James Files

[Wim Dankbaar]

Wim has spent so much money on the Files story, do you believe if he found contradictory evidence of Files alleged involvement he would say so? I don't.

I haven't found any contradictory evidence. Neither have you

I don't necessarily think Wim is deliberately perpetrating a fraud, I think he really believes Files.

Yep

You on the other hand, don't know what you have. You read documents and misconstrue what they say. You're probably sitting on a slew of stuff from Files that you either misinterpreted, or don't understand what they REALLY say. So you keep it to yourself because you don't want to inadvertently harm Files' case, while at the same time, indicate you have "proof".

Yep again

Edited November 7, 2004 by Wim Dankbaar

[Nancy Eldreth]

OK Richard, go to the FBI and police departments and tell them that you know more than them in how to conduct solving some crimes. They use Mafia if they can to do it, they use witnesses to do it, they use people on the streets to do it, they use who knows who system to do it and they also use people who can predict. ANY MEANS and if they don't then they haven't done their jobs.

As far as the FBI onto JFK system they did a good job on some of them, but rest assure a lot of what they did get was thrown away and or withheld. The withheld part I have seen just how much on that just by going to NARA and taking a really good look at it all. SO I know that part to be true. Richard a lot is withheld. It may not seem like a lot when you have over 5 millions papers on the subject and withhold less than one per cent but out of over 5 million that amounts to a lot of information withheld from us.

So, that information I was also told isn't into books. Not in newspapers, not coming out from witnesses anymore. Not talked about on the streets anymore.

They haven't done one thing to try and it is worth a shot at it, as far as I am concerned.

True, there are false predictions and people who are jack in the box types with money on the brains and any means to do it, just like some of the researchers and former FBI agents onto this. They get paid but they don't do the skills into it that is needed into solving this crime.

As far as emails I have had a few that are nice. Even when you have written to me on the side it is a lot nicer than what you put up on the forums.

[Richard J. Smith]

"OK Richard, go to the FBI and police departments and tell them that you know more than them in how to conduct solving some crimes."

If I went to my local police dept or to the FBI(except maybe Fox Mulder), or told Al Carrier, Ian Griggs, Ian Kerr, Mike Perez, or any other police official that posts on JFK forums to seek out a fortune teller, or to use a "certified" psychic like Kreskin to solve a case, they'd lock ME up. I love The X Files, but you should realize that it IS fictional.

[Dawn Meredith]

Wim and Richard:

Could you two just stop this bickering on this post and do it in a PM fashion??? It is really boring to read this garbage, when most of us are here for honest updates in this case.

I for one am looking very forward to Tosh's story. So far he sounds most credible. We thank you Tosh.

I saw the Files video a few years back and was not impressed with it, but it's very hard to learn more just listening to you two (Wim and Richard) accuse each other of lies and what ever happened on Lnacer. Enough already.

Dawn

[Nancy Eldreth]

"OK Richard, go to the FBI and police departments and tell them that you know more than them in how to conduct solving some crimes."

If I went to my local police dept or to the FBI(except maybe Fox Mulder), or told Al Carrier, Ian Griggs, Ian Kerr, Mike Perez, or any other police official that posts on JFK forums to seek out a fortune teller, or to use a "certified" psychic like Kreskin to solve a case, they'd lock ME up. I love The X Files, but you should realize that it IS fictional. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On several news stations some time back it was told that they did. Not fiction and they actually did crack several cases. It was from that I am stating what I have said on the forums.

Also, a true life movie several I have seen that also made mention to this. NO it isn't fictional. It is factual stated at the beginnings of the movies it is from factual events. I guess I am into lifetime programs. I also think I saw something to this effect on the History and/or Learning Channels. I said in several of my postings that Some police stations do this. That means NOT ALL. I also saw on the news that one time they used a good teller that she didn't crack the case. Only one miss out of several positves. Yet, the same teller did get some other cases. So, it is a fifty fitfty per cent chance to get maybe something. Maybe more depends on who it is they get to do this. I also said I am trying everything. I did say I was laughing on the thread. It was meant to be taken lightly but I grief over this, you never take anything the way it is written. DO YOU? I am not ashamed of ever trying anything as long as it is legal.

[Gibson Vendettuoli]

Trust me, psychics are not the way to go. They may actually know the truth, but people will still attack their credibility, one way or another. I knew and still know a psychic who talked to Lee Harvey Oswald quite often. She's told me several things. For instance, JFK is now Oswald's friend and they often give speeches together in the Afterlife (same with Booth and Lincoln; must be that they're afraid the assassin will hurt them again, so they team up to avoid it). She also says she did an interview with Oswald for a magazine her friends ran for a little bit, but she's unwilling to provide it.

In any case, she told me a few things that my uncle posted for me on a JFK newsgroup in 2001 on his account (HAiR Veteran) and that went relatively ignored. Oswald said supposedly that he was involved and fired two shots from the Texas School Book Depository. However, there were more shots fired from the Grassy Knoll by police recruit Roscoe White, with whom he was allegedly involved in other matters. Oswald was purportedly provided with a list of contacts by the CIA who could provide him with housing and other forms of help and, in a word, could be beneficial to him. When I mentioned Dave Ferrie and Guy Banister, he brought up the names "Little Tom" and "Sorrowful Man," the former Ferrie's CIA code name and the latter Banister's. When I mentioned the name Clay Bertrand, Oswald said the man was known to him, but he was not sure who the person really was.

Oswald told us more about his time in the Marine Corps, but I don't remember this. When I started calling him Ozzie, his nickname from days in the Marine Corps, he said not to call him that, as he associated the name with Ozzy Osbourne, whom he supposedly dislikes personally.

That's my experience with psychics. I know that she herself has been truthful on a lot of things, but you take these things with a grain of salt, you know. So I'd say it'd be best not to utilize psychics, or their credibility could be attacked.

G

[Nancy Eldreth]

Gibson,

Thanks I know. I truely know this. I am laughng and do realize many are frauds. Shame because there are very few real life people who have this gift. Many are just for money and will say anything.

I know if I take tape recorder in my hand and if the person tells me NO I will walk out the door. Plain and simple, save myself time, effort, energy and money.

Knowing that in the state of Delaware there is only one such gifted person that the FBI and police dept. have used several occusions to help solve a crime. The crimes were solved because of this person. I think I had mentioned this I also checked with an attorney as well. I went this women about 8 years ago.

Also, 8 years I walked out angry and totally misjudged her. What she told me made not any sense at all. It took me 8 full years to come to understand what this women told me. The accuracy that she in the past did tell me is more than I knew and far more than I would have realized at that time. For this reason I may give this another chance. Try this again. I just hope it doesn't take me another 8 full years to know what she is saying to me.

I will add this to my humerous statments here, because I do chuckle over this even at this moment. What she told me is that you will do a lot of work and you do have a great deal of it to do, you will walk away from me, but one day towards the very end you will come back to me. You will need to, and you will help the creditablity of psychic's and the psychic community out. That is her full statement on this issue to me. Now, not one teller told me that last line, two did.

That itself is nothing at all. The fact that she told me I have something in Dallas Texas to find out is. I wasn't into JFK reseach at that time and never gave it a thought.

I just hope it doesn't take me another 8 years to figure out what more she may tell me soon. She did say towards the end, well I do hope so!!

Glad to know that someone else also has attempted what I am going to try to do.

I have written to James Files, he writes back to me.

I have written to Judyth Baker and the same.

I have talked to Dan Marvin, also we email each other.

Only a few times with Tosh Plumlee have I talked to on open forum.

As far as Oswald I have only a few letters from him to his mother I got at NARA and also helped get the Oswald time cards over to Judyth Baker. She wanted them for some time.

I have talked to Wim and Vernon and been in the out's with both of them.

I have talked to Dick Clarks office, and found it rather interesting on what they stated to me. "we don't have the papers on how to deal with this anymore, not right off hand.' They are in storage and all of Files notes. Interesting.........on how they worded that to me.

Now with so much friction on their own creditablity of all the listed above, I feel them to be more at stake then the women who has helped solve some cases with the police and FBI already.

She told me I would be back when I was so much wanting to close a door on her. never did I ever understand her as I have in the last few weeks.

At least, I will give this a look see. I hope. Maybe, it will work out.

You know one of God's gifts to us is the gift of foresight. Only some will have this gift. Very few truely do.

As far as to this women who seems to be blessed with this ability. I will never name her name unless she requests it. Nor will I down her ever again. I didn't believe her in the past, now that I do see what she told me to be true, I do believe she may be all right. She maybe able to help.

(Also I am not telling all of it of what she told me, not yet.) Just this one major thing, she told me something I thougth to myself on 11/22/63 when I was a child.

I had forgotten about it. I remembered only in the last few days. What I said was, I feel like I am there when I was watching the events of it on TV. She told me I was in Dallas texas when I was a small child. Of Course I agured with her. YOU BET. I never was. When I remembered those words I then said OH MY GOD......I did say that. She also said that what I saw when I was a child upset you. Yes it did, and still does.

For this reason I am even more determined to do this now, more than ever.

And Time will tell.

[Wim Dankbaar]

I saw the Files video a few years back and was not impressed with it

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

Dawn,

You might be more impressed with the last interview:

http://www.trineday.com/Merchant2/merchant...ory_Code=DVD001

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/reviews.htm

And by the way, I asked Richard some questions he didn't answer thusfar. I also asked him to debate the evidence and try to backup his claims that Files is "utter hogwash" and "fiction". I haven't seen him doing that either. I hope you didn't miss that.

Wim

Edited November 13, 2004 by Wim Dankbaar

[Al Carrier]

On several news stations some time back it was told that they did. Not fiction and they actually did crack several cases. It was from that I am stating what I have said on the forums.

Also, a true life movie several I have seen that also made mention to this. NO it isn't fictional. It is factual stated at the beginnings of the movies it is from factual events. I guess I am into lifetime programs. I also think I saw something to this effect on the History and/or Learning Channels. I said in several of my postings that Some police stations do this. That means NOT ALL. I also saw on the news that one time they used a good teller that she didn't crack the case. Only one miss out of several positves. Yet, the same teller did get some other cases. So, it is a fifty fitfty per cent chance to get maybe something. Maybe more depends on who it is they get to do this. I also said I am trying everything. I did say I was laughing on the thread. It was meant to be taken lightly but I grief over this, you never take anything the way it is written. DO YOU? I am not ashamed of ever trying anything as long as it is legal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nancy,

Psychics are media sensationalism at best. If an agency has a high profile case, they come out of the woodwork nationwide to make a name for themselves. If it is a low profile, they are the local claimers. The 95% of the time they are wrong, the public never hears about them. The 5%, and that is being generous, that they provide blind info that may have some bearing on the direction of a solved case, they get the media attention to take full credit. Their odds are no better than Joe Citizen making guesses. The problem is, LE is required to follow up on any and all leads. A lead can be a direction or something solid and the high percentage are unfounded. It is the publicity of the off-the-wall leads that comes out to something that gets noted and that is where you are getting this. If psychics are the way to go, we could downsize investigations units and hire one psychic for every ten investigators. It isn't happening!

Al

[Nancy Eldreth]

Al,

I know that you are right. Your per centage is about accurate. That is why I stated it is very few of them.

Most are just money seekers and or gimmicks only a rare few are blessed with a gift and or if it could even be understood at the time that they give their inner most feelings. Took me 8 years to figure out anything the women told me.

So, I know this is just a hunch and just a simple type of research, also very experimental on my part to even suggest this.

I still aim to try it and find out and for that matter what could it hurt.

[Nancy Eldreth]

Wim and message over to Pam Ray,

I have heard Pam over a year back tell me I can't tell you what James Files states to her about me and on what he wrote to me.

Let me make something clear on this.

Many of my letter's contains nothing about JFK assassination except for a few points. Those points so often do refer to the fact that he can't talk about and or tell me answers to my questions either because he for one doens't know the answers and or he can't because of government contacts.

So, there isn't any off tell of facts surrounding JFK assassination. In fact I would have to say what little he does state may even hold more to his convictions if those letters were left on itself and without all of the cheesecake that surrounds all of it.

Also, Files sort of does mention this to me.

Who has the false information and who holds the more trueful confessions now that is the good question.

Time will tell. As I have so many times stated.

Cheesecake. Yes, it is, when we don't have the right kind of gun, right type of bullet, can't tell where he really was postioned only behind a fence, the list goes on and on. Files doesn't do that to me.

He made a signed confession that the prison held for two weeks before giving it over to me on the one and only letter that was put onto hold. Now, his answer on that one maybe not the full truth. He stated that it was because of lack of money he turned over to get it mailed. Maybe but it maybe stretched some on that direction.

For the fact that I hold most of Files letters is for this very reason. So, that they won't get tampered or twisted with. Seems odd to me NOW the time comes where I do get some concern over them. Have been now for the last months. Before this no one even bothered to try to get them.

Vernon does. Files knew for the most part that Bob Vernon and I didn't make any connections and this shows up in the beginning letters. He knew we brushed with each other in the effectiveness of because of trying to get certain parts done.

I have stated before that I have noticed a cover over with Bob to Jimmy and vice versa. This is still I fear very much the case.

I have to state this even if no one understands me or realizes this to be true.

But it is, trueful.

I don't know what Files told Pam and I am not concerned about that. I do know in maybe several of my letters Files does state to me of his concern over Pam's Book and for the reasons of it being that she may get many lawsuits and also Vernon has made mention to this on his accounts with Pam Rays book. Also, that the book comes from more of her insights than what Files insights are.

Again, as always, with this is a twisted facts turned around and one to over throw the other side.

I hold firm on to what I see know and believe as to what is really going on in this very large and twisted conspiracy that we have to deal with.

Wonder what Files reactions are going to be that are to get posted up soon?

Maybe someone can see the twists to it as I have seen. Who knows?

You know I had a good many talks with an attorney and one of the points that came out is this.

"which is a better materails to work with one story that has a lot of ponts to it or one that has less points and facts to it."

Me and the way that I answer and would think is the more points to it.

He answer to me was NO the one with the less points to it."

I wanted to know why.

He said because the least any one says is more than apt to be more the truth than the ones with the most statements made to it.

OH!!!

I guess I have the more prefect version then.

The least.

Why would Files wish to try to down it.

Conviction, that is why.

He can and be in his right except for the part that I hold written words.

Hold them dear and have done all that I can do legally to get this done.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I thought forum members might be interested in this article which appeared last week on the website of the Philadelphia Inquirer.

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

Posted on Wed, Jan. 18, 2006

What explains those who are true deceivers?

They lie with utter sincerity. And we become accomplices.

By Jeff Gammage

Inquirer Staff Writer

For more than 11 years, from the moment of his arrest to the moment of his execution, Roger Keith Coleman lied.

He lied to the courts, to his attorneys, to the news media, to the aunt and uncle who stood by him, to thousands of supporters who took up his cause.

He lied as he sat strapped in Virginia's electric chair in 1992, proclaiming his innocence with such sincerity that his backers pressed on even after his death. His guilt was definitively proven only last week, through new DNA tests.

How could Coleman have lied so long and so well to so many?

The fact is, everybody lies sometimes. But some people step beyond the polite lies that color everyday discourse and into pathology.

The hard question is why that happens.

Young children are notorious liars - and that's normal, psychologists say, given their difficulty distinguishing fact from thought, dream or desire. But most kids, as they grow older, go to school and interact with peers, come to learn the difference between truth and imagination, right and wrong. They develop the moral compass known as a conscience.

"The so-called pathological xxxx has learned from an early age that they get punished more often for telling the truth than they do for lying," says John Rooney, an emeritus professor of psychology at La Salle University. "They get so accustomed to devious behavior that they lie without much thought or emotion."

Recently, University of Southern California scientists offered a possible physical explanation, finding proof of brain abnormalities among people who habitually lie and cheat. Pathological liars had a surplus of white matter, the wiring that can provide tools for deceit, and a deficit of gray matter, which helps restrain the impulse to lie.

Our culture accepts a certain amount of deception - even demands it. If your wife asks you if she's getting fat, there is but one correct reply. Answering in the affirmative doesn't prove that you're honest - it proves you're a fool. But we have less tolerance for people who refuse to come clean when the evidence against them is overwhelming.

For years, Pete Rose maintained he never bet on baseball - and was banned from the game. Rosie Ruiz has become a punch line, still insisting she won the 1980 Boston Marathon, 26 years after she jumped into the race near its end. Korean stem-cell pioneer Hwang Woo-suk, his career in ruins, recently apologized for claiming to have cloned a human embryo.

But as much as we castigate people for lying, some of the blame lies with ourselves. A successful lie requires at least two parties, one to tell it and one to believe it. Studies show most of us aren't very good at identifying liars. In fact, the people who think they're good at it actually score lower.

•

Phillip Maltin, a Los Angeles lawyer who lectures on how to identify people who are lying, was once asked by a group of conspiracy buffs to examine the videotaped confession of James E. Files, an Illinois prison inmate who claims he shot John F. Kennedy.

"He is fantastic," Maltin says, with grudging admiration. "You look for all the indicia of dishonesty - change in tone, pitch, hesitation, change in body language, perspiration. This guy isn't exhibiting this stuff."

Where Files trips up, Maltin says, is when the interviewer asks how much he was paid to kill Kennedy. At that moment, Files exhibits a cluster of behaviors not seen elsewhere on the tape. He shrugs slightly, alters his tone, halts in his speech.

"How would you forget how much you got paid to shoot the president of the United States," Maltin asks, "if you can remember the color of the gun, and the date, time and place you met with Lee Harvey Oswald?"

Maltin cites the research of University of California professor Paul Ekman, who conducted pioneering work in "microexpressions" - the small, involuntary facial movements that reveal true emotions. Most people never notice microexpressions in others. But to a trained observer, they represent the brain's recognition of dishonesty, even as the mouth blabbers on.

You don't detect dishonesty by looking for the lie, Maltin says, but by identifying the change in behavior that suggests a person is nervous in a situation where he or she shouldn't be. But there's a caveat.

"If somebody doesn't believe what they're saying is dishonest or deceptive, or if somebody delights in trying to deceive you, that person will not exhibit the characteristics," Maltin says. "You will never, for the most part, be able to identify a xxxx unless the person has a conscience."

•

Virginia legal specialist Marie Deans visited Roger Coleman in prison for nearly a decade, talked to him by phone practically every week.

She was with him the night he died and afterward helped to scatter his ashes in the Southwest Virginia mountains.

Throughout their relationship, Coleman insisted he didn't murder 19-year-old Wanda McCoy, his wife's sister.

"My normal way of reacting to people telling me they were innocent was to say, 'Right,' and then ask the next question," Deans says. "But I didn't with Roger. I paid very close attention."

In the early 1980s, when she met Coleman, Deans was waging a one-woman battle against Virginia's death penalty, founding the Coalition on Jails and Prisons. She was no naif: She knew the ways of death row and the men who lived there. She also knew the anguish of the victims' families - her mother-in-law had been murdered.

When the DNA results were announced last week, Deans says, she didn't feel betrayed. Instead, she wondered: Is it lying if you honestly believe you're telling the truth?

"Ever since DNA poked its head up, he was like, 'I want one of those tests,' " she says. "If you're guilty and you know you're guilty, you're not going to be begging for forensic testing."

She long believed that Coleman suffered from neurological problems, that he had incurred some type of brain damage. He heard things, she says. Sometimes he would seclude himself in his cell, not speaking to anyone, for a week or more.

"I came to the conclusion that if Roger had committed this crime, he didn't know it," Deans says. "I don't believe that Roger was a scammer, or somebody who just decided he could lie his way out of this."

Of course, Coleman never claimed he had a brain injury. He said he was innocent. And in hindsight, one incident seems telling.

In his book about the case, May God Have Mercy, author John Tucker wrote that Coleman once hesitated at the prospect of DNA testing. Coleman maintained he had had sex with a female corrections officer, and that DNA from that encounter could be used to frame him.

At the time, his fears were dismissed as prison paranoia.

•

To some, the revelation of Coleman's guilt was no revelation.

"Stop the presses: It turns out that rapists and killers are also liars," Michael Paranzino, president of a pro-death-penalty group called Throw Away the Key, told the Associated Press.

To others it's more complicated.

"The reason they're able to lie so effectively is so few of us are good at detecting people who lie," says former U.S. military interrogator Greg Hartley.

A lie cannot exist in isolation. It requires the support of innumerable smaller lies, says Hartley, an Atlanta consultant and author of How to Spot a xxxx (Career Press).

He recalls an exercise where soldiers were being taught to resist interrogation. As the subjects were harassed, they'd try to protect their family by seeking to eliminate the line of questioning.

I'm an orphan, they'd say. My parents died in a car crash.

The key to decoding that fiction lay not just in the soldiers' body language, but in the details of their story, Hartley says. What was the date of the accident? Where did it occur - not the town, the intersection? Was it a one-car crash or two?

Any "orphan" would remember those details.

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

Contact staff writer Jeff Gammage at 215-854-2810 or jgammage@phillynews.com.

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

© 2006 Philadelphia Inquirer and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.philly.com

[Jason Vermeer]

They completed a VSA (voice stress analysis) on Mr. Files some time ago. Supposedly 70-80 percent of what Files was talking about was true. Unfortunately, I don't know which specific parts he was truthful or lying about but a VSA might not pick up rehearsed answers or the repetition of memorized facts. I was going to ask Wim about the telephone records putting Files in Chicago during the assassination as well as Files insistence that he had a "twin brother" whom he later had to kill...then I went back to the JFK MURDER SOLVED website and noticed that Wim has begun quoting himself...

I decided I might not get very far....

Jason Vermeer

[Jason Vermeer]

On WIm Dankbaar's JFKmurdersolved website, one of the tennants supposedly bolstering the theory of James Files firing from the grassy knoll was that Files left "teethmarks" on a shell casing. They placed great emphasis that an expert in Odontology verified they were indeed teeth marks. That person's name was Dr. Paul Stimson. You will find the following statements regarding the teethmarks on Wim's website...

"This professor has certified that they (the dents on the shell casing) were indeed human teeth marks"

"The shell casing is therefore a crucial piece of evidence for his credibility"

The best source is a primary source. I took the liberty of contacting Dr. Stimson regarding those teeth marks. Here's what he had to say....

"I should have said 'could have made the impressions in the bullet.' I, obviously overstated the conclusions at that time and now wish I could retract them and make the above statement" - Dr. Paul Stimson.

I will try to post the original email attachment here but I am having problems uploading it. I also emailed Dr. Stimson back about how he COULD go about retracting his statement. I gave him JFKmurdersolved website and Wim's email and number. If you want, you can go to Lancer to check out the emails for themselves.

Jason Vermeer

[Mark Johansson]

On WIm Dankbaar's JFKmurdersolved website, one of the tennants supposedly bolstering the theory of James Files firing from the grassy knoll was that Files left "teethmarks" on a shell casing. They placed great emphasis that an expert in Odontology verified they were indeed teeth marks. That person's name was Dr. Paul Stimson. You will find the following statements regarding the teethmarks on Wim's website...

"This professor has certified that they (the dents on the shell casing) were indeed human teeth marks"

"The shell casing is therefore a crucial piece of evidence for his credibility"

The best source is a primary source. I took the liberty of contacting Dr. Stimson regarding those teeth marks. Here's what he had to say....

"I should have said 'could have made the impressions in the bullet.' I, obviously overstated the conclusions at that time and now wish I could retract them and make the above statement" - Dr. Paul Stimson.

I will try to post the original email attachment here but I am having problems uploading it. I also emailed Dr. Stimson back about how he COULD go about retracting his statement. I gave him JFKmurdersolved website and Wim's email and number. If you want, you can go to Lancer to check out the emails for themselves.

Jason Vermeer

Quote from Paul Choor on Lancer:

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...242&page=#47259

Excuse me, but I don't see what is so excellent...

Jason Vermeer, I think your eagerness to kick against the Files story is starting to look like personal vendetta and frankly pathetic.

In my eyes it looks desperate.

First of all you were going to do a CONFERENCE CALL to Stimson together with Wim. Apparently, you could not keep that promise, which to me is not a surprise in light of your displayed disingenuous behaviour.

What we have now is that still dr. Stimson has indeed rendered his original medical opinion that it were human teethmarks on that shellcasing, and that now he's saying that he should have said "could have been human teethmarks", which he didn't. But even if he did, it would change very little.

What he said was in fact: "The indentations are oriented on the shell casing in a pattern that would be consistent with the maxillary right central incisor making the larger mark and the two smaller marks would be consistent with the lower right central and lateral incisors. IT IS MY OPINION THAT THE MARKS ARE CONSISTENT WITH HAVING BEEN MADE BY HUMAN DENTITION"

The difference is of course that Mr. Stimson knows now that the casing is connected to the most controversial and highest profile murder case in the history of United States. Maybe that has made Mr. Stimson a little nervous. For originally he wasn't influenced, like he was in the vile biased introduction letter of Jason.

Dr. Stimson was told only:

This casing was supposedly in a murder and was in a person's mouth and that the marks on the casing are supposed to be teeth marks.

Dr. Stimson was asked to examine the casing in his lab and to tell us:

1. Are the dents teeth marks?

2. If they are not teeth marks, what are they?

And if Dr. Stimson cannot fully support his own original statements anymore, why did he never bother to contact JFKmurdersolved.com to offer his correction?

Jason, have you ever bitten such a caliber shellcasing?

I saw Wim doing it and you know what? I saw him doing it 6 times! And you know what? All the 6 testcasings looked EXACTLY like the dentmarks on Files' casing !!!

I wonder what your strategy is here? Do you actually want to suggest that the marks are NOT dentmarks? If not, what are they in your opinion? Do you want to suggest they are dentmarks, but not made by Files? Or what?

Gr. Paul.