David Josephs

That's fair Dave... How about using some plain old common sense? The photo was given to the HSCA on Dec 31, 1976 by Roscoe White's widow The Det Brown image is from Nov 29, 1963 The ghost cutout was found in the DPD archives before Dec 31, 1976 Det Stovall provides yet another copy of 133-C in 1978 How can the DPD position the man and make a cutout of a pose no one was aware of when they have in their possession two photos of the same scene which they could just as easily placed Det Brown in? Don't over think it Dave... try some logic. What are the possibilities? - The photos existed as a set well before 11/22 - The cutout and Brown pose are two of the most amazing coincidences ever - 133-C was found with the other photos yet like the 133-A negative, simply disappears from evidence. For 13 years - ??? Can you offer any benign explanation regarding the 13 year foreknowledge of an image used as the basis for a recreation AND a cutout which does not fit back into the 133-C itself? And if you can't Dave... it's time to admit that the BYPs are simply not what the WCR wants them to be... plus the shadows don't work: This is something I created for my next CTKA article. As you can see, the body shadows on the ground behind both men go in the same direction yet just look at the faces and the anatomical left side of the neck... the face in the BYPs does not belong.

If the article was written BEFORE the call on the 30th how would the FBI know where to go in the first place? "Mrs Stanley declined to comment on how the FBI learned that the registry contained the name of "Lee Oswald" I'm not at liberty to say anything," Mrs Stanley said. "I just can't... I was advised not to say anything." Asked whether the FBI instructed her not to comment, Mrs Stanley replied, "There were others, too, but I just can't say." The connection to JFK is that spoke at Ashland on Sept 24th. Nagell's warning included JFK's assassination "during the latter part of September (1963), probably the 26th, 27th, 28th or 29th" IOW - between Nov 22 and Nov 30 someone had to contact the FBI and report the incident. And then those at the restaurant are told to keep quiet about this event that you now claim was innocuous. I'm sorry you don't see the connection or the need to investigate or finally the real possibility that the FBI created some ficticious caller reportto explain away the strange placement of Oswald in Dallas. Why can't you post the source of that "FBI Report" related to the 11/30 call? -------------------- How do the unknown people in Wisconsin know to put Oswald "from Dallas" on Sept 14th if there is no connection and no way to know where he would be, or be from, at all? Why "Dallas" when there were actual newspaper accounts of his arrest in New Orleans in August? You are prepared to conclude that this incident was completely benign on the word of an FBI report about unknown people making an anonymous claim... and you wonder why your work is so hard to take seriously... between Radionics and a call from any crazy woman to be used as the basis for your uncorroborated conclusions - all you seem to be doing is hoping no one looks closely at the snake oil side show you present as research... Let's see, Do we know of any incident where the FBI put one thing in a report or statement to incriminate Oswald only to learn that what was said never happened? Case in point: to get Oswald into the corner building the rifle and sniper's nest they need to get Williams off the 6th floor sooner than later. (for Bernie and those who think I am changing the subject - this is a simply an example of the FBI saying one thing to add incriminating evidence to the mix in place of reporting what was actually said.) Why in the world would the FBI lie about Williams being 10 feet from the SE corner for 3 versus 15 minutes I wonder ???? Mr. BALL. Well, now, when you talked to the FBI on the 23d day of November, you said that you went up to the sixth floor about 12 noon with your lunch, and you stayed only about 3 minutes, and seeing no one you came down to the fifth floor, using the stairs at the west end of the building. Now, do you think you stayed longer than 3 minutes up there? Mr. WILLIAMS. I am sure I stayed longer than 3 minutes. Mr. BALL. Do you remember telling the FBI you only stayed 3 minutes up there? Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not remember telling them I only stayed 3 minutes. Mr. BALL. And then on this 14th of January 1964, when you talked to Carter and Griffin, they reported that you told them you went down to the fifth floor around 12:05 p.m., and that around 12:30 p.m. you were watching the Presidential parade. Now, do you remember telling them you went down there about 12:05 p.m.? Mr. WILLIAMS. I remember telling the fellows that--they asked me first, they said, "How long did it take you to finish the sandwich?" I said, "Maybe 5 to 10 minutes, maybe 15 minutes." Just like I said here. I don't remember saying for a definite answer that it was 5 minutes. Mr. BALL - Were you on the sidewalk or curb? Mr. JARMAN - On the sidewalk. Mr. BALL - The sidewalk in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building? Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - How long did you stand there? Mr. JARMAN - Well, until about 12:20, between 12:20 and 12:25 Mr. BALL - What did you do when you got to the fifth floor? Mr. JARMAN - We got out the elevator and pulled the gate down. That was in case somebody wanted to use it. Then we went to the front of the building, which is on the south side, and raised the windows. Mr. BALL - Which windows did you raise? Mr. JARMAN - Well, Harold raised the first window to the east side of the building, and I went to the second rear windows and raised, counting the windows, it would be the fourth one. Mr. BALL - It would be the fourth window? Mr. JARMAN - Yes. Mr. BALL - Did somebody join you then? Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir; a few minutes later. Mr. BALL - Who joined you? Mr. JARMAN - Bonnie Ray Williams. Mr. DULLES. I would like to ask one question here. When you were on the sixth floor eating your lunch, did you hear anything that made you feel that there was anybody else on the sixth floor with you? Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir; I didn't hear anything. Mr. DULLES. You did not see anything? Mr. WILLIAMS. I did not see anything. Mr. DULLES. You were all alone as far as you knew at that time on the sixth floor? Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. Mr. DULLES. During that period of from 12 o'clock about to--10 or 15 minutes after? Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. I felt like I was all alone. That is one of the reasons I left--because it was so quiet.

Curious Dave... you never did bother to address 133-C and the Det Brown recreation. Unless White and Stovall hid this third image and negative it was only acknowledged to exist on NYE 1976. How can the ghost image and Det Brown be in the 133-C pose when that image's existance had not yet been discovered? And why, when we paste Ozzie in from 133-C does the image not work and is all skewed? btw - the Det Brown image was taken on Nov 29th 1963

The lack of insight by the H & L Brigade continues apace. First off you'd need to find someone who is actually successfully debunking anything... Parker runs whining from a direct posting of the actual evidence related to the correct years and what was actually said along with what it meant. I posted the calander Parker... show us by counting there are over 125 school days in less than half a semester... and where exactly the stay at Youth House - which was not any of the three PS44's in NYC - is reflected in this PERM record... Maybe also address why there are multiple copies of the same record which do not match each other... Stick to the evidence Parker and deal with IT, All I'm doing here is posting it and watching you and your brigade stumble over yourselves trying and debunk it with nothing but the air in your lungs... Just count the days Parker... you can do that, unless math is also different down under fitting 125+ days into less than a single semester is almost as good as the SBT...

Who are "they" and wasn't it "they" who sent Oswald to Odio's place to start with? So they had to do the Mexico City thang because they didn't really think the Odio plan through properly? Another problemento!!!! Why wasn't Oswald calling himself LEON in Mexico City? Remember those dumb Latinos thought he might be from outer space with a strange name like "Lee"!!!! ANSWER David Josephs on the Mexico City Trip: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6. start here http://www.ctka.net/2014-Josephs/Josephs_Mexico%20City_Part%201.html !!! gaal If this is indicative of the rest of it, I don't think I'll bother reading any further: Josephs states: While the article repeatedly claims that there is no indication that Oswald was in Wisconsin, it never even hints at why or who would be putting that name with DALLAS in mid September when Oswald was in New Orleans with Marina (who was 8 months pregnant) and his first child June. What follows is a either a figment of my imagination or Josephs is maintaining his usual standard: Now what, David? Go from claiming they never tried to explain it to... they invented the phone call above? I guess that will have to be it, You've got nothing else to fall back on. Maybe it's just that you speak a different English down under? While the article repeatedly claims that there is no indication that Oswald was in Wisconsin, it never even hints at why or who would be putting that name with DALLAS in mid September Would you provide the source for this quote please and then show how it is contained in the article I refer to above... as I never mention anything about an FBI follow-up report... you going to offer the source of this report or do we have to just take your word? When someone uses a noun "this article" followed by a pronoun, "it never hints at why or who" most people understand the sentence refers to the article which I posted in the essay. I'm glad you found an FBI report of a phone call from an unknown woman about an unknown man and unknown reasons... but the ARTICLE as I state, does not hint at this. Additionally, the article goes on to state that the woman at the Fox and Hound was told that she was not to say a word, "I was advised not to say anything" by the FBI. And if we are just going to believe any phone call then your Radionics call from Oxnard and the Tippit call regarding Oswald's real relatives in NYC must also be accepted as authentic evidence... ok.. fine with me. So you see, once again in your effort to find fault in work you barely comprehend you twist the meaning of the words to suit your purpose. You are once again wrong in your analysis of what is very simple to follow. This is the Evidence as it was offered. I do not state that I or anyone believes Oswald was actually there yet even you have to admit that a random call from a unknown person owning up to writing "Lee Oswald Dallas, Texas" in Wisconsin on Sept 14th when Oswald lived in New Orleans seems a bit more than a simple prank. But since all we have are anonymous calls and that article I include the real article in the presentation as opoposed to some FBI explanation which may or may not have any further corroboration. Harvey and Marina Oswald did not live in Dallas all that summer... but Lee did. How would these unknown people know to put DALLAS when our Oswald in only in Dallas from October 1962 thru April 1963 and then again from October 1963 on.... Nice try though Greg...

Welcome Mr. Berkley... I appreciate your candor in being able to declare with such certainty that there is no "credible or empirical evidence of conspiracy of any kind" With regards to Oswald acting alone - I did an article assuming he did do it alone and what that plan of action might look like... ------------------------------ One of the few things I can say is an original argument of mine is the questioning and examination of the timing of events and the PLAN OIF ACTION that needed to occur for Oswald to have even been considered as involved in the assassination at all. Let's assume for the sake of this discussion that Oswald was indeed at the SE 6th floor window at 12:30, and shots from there are fired by him, AND that he planned to kill JFK with the Mannlicher Carcano rifle. He surely could not have killed JFK with a rifle that was not there in the first place. Oswald has a few items of information he MUST have in order to pull this off, the most important being the knowledge that the motorcade and JFK's limo would pass within shooting distance of the building. Where would he get such information, and what would that info say specifically? Commission Exhibit 1362 is the Nov 19th Dallas Times Herald article revealing the route the motorcade would take... "The motorcade will pass thru downtown on Harwood and then west on Main, turning back to Elm at Houston and then out Stemmons Freeway to the Trade Mart" AHA! Oswald, if he read or was aware of this article would now know that the motorcade would pass directly beneath the TSBD... in essence the motorcade was bringing JFK to his doorstep... Good thing he decided to take the lower paying TSBD job in October, right? This is TUESDAY Nov 19th. The article prefaces with the fact that the formal announcement of the trip was made in Washington DC at 4pm... Could Oswald the Lone Nut have known that JFK would pass by the TSBD before that? I don't see how. Security according to Chief Curry was not even planned until Tuesday the 19th. This must have been the evening edition of the paper. Is there any evidence from anyone in the building or anyone close to Oswald that he knew about the motorcade route that day? According to Marina, on the night before the assassination, she asked him about Kennedy's upcoming visit the next day. Oswald seemed totally in the dark about when or where the motorcade would pass. (WC Vol. 18, p. 638) Junior Jarman told the Commission that he did not learn about the motorcade passing in front of the Depository until that morning at about 9 AM. About an hour later, Oswald was standing near a window looking out at the gathering crowd. He asked Jarman what the people were there for. After Jarman told him, he asked which way the motorcade was coming. Which reveals, unlike the Commission assumption, that Oswald did not read the November 19th Times Herald (WC Vol. 3, p. 201). Between the evening of Nov 19th and Thursday Nov 21 Oswald decides to get to the home of Ruth and Michael Paine to get his rifle out of the garage and bring it to work on Friday so he can do the deed. Does he make sure to ask Texas School Book Depository colleague Wesley Frazier for a ride home that day? For if he doesn't get home by Thursday night how can he get the rifle to work Friday? Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, we were standing like I said at the four-headed table about half as large as this, not, quite half as large, but anyway I was standing there getting the orders in and he said, "Could I ride home with you this afternoon?" And I said, "Sure. You know, like I told you, you can go home with me any time you want to, like I say anytime you want to go see your wife that is all right with me." Good thing Wesley was so accommodating... Asking Thursday for a ride home, a ride that would make or break his plan to kill JFK Friday seems cutting it a bit close... And he'd have to bring that paper bag he made to hold/hide the rifle with him... yet the man who sits by the paper dispenser never leaves his desk, eats his lunch at his desk and testifies to not being away from that area... yet somehow Oswald accomplishes this construction project with no one seeing him do it... and gets it home that Thursday in the car with Wesley... maybe hidden in his pants, or shirt, or jacket, or sweater, maybe??? Marina and Ruth are very surprised to see Oswald on that Thursday as he usually gives them fair warning... Mr. JENNER - Let's proceed with the 21st. Did anything occur on the 21st with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald, that is a Thursday? Mrs. PAINE - I arrived home from grocery shopping around 5:30, and he was on the front lawn. I was surprised to see him. Mr. JENNER - You had no advance notice? Mrs. PAINE - I had no advance notice and he had never before come without asking whether he could. Mr. JENNER - Never before had he come to your home in that form without asking your permission to come? Mrs. PAINE - Without asking permission; that is right. It is here we are treated to Ruth Paine's story about the garage door and light being left on... she never sees Oswald in the garage, never hears him... and even goes on to tell reporters: Mrs. PAINE - I said I did not see how he could have taken the gun from the garage without my knowing it. As noted researcher Carol Hewett pointed out, evidently Ruth did not know that Marina said Lee was with her that night in her room and fell asleep. Yet somehow, he got into the garage, into the blanket, disassembled the rifle, placed it in the paper bag and made it ready for his leaving the following morning... if the OSWALD PLAN to kill JFK can even occur... maybe all this happened in the morning? Mr. JENNER - You heard no moving about on his part prior to your awakening? Mrs. PAINE - No moving about on his part at all when I looked when I awoke. Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. He then stopped talking and sat down and watched television and then went to bed. I went to bed later. It was about 9 o'clock when he went to sleep. I went to sleep about 11:30. But it seemed to me that he was not really asleep. But I didn't talk to him. In the morning he got up, said goodbye, and left, and that I shouldn't get up--as always, I did not get up to prepare breakfast. This was quite usual. So the entire household was awake at 9pm when Oswald goes to sleep... and there is no mention of the time or sounds involved in what Oswald needed to do to get his 40" rifle into that bag... But he must have at some point as he walks to the Frazier's with this large bag in his possession... which we come to learn must be at least 34" long to hold the largest piece of the broken down rifle. Also in this bag are the clip, the ammo, the scope and the barrel with firing mechanism... Metal and wood adding up to 7.5 lbs, with nothing to keep it from banging into itself, tearing this bag, or anything else. Surely the people at the Frazier household see this bag? And they do and testify to it... Mrs. RANDLE. No, sir; the top with just a little bit sticking up. You know just like you grab something like that. Mr. BALL. And he was grabbing it with his right hand at the top of the package and the package almost touched the ground? Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir. (this 5'9" man holding his arm at his side carrying the bag, and this 34" piece did not touch the ground...ok) ... Mr. BALL. Now, was the length of it any similar, anywhere near similar? Mrs. RANDLE. Well, it wasn't that long, I mean it was folded down at the top as I told you. It definitely wasn't that long. ... Mrs. RANDLE. I measured 27" last time. Mr. BALL. You measured 27" once before? Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir. Hmmm... maybe she didn't get a good look... what does Wesley say about this bag? Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I would just, it is right as you get out of the grocery store, just more or less out of a package, you have seen some of these brown paper sacks you can obtain from any, most of the stores, some varieties, but it was a package just roughly about two feet long. So it appears that Oswald is able to carry a 34"-40" rifle in a bag quite a bit smaller... yet measurements can be deceiving... maybe they underestimated; they MUST HAVE since the Lone Nut Oswald did get the rifle from the garage; where it had never been seen by anyone in the house; to the TSBD on the morning of the 22nd in the back seat of Wesley's car. And was able to tuck this rifle under his arm and carry it into the TSBD... Did anyone see Oswald when he arrived that morning? One man, Edward Shields, claims he is told by his "friends" that they see Wesley drop Oswald off at the back door... yet this is 2nd hand hearsay and virtually impossible to prove... Luckily Mr. Dougherty was not only at the back entrance when Oswald arrives, but see whether or not anything is in his hands at the time... After the same question about Oswald is asked and answered a number of times we finally have as evidence: Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir. Is there anyone other than Wesley and his sister that claims they see Oswald with a package, bag, rifle or anything in his hands that morning? Nope. Yet he MUST HAVE since his plan was to kill JFK as he passed by later that day... and we get back now to the timing from that day. After slipping by everyone with the package he stows it... where? Where does Oswald place this 27 to 40 inch bag with rifle parts in it so that it is undisturbed and available when he is ready to execute his plan. Maybe behind some boxes on the 6th floor? Since he knows there is work being done up there and the place is in disarray, no one would notice it... Maybe the 1st floor domino room? A hall closet? Well, no matter, it had to have been somewhere since this same rifle (supposedly) is found on the 6th floor, fully assembled at 1:22pm. Back now to his knowledge of the motorcade route and the timing. What information is available to this Lone Nut master planner of JFK's death as to WHEN the motorcade would pass by the TSBD? He'd have to know this to at least be looking out a window at the time so as to take a shot... right? We come to find that Secret Service agent Winston Lawson tells Chief Curry that the luncheon was to begin at 12:15... that the plane was to land at 11:30 and after a 45 min motorcade thru Dallas, arrive at the Trade Mart. VIP invitations had been sent and received which stated the Luncheon was to start at 12 NOON. So basically even if he was able to know about what Lawson said to Curry, or had seen an invitation to the event, to this LONE NUT KILLER the motorcade would have to pass by the TSBD between 11:55 and 12:10... well before 12:30 in any case. At the same time he knew he had to retrieve the bag with the rifle in it, reassemble the rifle and be at some window facing Elm when he drove by or miss out on his chance for immortality. We make the assumption that Oswald MUST determine a time for the limo and JFK to pass by his place of work; otherwise how can he carry out his plan? So, is there any corroborated sightings of Oswald during this time? It seems that Eddie Piper, who was with Junior Jarman and Harold Norman, sees Oswald on the 1st floor around noon... no bag, no rifle. Oswald even mentions seeing these 2 men in statements attributed to him. Carolyn Arnold claims to have seen him around 12:15 also on a lower floor... all the while Arnold Rowland eventually testifies that a man with a rifle is in the SW 6th floor window around 12:15... SOMEONE knew when to expect the motorcade... Concurrently Bonnie Ray Williams is eating his lunch 10 feet from the SE corner of the 6th floor sometime between 12 and 12:15. Mr. WILLIAMS. It was after I had left the sixth floor, after I had eaten the chicken sandwich. I finished the chicken sandwich maybe 10 or 15 minutes after 12. I could say approximately what time it was. Mr. BALL. Approximately what time was it? Mr. WILLIAMS. Approximately 12:20, maybe. Mr. BALL. Well, now, when you talked to the FBI on the 23d day of November, you said that you went up to the sixth floor about 12 noon with your lunch, and you stayed only about 3 minutes, and seeing no one you came down to the fifth floor, using the stairs at the west end of the building. Now, do you think you stayed longer than 3 minutes up there? Mr. WILLIAMS. I am sure I stayed longer than 3 minutes. Mr. BALL. Do you remember telling the FBI you only stayed 3 minutes up there? Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not remember telling them I only stayed 3 minutes. Why would the FBI lie about that? According to them, no one sees Oswald between 11:50 and 12:30. If Williams is on the 6th floor only a few yards from the sniper's window, surely he would hear the assembling of a rifle or the moving of boxes to encircle the "nest." With Williams leaving at 12:15 or just after, and leaving via the elevators next to the stairs, Oswald, whose only knowledge of the motorcade timing can come from those he is in contact with between 11:30 (when the plane was supposed to land) and 11:55 (when the plane actually lands), MUST have passed him either on the stairs, on the 6th floor, or was already on the 6th floor at 12:00 with the bag and rifle. Yet we've already proven that he was on the first floor around 12:00... Maybe he arrives at the 6th floor just as Williams arrives at the windows of the 5th floor? Williams finally meets up with pals Harold Norman and Junior Jarman on the 5th floor since, as he put it: Mr. DULLES. You were all alone as far as you knew at that time on the sixth floor? Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. Mr. DULLES. During that period of from 12 o'clock about to--10 or 15 minutes after? Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. I felt like I was all alone. That is one of the reasons I left--because it was so quiet. The man who finds out about JFK passing by his window just 3 days before and goes through a variety of activities to insure he is at ANY window facing Elm when he KNOWS JFK is passing by... appears completely unconcerned about the motorcade and timing as late as 12:15... and most definitely not involved in preparing for this event PRIOR to 12:00. He has gone home, out of the ordinary; walked to Frazier's rather than get picked up, out of the ordinary; is carrying a bag which has to contain a 34" piece of rifle with other rifle parts/ammo, out of the ordinary; find a place to stow this weapon for later retrieval, out of the ordinary; and has an idea as to when the limo carrying JFK will be within range so he can be ready. Between 11:50 and 12:20 there are people on the back elevators and stairs either coming down for lunch, retrieving cigarettes, going up for lunch, going up to view the parade, coming down to join friends. While the plan may be sound, the opportunity simply never presents itself. From all the available evidence, Oswald is either in the 1st or 2nd floor lunchrooms at around 12:00 and must be concerned that his plan to kill JFK requires him to vanish unnoticed only to appear ready to fire at the correct time. The correct time... one of the largest holes in Oswald's plan for immortality. From the time, 3 days prior, that Oswald learns that JFK is passing by his workplace, until he places the bagged rifle in a safe hiding place for retrieval at the appointed time, there remains little if any evidence to support any of the actions necessary were ever carried out. And now, at 12:00 on the fateful day, this small, never-amount-to-anything man with the US intelligence community swirling around him for the past 2-4 years, is just sitting calmly eating his lunch. When WAS the limo going to pass by, for real? We come to find that Mrs. Reid talks to her husband who is listening to the radio which states that the plane arrived late and the limo did not leave Love field until 11:55... how fortuitous for the assassin who is obviously pressed for time to get to a window when he BELIEVES, when any information available to this loner tells him the limo should pass by. Mrs. REID. Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn't watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late. Yet how would Oswald know this? There is not a single bit of evidence that is shared by anyone who claims to have told Oswald anything about a radio broadcast and the delay in the motorcade... it is also not until 12:20 at the very least that Mrs. Reid finally decides to leave the lunchroom and attend the parade. Mr. BELIN. All right. Do you know about what time it was that you left the lunchroom, was it 12, 12:15? Mrs. REID. I think around 12:30 somewhere along in there Is it possible that Oswald was still in the same lunchroom as Mrs. Reid? Did she see any men in the lunchroom when she finally decides to leave, KNOWING that the parade is running a bit late...? Mr. BELIN. Were you the last person in the lunchroom? Mrs. REID. No; I could not say that because I don't remember that part of it because I was going out of the building by myself, I wasn't even, you know, connected with anyone at all. Mr. BELIN. Were there any men in the lunchroom when you left there? Mrs. REID. I can't, I don't, remember that. Up to this point in the questioning, and for the rest of the questioning, Mrs. Reid has remained calm and answered directly and easily... and then she is asked if she is the last person in the room... "No," she claims and rather than finally answering the question about any MEN in the room when she left... she states: Mrs. REID. I can't, I don't, remember that. Mr. BELIN. All right. Mrs. REID. I can't remember the time they left. If indeed Oswald was in that lunchroom; and there is evidence he was for his lunch around 12:00; then he was there when Mrs. Reid leaves the room... If this is NOT Oswald... where is he given his plan to have the rifle ready to fire from a South facing window between 12:00 and 12:30. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt... at a little after noon on the 22nd Oswald has to accomplish the following: Retrieve the rifle, assemble the rifle, assemble the sniper's nest in the SE 6th floor corner without leaving a prints on any of these 20+ 40 lb boxes, hope that no one is on the 6th floor at the time, and do so without being seen or heard by anyone... for as we have the testimony... no one hears any of this happen or sees any of this occurring... What is seen are men on the 6th floor at 12:15, one on the SW with a rifle and one on the SE looking out a window... neither of these men are Oswald... and both of these men are seen by a number of witnesses. But no matter... since he MUST HAVE been able to accomplish all this within 15 to 20 minutes without actually knowing any of the timing details... we have to give him kudos for a good plan, even though there is virtually nothing to prove that any of these necessary steps were taken by Oswald. Within 2 minutes of the shots being fired he is supposedly stopped in the lunchroom on the 2nd floor... yet that's not what Officer Marrion Baker writes on 11/22 and signs on 11/22 in his AFFIDAVIT IN ANY FACT. "As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9," 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." No 2nd floor, no door to the lunchroom, no window in the door, no pulling of his pistol, none of this story to be is recorded on the afternoon of the killing by the Officer who stopped someone coming down the stairs 1-2 flights higher up and from where the shots were supposedly fired... the lunchroom scene does not materialize until the testimony of Roy Truly and Officer Baker, and in fact takes what would have been a much shorter time period for Baker's affidavit; "we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway." The content of this first hand first day recollection is ignored by the WC, which creates a scenario to avoid identifying whoever it was that Baker and Truly intercept coming down the stairs. Despite all this we still have Oswald firing 3 times from this window with "that" rifle. For Oswald to have accomplished this amazing feat of shooting and to corroborate with witnesses, the barrel of the rifle was protruding from the window... Mr. EUINS. The man in the window. I could see his hand, and I could see his other hand on the trigger, and one hand was on the barrel thing. Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, at the time the second shot was fired, where were you looking then? Mr. EUINS. I was still looking at the building, you know, behind this--I was looking at the building. Mr. SPECTER. Looking at anything special in the building? Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir. I was looking where the barrel was sticking out. Mr. SPECTER. And how long was the piece of pipe that you saw? Mr. EUINS. It was sticking out about that much. Mr. SPECTER. About 14 or 15 inches? Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir. ... Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had any kind of a scope on it? Mr. BRENNAN. I did not observe a scope. Mr. BELIN. How much of the gun do you believe that you saw? Mr. BRENNAN. I calculate 70 to 85 percent of the gun. Three men, Norman, Williams and Jarman where positioned on the 5th floor directly beneath the SE corner not 15 feet from the muzzle of the rifle. These three men just feet below the SE window are subject to a rifle blast that produces over 150dB of sound/shockwave. Studies show that this level of sound, even down to 120dB, will render a person temporarily deaf, cause ringing in the ears and be quite painful for some time afterward... and not only does it happen once but 2 more times... yet one of these men claims to be able to hear the working of the bolt and clinking of the shells on the floor above... A sound this loud, repeated twice more from the same location and these men can only "think" or "believe" someone is shooting at the president... It stretches the bounds of credibility... but it MUST have happened that way... 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." Well, I couldn't see at all during the time but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle, it sounded as though it was to me. Given what we now know about what Oswald could have known, and that we agree that he must have had a plan, even if only created three days before on Tuesday once he learns JFK is coming to Dallas and passing under his place of employment... It stretches the bounds of credibility to accept that this plan includes not knowing when the limo is to pass by and in turn having to be in a position to use the rifle he took such pains to bring to as well as hide in the TSBD. None of Oswald's necessary activities are offered by the WCR to support such a plan. It's all tautological: He must have been there because he had to be in order to fire the shots. The Evidence is the Conspiracy... when I originally offered the concept in August of 2010 on this forum it was well received and completely blows the WCR scenario out of the water... it remains impossible for the events to have happened the way they were described and not even possible to be considered by any thinking person. As Vince Bugliosi says, although he wishes you conclude the opposite, this is indeed the most complicated murder of all time, and the WCR proves it to be so. Talking about the "evidence" as if it indicates anything related to the assassination is a hoax and a cruel joke on anyone who continues to play the game... The magician's trick of getting you to look here while the deception is happening over there... ----------------------------------- Curtis - as for visual evidence of a conspiracy to implicate Oswald as the Lone assassin Gerald Ford had the rear bullet hole moved up above the collar bone when Burkely confirms a T3 entry. The SBT - if debunked - makes it impossible for and single shooter from the rear to accomplish the shooting feat attributed. There was a reason these men did not see the clothing or the xrays or the photos and relied on verbal desrciptions to create illustrated representations of what occurred rather than show what really happened. This is empirical evidence that the WC changed the evidence in order to remove speculation of a potential conspiracy to kill JFK. Senator Schwieker tells us that the CIA withholding information about their Castro assassination attempts remains on the most egregious examples of the conspiracy to implicate Oswald as an unconnected Lone Nut... This is the Ryberg illustration with Ford's replacement of the hole - along with the actual shirt and an actual skeleton. Why did the WCR lie about the location of the entry wound that suppoedly exits the throat, when the real wound is well below the supposed "exit" ?

Just can't deal when evidence is put in front of your analysis of the data to show what the actual info shows as opposed to your convoluted speculation?Poor you. The mods have nothing to do with your inability to address the actual evidence with anything but bad analysis and wishful speculation. The result of you not really knowing the material and guessing... You need to defend yourself buddy. Address the questions rather than cry to mommy, k?

Looking at how long this has been going on - the link is from Feb 2007: Example 1. He takes Robert's testimony that LHO attended W.C. Stripling Junior High School in Fort Worth during the '51-52 school year (ie the last school LHO attended prior to going to NYC), and instead of assuming Robert got the school wrong, he claims he got the year wrong. Why? Apparently so he can then claim "Harvey" attended Stripling in '54 while Lee was at Beauregard in NO Mr. JENNER. And, at that time, I take it your brother Lee was attending Arlington Heights High School? That would be 1952? Mr. OSWALD. Just a minute, please. In 1952 Lee was 13 years old. He would be attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School then. Mr. JENNER. I see. For the school year 1951-52? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades. And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School. Mr. JENNER. As soon as he finished the sixth year at Ridglea Elementary School, he entered W. C. Stripling High School, as a seventh grader? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir--junior high school. Once again GP allows JENNER and his leading of the witness cloud his judgment. Oswald turns 13 in Oct 1952 which is the 52-53 school year, not 51-52 as JENNER claims. Arlington HIGH SCHOOL - again as JENNER leads - would not be Oswald's school in 1952 but in 1956 as a 10th grader, not a 7th grader. (CE2211) But let us remember that there is no record of Oswald attending Stripling or living at 2220 Thomas at all, let alone in 7th grade... despite the witnesses who played ball with him and saw him at his home across from Stripling. If Robert is correct about the 52-53 school year despite JENNER's leading, then he could not have been in NYC in Sept of 1952. So which is it Greg? Kudlaty tells us the records were for Sept thru Nov 1954 for the 54-55 school year when Oswald was in 9th grade when the record shows him at Beauregard. Example 2. He claimed the records from PS 44 in NYC showed no absences - despite LHO being in Youth House for a couple of weeks during this period. In fact, what the record shows is 15 days absence. From April 15 thru May 8th is 17 days gone The record claims that from March 23rd thru May 29th he attends 109 + 3 1/2 days and is absent 15+ 3 1/2 days How many school days are there from March 23. 1953 thru May 29, 1953 when each semester is around 90 days for 180 days per year of school? From Mid January thru the end of May is about 90 school days - how can it be 124 + 6 1/2 days between March and May? The other 2 points relate to Dr. Kurian at Youth House and Bolton Ford which we can address another time... The NYC school record is superimposed... simply count the days

Not that it's the most definitive of evidence yet there is a coincidence that the image in the ads shows a bottom mount while the arrest rifle has a side mount... But as you can plainly see, the rifles are not the same. Close, but not the same. One other question... would you please produce any document or record that shows LEE HARVEY OSWALD ordered a rifle which is not based on the HSC(IA)A's tainted handwriting analysis on reproductions. If the only evidenec related to these purchases are only Xerox copies of copies from microfilm, the conclusions based on these copies are worthless. Please show us that OSWALD ordered, paid for and picked up siad rifle in March - and then explain how that rifle gets from New Orleans on Sept 23, 1963 to the Paine garage when neither Ruth nor Marina nor Michael sees a rifle in the Oswald belongings while Ozzie is supposedly to and from Mexico with a small zippered bag... no rifle and an empty 4907 Magazine. If and when you ever get to addressing this we'll be here... HSCA Handwriting analysis http://jfkassassination.net/parnell/hscahand.htm 29. March 12, 1963. U.S. postal money order No. bearing handwritten fill-ins as follows: Klein's Sporting Goods, A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915. Dallas, Tex. Blue ink, ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (CE 788; JFK exhibit F-509A and 509B.) 30. March 12, 1963. Enlargement of microfilm reproduction of Klein's order form for rifle from A. Hidell, superimposed on envelop, postmarked March 12, 1963, addressed to Klein's, Dept. 358, 227 W. Washington Street, Chicago 6, Ill., with return address: A. Hidell. P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. Location:Archives. (CE 773: Cadigan's exhibit 1; JFK exhibit F-504.) FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF CHARLES C. SCOTT Photographic reproductions could only be compared visually with other photographic reproductions or with original documents. All conclusions based solely upon photographic reproductions are necessarily tentative and inconclusive. since they cannot reveal much about pen pressure and other dynamic qualities of handwriting. Further, they sometimes conceal, rather than reveal, evidence of tracings, alterations, erasures, or obliterated writing. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF JOSEPH P. MC NALLY Letter to "The Worker". 29. Xerox of Klein's money order. 30 (DJ: Joe here does not even have the correct item with the correct # ???) In particular, members noted that not all documents were available in their original. It is standard practice in the profession of questioned document examination to make definitive conclusions only about documents examined in their original. Thus the panel members gave only tentative opinions for items provided them in some type of facsimile. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF DAVID J. PURTELL Procedures (55)Items 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12,15,16,17,18,19,20,22,23,24,25, 27,29,31,32,33,34,36,38,39,40,43,45,47,48,51,54,55,56,57,58,59,61,and 62 were studied, both visually and microscopically Item 29 was a Xerox copy made from a microfilm copy. Such a second generation copy has the defects of both processes.

That's not what the autopsy report says either Dave.... and that's not what Rankin said. But I have to congratulate you - that's the most amazing double-speak excuse I've ever heard. If the autopsy we now see was in their hands as you claim.... which clearly states The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck how is there any confusion whether it was an entrance or exit? Furthermore, Dave, would you please show us on this diagram where "below the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone" is? Fromwhat I remember of anatomy, that large triangluar bone on the right is the shoulder blade / scapula with botht he shirt and jacket putting the hole right where they and everyone other than FORD says it was. again, good luck Mr. Rankin: Then there‘s a great range of material in regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much more than we have at the present time. We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent, since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone, which is below the place where the picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through. So that how it could turn, and -- Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went in a finger's length. Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said

No one answering you at the other thread so maybe here Bernie? Let's look at your question a little... Does the man in the FWST photo look ANYTHING like a man who was impersonating Lee Harvey Oswald? Bernie - that is the photo the FWST used to illustrate Lee Harvey Oswald the defector even though there are journalists and photographers in Russia at the time of this interview. Why use a old photo of a Marine when you can take a current photo of a defector to go hand in hand with the story? As i posted earlier - these are the photos of Oswald in Russia - does the FWST image look anything at all like our Oswald? does our Oswald look at all like the 2 photos of this Oswald at Atsugi or the altered FWST image ? You can conclude whatever obtuse thing you want Bernie.... just like the question. FWST looks more like the real LEE Oswald than the man playing the Harvey married to Marina part... and is why no photo was taken for that story - written by a CIA asset and submitted with an obviously altered photo... wonder who could have done that ???

Aren't you the guy who said they had a family and better things to do? They can't take any of your obtuse behavior either so you've been banned back to posting non sequitor. You keep working on that FWST image - you'll figger it out eventually... Don't bother Jim... you lost him at "Don't you get it"... minions can only do what the master tells them to do... Engaging with intelligent, corroborated sources and info is not in the game plan for the brigade... just look at each and every one of their posts...

So you simply have nothing to say and no way to confuse the issue regarding the questions I asked Dave? Regarding the BYP - 133-C. How does the DPd know to put Det Brown into the 133-C pose if that photo is not seen until 1977? Stop the side show and address the questions posed Dave... Why is what Rankin says is in the autopsy report - is NOT in the report? What were they referring to Dave? WCD298 - where did the info on the "5 feet from 5+00" come from so that the FBI could show a shot hitting JFK at Z375? Try to stay focused Dave... this is what the evidence shows... not what I say or they say or we think... this is the Evidence and the Evidence IS the Conspiracy. Good luck with all that... (you're obvious avoidance is transparent Dave... "Change the subject" is a tactic, not a solution.)

This following is posted toshow that the medical records do designate where the Marine is at the time.. San Diego CA Infirmary when in SD, The US Naval Hosp #3923 in Yokosuka and finally MACS-1 #3835 in Atsugi.... Are you claiming that any of the medical evidence shows treatment on the ship and/or in Ping Tung while all the other med records entries are related to exactly where CE1961 claims he was. Can you can you not put him on the ship Parker? and if you claim he was on the ship why did you offer the DoD letter of his NOT GOING TO PING TUNG as proof he stayed back and it was he who was treated in Atsugi - in the face of the Oswald in Ping Tung evidence? And now finally to the Ship to Ping Tung - The 16 Sept 1958 entry says: "MAS NAVY 3835 to mainside for Smear" - yet he has been on the ship since the 12th of Sept ??? Under that is a slip taking him to the MACS-1 ward for tests... is the "medical facility" on that ship called MACS-1? And finally the "P"ersonal "H"istory of the marine states he has had VD Previously - can you please show us any other medical record for the man Ruby killed that shows he already had VD? or you gonna send Bernie to confuse the issue with obtuse comments about anything but the questions asked? This is actually beginning to get fun watching the brigade crumble before our eyes. Each and every argument they offer is either worse than the one before or has nothing at all to do with what is being asked.... C'mon boys - keep posting - each becoming a heavier lead weight sinking your terribly unsourced and uncorrobrated arguments.

And one more from the HSCA

Just some confirmation of Odio's statement about how he was introduced

John has a 130 page notebook on Odio that I'm reviewing as well... http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/odio.htm Mrs. ODIO. They (the FBI) told me they were coming because of the assassination of President Kennedy, that they had news that I knew or I had known Lee Harvey Oswald. And I told them that I had not known him as Lee Harvey Oswald, but that he was introduced to me as Leon Oswald. And they showed me a picture of Oswald and a picture of Ruby. I did not know Ruby, but I did recall Oswald. They asked me about my activities in JURE. That is the Junta Revolutionary, and it is led by Manolo Ray. I told him that I did belong to this organization because my father and mother had belonged in Cuba, and I had seen him (Ray) in Puerto recently, and that I knew him personally, and that I did belong to JURE. They asked me about the members here in Dallas, and I told him a few names of the Cubans here. They asked me to tell the story about what happened in my house. Mrs. ODIO. No; I unfastened it after a little while when they told me they were members of JURE, and were trying to let me have them come into the house. When I said no, one of them said, "We are very good friends of your father." This struck me, because I didn't think my father could have such kind of friends, unless he knew them from anti-Castro activities. He gave me so many details about where they saw my father and what activities he was in. I mean, they gave me almost incredible details about things that somebody who knows him really would or that somebody informed well knows. And after a little while, after they mentioned my father, they started talking about the American. He said, "You are working in the underground." And I said, "No, I am sorry to say I am not working in the underground." And he said, "We wanted you to meet this American. His name is Leon Oswald." He repeated it twice. Then my sister Annie by that time was standing near the door. She had come to see what was going on. And they introduced him as an American who was very much interested in the Cuban cause. And let me see, if I recall exactly what they said about him. I don't recall at the time I was at the door things about him. I recall a telephone call that I had the next day from the so-called Leopoldo, so I cannot remember the conversation at the door about this American. Mrs. ODIO. The next day Leopoldo called me. I had gotten home from work, so I imagine it must have been Friday. And they had come on Thursday. I have been trying to establish that. He was trying to get fresh with me that night. He was trying to be too nice, telling me that I was pretty, and he started like that. That is the way he started the conversation. Then he said, "What do you think of the American?" And I said, "I didn't think anything." And he said, "You know our idea is to introduce him to the underground in Cuba, because he is great, he is kind of nuts." This was more or less--I can't repeat the exact words, because he was kind of nuts. He told us we don't have any guts, you Cubans, because President Kennedy should have been assassinated filter the Bay of Pigs, and some Cubans should have done that, because he was the one that was holding the freedom of Cuba actually. And I started getting a little upset with the conversation. And he said, "It is so easy to do it." He has told us. And he (Leopoldo) used two or three bad words, and I wouldn't repeat it in Spanish. And he repeated again they were leaving for a trip and they would like very much to see me on their return to Dallas. Then he mentioned something more about Oswald. They called him Leon. He never mentioned the name Oswald. Mr. LIEBELER. He never mentioned the name of Oswald on the telephone? Mrs. ODIO. He never mentioned his last name. He alway. s referred to the American or Leon

Figures... So tell me Bernie, in between the whining can you tell me where I embellished anything. Odio says they introduced him as Leon Oswald, twice. Greg claims the surname "Oswald" was NEVER used This is a simple thing Bernie... and incase you haven't figured it out... you're both minion and a sheep trying so hard to be taken seriously - at least you went thru the post and showed your character manipulation skills Well done !!

Von Pein... you did not answer any of the questions posed... 1. Where in the autopsy did Rankin read this? And if you cannot find it in the existing autopsy - what was Rankin referring to? 2. How can the autopsy have come to a conclusion: "The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck." in Nov when in January the info is still inconclusive? 3. WCD298 is a model of the shooting by the FBI delivered in early January and was part of the hiding of the survey legend which shows the WCR explanations impossible. This model, created in Dec 1963 using every FBI resource, shows three shots hitting the occupants of the limo with a final shot 40 feet down the road where the SS recreation also puts the final shot (4 feet from 5-00) Which resources did they use to determine a shot 40 feet past Z313 David? And why was the SBT not even a thought at this point? The WCD gives us specific measurements with the disclaimer that this model will assist those who have never been to DP to "gain a full and clear understanding of the happenings surrounding each event." From what sources could the FBI have gotten their conclusion so incredibly wrong when compared to the physcial evidence available? (For those who don't know.. 4+65 refers to a point 65 feet past station 4 which in turn is 35 feet from station 5 further down Elm. The hidden legend puts the "third shot" at 4+65, not 5 feet from 5+00 like the SS report and FBI model. Where do you suppose they got the info to place the third shot 40 feet further doen Elm Dave? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10699#relPageId=6&tab=page

Dave... please point to this passage Rankin describes in the autopsy. or is Mr. Rankin lying ? Mr. Rankin: Then there‘s a great range of material in regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much more than we have at the present time. We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent, since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone, which is below the place where the picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through. So that how it could turn, and -- Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went in a finger's length. Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said Rankin's comment is from the Exec Session on January 22, 1964... and they STILL dont know if it was an entrance or exit... then how could Humes have written and delivered an autopsy report which states: Date 11/22/63 1300 (CST) Prosecter: CDR J.J. Humes, MC, USA (497831) Assistant: CDR "J" Thornton Boswell, MC, USN, (439878); LCOL, Pierre A. Finck, MC, USA (04 043 322) Full Autopsy The other missile entered the right superior posterior thorax above the scapula and traversed the soft tissues of the supra-scapular and the supra-clavicular portions of the base of the right side of the neck. This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body. Once again Dave... in the existing autopsy, please point us to the section that described a fragment exiting the throat... Also like to know what anatomy class or book you've seen which places the throat below the scapula... Using the following, can you show us where the bullet went in the back? And this one to show right to left as well as up and down Thanks

David - you remain the only person posting on this forum who has that "thick layer of myth and misinformation" you speak of.... Continually referring to outdated and debunked government investigations and conclusions as if they are the tablets from Sinai continually makes you sound like a grazing sheep willing to be happily led to slaughter. I applaud your persistence though... for someone to remain as wrong about everything as you are and keep going back to the well as if the water wasn't poisoned is, well, the role of the WCRHSCA defender. The real problem is that discussing the case with you is akin to having a conversation with a parrot - you only have one channel and you present it as if you haven't given the topics a single thought since it was put on paper in 1964. What I'm wonder is what you are most scared of... the reality of the conspiracy involved and the depth of evil required or that you have so much invested in defending the government's position (ala Dunkel) you've left yourself no room to have a doubtful thought. The simplist of questions Dave... to connect the back and front wounds the bullet must RISE 11 degrees within the body. The shot, if from the 6th floor, would be traveling DOWNWARD at almost 20 degress (angle plus incline) The WCR says it did not hit anything that would change it's course and goes on to hit Connally... Kinda obvious from the image below that the bullet went in well below the throat - for it to RISE in the body, JFK must be tying his shoes when it happens... Is this what you are now claiming? or is there another explanation for themovement of the bullet hole and the impossibility of a bullet rising when shot on a downward trajectory?

There is an exhibit which shows a photo of the microfilm which had the envelope and orders from which they were supposedly printed. That roll of microfilm is not longer in the archives... even though it was indeed deposited there back when. There was alos a matter of who had it - in one report Waldman gives it to the FBI, in another he places it in a safe from where it is removed and provided later... There is of course a little problem of Authentication David... if there is no original to look at there is no way to confirm they are the same other than taking someone's word for it. The FBI's word - which has a terrible record of messing with evidence. If they hadn't been manufactured there would be no need to lose the originals. Kinda like losing the negqative to 133-A. It was found, recorded and inventoried at the DPD - and then disappears either before it gets to the FBI or after... but it disappears as did the Kleins microfilm. That you can't see a legal problem with not having originals to authenticate the copies is par for the course Dave... And without a shred of June 1962 shipment evidence, how does Chapman know the serial number is wrong?

and no, the rifles are not the same

Let's try this from a different POV Waldman here tells us that the FBI knows the serial number of the rifle C2766 and that it was shipped from Crescent to Kleins. Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, were you ever contacted by any law enforcement agency about the disposition of this Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that had the serial number C-2766 on it? Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; on the night of November 22, 1963, the FBI contacted our company in an effort to determine whether the gun had been in our possession and, if so, what disposition we had made of it. Mr. BELIN. Do you know how the FBI happened to contact you or your company? Mr. WALDMAN. The FBI had a record of a gun of this type and with this serial number having been shipped to us by Crescent Firearms. Mr. BELIN. Do you mean that Crescent Firearms gave the FBI this information? Mr. WALDMAN. Well, I--I must assume that's the case. I don't know it for a fact. The only place this information is offered is on one of the 10 packing slips. "38 E" is the international designation for the rifle and has no direct relationship to the rifles Rupp sends to Kleins which are "T-38" - also non-indicative of the model or length. There is no evidence that DVP can produce that shows Rupp and carton 3376 were ever associated. Waldman also tells us that these slips were sent as memos after the fact and not with the shipment of rifles. Therefore, the information about: “C” 2766 in carton #3376 on packing slip #3620 on November 22, 1963 can have only come from Feldsott who in turn specifically states they were from evidence related to the JUNE 18, 1962 shipment . https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=45#relPageId=215&tab=page On p10 of WCD881 Waldman tells us he provides these to the FBI in March 1964 p3 of WCD790 tells us that Feldsott gave the FBI these 10 slips when interviewed on Nov 22nd. Both men cannot give the same exact slips, becoming Waldman exhibit #3 http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0361b.htm There could not be a June 1962 shipment without Rupp removing cartons from Harborside prior to August 1962... so where did Crescent/Rupp get these rifles to begin with? Furthermore, SA Chapman tells us that while Kleins' ORDER records state "C" 2766, the Kleins shipment RECEIPT records show two close but different rifles were rec'd. In essence, there are no records that Kleins ever rec'd "C" 2766 as we've been saying all along. and the FBI knew if that evening as well... Conclusion: The FBI took the June 1962 evidence provided by Feldsott and claimed the packing slip information from Crescent to Kleins (Waldman #3) was for the Feb 1963 delivery. We do not know what Feldsott provided related to the June shipment but it was surely not these 10 slips which are the original slips from Italy with the international Item # "38 E". We are once again pressed with the problem that not a single rifle is crossed out as replaced by Rupp - this reinforces these cannot be packing slips related to an "in USA" shipment of these rifles and also makes it possible that both Feldsott and Waldman provide packing slips to the FBI. The only other item of evidence with #3376 listed is the Crescent to Kleins document "Via Lifschultz" where #3376 is the only carton not checked off. So unless DVP can offer a different source for the SERIAL # info the FBI has at Kleins that night, the entire Kleins evidence trail is connecting a Feb order to a batch of Italian packing slips possibly provided by Feldsott relating a completely different shipment. Unless of course he can show any direct connection betwen the evidence discussed

The answer is he didn't change heights, it is only discrepancies in the record. I find it believable that someone would ask him his height, as long as it wasn't too far off and a couple inches qualifies in my book. Of course, they are not going to do that with something like a shooting score for obvious reasons. I go by Occam's razor-the simplest explanation is usually correct. In the case of anyone's records there will be discrepancies because people make mistakes. In all cases where LHO was photographed with a height chart or such as at autopsy where accuracy was needed he was 5' 9" tall, in other words instances where we know he was measured. As others have said here previously, men will lie about their height-I have done it myself, although I only added an inch. I don't pretend to know the answer to every discrepancy in the record. But I am unwilling to accept the H&L theory to get my answers. Earl Rose stated that he could have overlooked the mastoid scar and IDed the body through fingerprints and x-rays. It is a different thing to not find a scar and to say it doesn't exist. As for witnesses, it is a known fact that after a publicized event people will say they have seen someone somewhere when it could not have happened. I would say the number of sightings of LHO that have any merit at all are maybe 3 or 4 and I am not saying they happened, only that they could have such as Odio and a couple others. Alice Texas I don't buy at all. I am unaware of any autopsy photos that are missing for Oswald. The key point with Landesberg is that they found something and tried to make it fit the scenario they had developed rather than letting the evidence guide them. And that is one of the problems with H&L is square pegs in round holes. There is always an alternate explanation for any of the discrepancies in the record other than the H&L theory. Thanks Tracy... appreciate the response... isn't the real point about the mastoid scar and his autopsy that the photos that were taken cannot be seen to prove it one way or another... like so much of the "original" evidence? (You may want to google the discussion about the 30 or so photos taken by another doctor at the time to record the autopsy process... taken away, cataloged yet gone to history) There are a few out there but they are mostly poor - as if a doctor not a photographer took them http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/02/JilM.html and many of course are missing... Do we really need to contact the USMC to see if they ever simply took the word of the marine for their vital stats documentation? And we are of course talking about more than just the marine records related to his height discrepancies... Was it the same "take your word for it" problem between 1951 and 1953 when he goes from 5'4" to 4'10" while Robert says he took the photo while Pic says that's not his brother... Kids usually don't shrink by 6 inches between ages 12 and 14.... while witnesses/documentation along the way that tells us of this scrawny, loner which conflicts with Lee, the class president and leader of kids... the little one also did not speak with a southern accent when he returned to New Orleans, and Ft. Worth... while Lee was teased for his accent while in NYC... This to me, remains one of the more difficult to resolve conflicts... since Pic goes on to correctly choose H from L in every case. Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that? Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City? Mr. PIC - No, sir.