consider how complicated it would have been to fake it.

[David Von Pein]

Then why did EVERY cheek that fired the weapon test positive...?

Wrong....

"There were negative reactions on both hands and on the cheek of the FBI agent who fired the assassination weapon. Thus, we had the other side of the coin: A negative reaction from the paraffin test did not prove that a person had not fired a rifle." -- David Belin; Page 18 of "November 22, 1963: You Are The Jury"

[Bruce Fernandez]

Hello David (and others)

Using DVP's reasoning, not necessarily disagreeing:

The rifle found in the TSBD was one which was ordered by and Klein's shipped to Hidell (LHO), (serial # thought), although some concern about multiple rifles with same serial # from different Italian manufacturers is potentially confusing

The only bullet from that day that can be linked to that rifle is a pristine slug of dubious origin (certainly didn't do JC's damage)

Comment: again bad patsying

Not obvious from any source that LHO was actually involved in the rifle transaction (hand writing is certainly indicative, but lack of order processing is confusing) so I'm not denying anything "obvious" to me

Sort of agree with your "probability of use" question, though short on detail about how Hidell got package sent to Oswald PO Box

Continues to feel like short sighted patsy process (that's consistent with my view of US Govt employees working faster than their 50 yr views ... and current technology ... allowed), too many details just out of order

So TSBD 6.5 MC was ordered by AH, money order not processed by US banking authorities (seriously suspicious), and rifle received at LHO PO box (by LHO .. or ...), not documented, OK

Marina was coerced into acknowledging back yard photos, it didn't happen, so they're not authentic, OK

Nonetheless, they show different rifle than that found in TSBD on the day of the assassination, who's doing that?? Roscoe body??

They're, the BYP's, therefore, completely bogus, and Marina didn't actually participate (she lied, was misled to lie, or whatever)

David, too many questions (which actually only, sadly, defines this national tragedy for you or me to be sure of what we see or believe or, more to the point, can reasonably conclude with agreed data).

Best, Bruce

[David Von Pein]

David, too many questions....

Bruce,

IMO, there are no unanswered "questions" with respect to Oswald's rifle purchase at all. To the contrary, it couldn't BE any more crystal clear from the paperwork that Oswald ordered a rifle from Klein's and Klein's shipped Rifle C2766 to Oswald's PO Box. How much more straightforward can it get? And the testimony of the Klein's representative (Waldman) seals the deal on the transaction---that rifle WAS shipped by Klein's in Chicago to to Oswald's post office box in Dallas.

The rifle transaction is, in a sense, ON FILM --- microfilm records.

Sure, anybody can pretend that all the documents are fakes. But that's just a cop-out. No CTer has ever proved that ANY of the documents connected with LHO's rifle have been manufactured. And yet many CTers seem to think they ALL were faked.

As they have done in so many other areas of the JFK murder case, conspiracy advocates have invented any number of flimsy reasons to disregard the perfectly solid evidence that proves Oswald ordered the rifle and that Oswald (aka Hidell) was shipped the eventual Kennedy murder weapon by Klein's.

In addition, I think one of the silliest and dumbest and lamest of all the theories put forth over the years by CTers is the throry that has a group of unknown plotters creating all of the rifle documents from whole cloth in order to have what looks like a solid trail for the rifle purchase. A much much better "CTer theory" would be to just accept what is obviously the truth about Oswald ordering and possessing the C2766 rifle --- and then the CTers can pretend that the plotters went about the much easier task of framing Oswald with his own rifle, versus having the conspirators having the need to invent the rifle trail from the ground up themselves.

But that's what usually happens when CTers go down these silly paths to conspiracy --- they end up looking mighty foolish when the truth (and the paperwork and the testimony of William Waldman) is stacked up alongside the weak-sister "Everything's Phony" excuse that is always propped up by the conspiracy believers.

Edited May 31, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Mark Knight]

"The rifle transaction is, in a sense, ON FILM --- microfilm records."

So where are those microfilm records TODAY? Can you produce them? Can you tell us where in the National Archives they might be found?

Because if that microfilm CANNOT be found today...then its evidentiary value is greatly diminished.

[David Von Pein]

So where are those microfilm records TODAY? Can you produce them? Can you tell us where in the National Archives they might be found?

Because if that microfilm CANNOT be found today...then its evidentiary value is greatly diminished.

Mark,

The WC exhibits known as Waldman 7 and CE788 and CE773 are photographic copies made from the original Klein's microfilmed records. That's practically the same thing as having the original microfilms. Although for handwriting anaylsis, it is always better to have an "original". But that argument certainly doesn't apply to Waldman #7, which has no "Oswald" writing on it at all. So that excuse won't work for CTers regarding the crucial document known as Waldman Exhibit No. 7.

Plus there is the testimony of Bill Waldman, who verified that what we see in Waldman #7 is a copy of the original.

Those things don't meet your requirements for "proof", Mark? You MUST see the "originals" in order to believe the documents are authentic, is that it?

In order for the rifle paper trail to be a falsified trail, CTers have no choice but to call William Waldman a big fat xxxx. There IS no way around that.

Now, somebody please tell me WHY I should think William J. Waldman was a xxxx and a person who wanted to frame Oswald?

Should I have a reason to think everybody EXCEPT Lee Harvey Oswald is a suspect in this crime?

Edited June 1, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Mark Knight]

I don't know that anyone called Waldman a xxxx; those are YOUR words, not mine.

I 'm pretty sure you won't find anything in my post #134 above saying the paper trail is falsified. I haven't made that accusation.

I just asked about where that microfilm is today. Because if the microfilm cannot be produced today, then it cannot be examined.

And if it cannot be examined, we can no longer determine whether or not any evidence allegedly taken from the microfilm is what it is represented to be.

SHOULD a grand jury ever be convened to examine the evidence--which has NEVER been done in this case, and which folks like Bill Kelly are trying to bring about--the admissibility of the Waldman evidence might be challenged successfully.

[David Von Pein]

We have the copies of the rifle documents preserved for all time in the WC volumes (and now online, of course). But I'm not sure where the "original" Klein's microfilms are located (or even if they were preserved at all).

But regardless of where the originals are located, the notion that the copies we currently have are tainted in some way is just another way the CTers have of pretending that the various pieces of incriminating evidence against Oswald have been manufactured or manipulated in order to frame LHO.

And, I will stress again, unless Bill Waldman was lying through his teeth to the Warren Commission (and why should anyone believe he was?), then this document below is exactly the same thing as having the original document in our possession right this minute, because it represents a photographic reproduction of the original microfilm, just as Bill Waldman said in his WC testimony at 7 H 366....

Edited June 1, 2015 by David Von Pein