David Josephs

Thomas... "definite proof" of anything in this case is virtually impossible... All I'm saying is the hands don't look the same... they don't seem to match... When you ADD THAT TO THE OTHER MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE PROVING THE BYP NOT GENUINE it is not so hard to fathom or understand. I presented and mentioned this other evidence... you want to call theose in the HSCA who questioned the authenticity "amateurs" so be it. You, nor Frankenstein below you can prove they are genuine... nor explain how at least one of them was seen the night before and asked about hours before their discovery... I know you want to believe... but you're stuck on the hands and have some hard-on for arguing with me over them and silly semantics. That you want to play spelling cop is wonderful... and when the literary society tells me I can't have tea with them since my spelling and grammar can be poor from time to time due to the speed at which I respond and move on... I'll let you know... "The whole world to see" - a lttile bit full of oneself and this forum Thomas... All I get are emails thanking me for taking on the likes of you and your buddies Costello and Frankenstein... I talk about the trees and forest and all you three want to debate is leaf stem sizes.... Lammy chimes in with another request to do what he can't, won't and would never understand to begin with... Len is simply a xxxxx for no other purpose but the jollies and we expect better from you sir.... Tell you what... when you find DEFINITIVE PROOF of anything in this case... start a thread and watch 'em come out of the woodwork... I'm done with this absurd discussion of a foregone conclusion.... Catchyallater...

The image of Oswald in Russia, on the train with Marina also shows what looks like a wedding ring on the right hand... (attached) I believe the ring on his left in the arrest photos was the Marine Ring. Which is listed on CSS7992 with his ID bracelet. I don't know of a picture with Oswald wearing the plain gold band on his left hand... did a quick search... here's probably why. History According to the Baylor University Medical Center website, classical Greek and Roman culture implied that the left side was sinister (the word “left” comes from the Latin “sinestra,” meaning “sinister”). This tradition carried into Europe, as we see Old English using the word "left" to imply weakness or fault. Wearing the wedding ring on the right hand has become popular for this reason, just as most men offer handshakes with the right hand. Culture Most men continue to wear weddings rings on the left hand in America, Sweden, France, and the UK. In many other European countries, it has become fashionable for men to wear their wedding bands on the right hand. Men's wedding rings, in general, are still a relatively new tradition. Because men's bands have only become popular in the last century, the trends are not set in stone. Men have the freedom to choose to wear the wedding ring on the right hand.

Thomas - Colby - Lamson Abbot and Costello meet Frankenstein... Thomas... what is so hard for you to understand that the images were created by putting Oswald's face on someone else's body... there are no "fake hands" and it's somewhat infantile for you to keep referring to them as such when I've addess that mistake repeatedly. If and when the three of you can present evidence that the THREE IMAGES are authentic... get back to us... As I posted... believe the WCR/HSCA all you want... as there are the only bits of evidence that attempt to prove the BYP genuine... and they fail miserably. I'm sure your TRIO can come up with the answers on your own from now on... I've presented my case... and you've done nothing to present your own. Lip service proves nothing boys... where's the beef?

these are THE carcanos... the top is the NARA photo, the bottom you know... and yes, there is a slight difference in the rotation... Can you tell me where #3 appears on the BYP? Can you tell me why the NARA image does not have the round silver circle #4? Can you explain why every single image of the carcano shows a bottom mount sling ring EXCEPT for the rifle in evidence? Will you ever incorporate the rest of the evidence in considering the authenticity of the BYP... I'd like to know what you feel is the most compelling evidence in SUPPORT of the 3 BYPs being genuine DJ 4's not there because it's a reflection and the tilting (and rotating) and lighting is different. Don't know if every carcano photo shows a ring or not. I can't see any definite difference in 3. Will I ever? I don't know. Most compelling? I've spent a long time on those some time ago (years) (I'm not going to be able to do that again any time soon) in all sorts of analysis and I've also lived my life with cameras and my dad was an avid photographer. I see reasonable doubt possible in all that I've looked at. I don't see how the photos beiong genuine in any way detracts from the assassination being a conspiracy. Nor (come to think of it) what my opinion on the matter matters for that matter. I think we can agree that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK and that there is an ongoing conspiracy to cover that up. you wrote: Most compelling? I've spent a long time on those some time ago (years) (I'm not going to be able to do that again any time soon) in all sorts of analysis and I've also lived my life with cameras and my dad was an avid photographer. I see reasonable doubt possible in all that I've looked at. Do I read this correctly? The most compelling evidence that the photos are genuine is you seeing reasonable doubt that they are genuine? John, we have the micro and macro problems here... Whether these photos are genuine or not does not make or break the MACRO case, exactly - from the micro view these are photos that supposedly places the assassination rifle he never rec'd in his possession, a revovler he never rec'd on his belt, taken weeks before he supposedly rec'd them by Marina who can't remember how the camera works (even though she's only taken a handful of photos) or how many images she took, in a series of poses that appear physically impossible with his head in virtually the same exact location and size even though the photos are taken from different distances, which were found at 3:30pm on 11/23 yet shown to Michael on 11/22 and while Fritz asks about them at noon on 11/23, with the DPD recording the 2 negatives into evidence only to lose one of them so compariosn between images cannot be adequately done, with additional copies in the possession of the families of the men who "found" them... One of which appears on the cover ot LIFE sealing Oswald's fate in the court of public opinion... No John, if they were genuine, and those are the actual weapons used, and Oswald posed out of some unknown desire to have these images in his portfolio... it suggests that the Kleins documentation is correct (does THAT detract from there being a conspiracy?), that the rifle WAS in the Paine garage and ultimately taken to the TSBD as it was no longer at the Paine residence... that Railway did indeed hand over a revolver carton to Hidell/Oswald, and did collect the COD and send to Seaport and did collect the shipping and deposited it in their account. That the Money Order to Kleins was legit... that they did indeed live at Neely... that he did have a way to clean the rifle after the Walker shots and burying the rifle... that he bought ammunition, Etc, Etc, Etc... Doesn't change the fact that Oswald was not the man in Mexico, or in Alice, or at the Sports Drome, or at Odio's or, or, or... so now - it is not make or break or we can say that the pix are legit and the Paines simply allowed somone to take the rifle and plant it in the TSBD? Yet that doesn't explain the other discrepancies in the evidence related to the weapons. So imo John, accepting the BYP as authentic leads one down a path that cannot be supported by the evidence... and is in fact contradicted by the evidence... Believing in the BYP is the same as believing in the Bethesda xrays, 3 shots 3 hits 1 shooter, the magic bullet, CE399 being involved and a single casket entry into Bethesda... Possible yet that belief does in deed change the nature of the conspiracy and gives credibility to SOME of the fabricated evidence. IDK about you but I've not seen compelling evidence that they are authentic since the process to create the image would incorporate the use of the original camera and therefore have the same markings as Shaneyfelt explains.... Has a photographic expert in the creation of these types of images ever been tasked to take an original negative from that type of camera and replicate the final product in the same manner as is suggested?

David, Please understand that on this thread I'm only concerned with your apparent belief that you have posted definite photographic proof that Oswald's hands were faked in the back yard photographs. My argument is that the resolution is so fuzzy as to make it impossible to say whether or not they were faked. Perhaps we should just agree to disagree, and leave it at that? Sincerely, --Tommy I never said Oswald's hands were faked... you did. I am saying that the person who's hands are holding the rifle/newspaper in the BYPs is not the same person whose face is in those photos. Body = person 1 Hands = person 1 Face = person 2 If Lamson wants to quote the HSCA photographic study.. and believes THEY are the qualified body of people that lets him sleep well at night regarding this issue... so be it.... He is in no better position to prove or disprove the photos as real or created as anyone else. So he believes the HSCA and WCR. 'nuff said.

Thomas... A guess (you changed that to "think"), yet not a good one... What I am actually saying is that the hands are part of a compilation of evidence that suggests the BYP are not genuine... That if there were any bits of evidence that suggest they are genuine... not just that they could have come from THAT camera - which in itself does not prove Marina took them at that tim - I'd like to hear them... Do we agree that Oswald seemed to know what he was doing around photographic equipment? Do we agree that the CIA/FBI also have photographic experts capable of creating this finished product? Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is my opinion that it was used directly to make the print. However, I cannot specifically eliminate the possibility of an internegative or the possibility of this photograph having been copied, a negative made by copying a photograph similar to this from which this print was I think this is highly unlikely, because if this were the result of a copied negative, there would normally be evidence that I could detect, such as a loss of detail and imperfections that show up due to this added process. Although a very expertly done rephotographing and reprinting cannot positively be eliminated, I am reasonably sure it was made directly from the negative. Mr. EISENBERG. But at any rate if it was not made directly it was made indirectly? The only process that could have intervened was a rephotographing of the photograph and making a negative and then a new print? Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. Mr. EISENBERG. Could you briefly give us your qualifications as an expert in photography, Mr. Shaneyfelt? Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have been in photographic work since about 1937. I started working with the FBI in 1940. Three years prior to this I had worked as a newspaper photographer in Hastings, Nebr., and on entering the FBI I worked in the photographic section of the FBI for about 8 years before I became a special agent. I became an agent in 1951, spent a year in Detroit as a field investigator, and then was returned to the laboratory and assigned as a document examiner. I was also assigned cases involving photographic examinations, because of my extensive experience in photography. I have a B.C.S. degree from Southeastern University here in Washington. Mr. EISENBERG. Can you estimate the number of photographic examinations you have made? Mr. SHANEYFELT. This would be just an estimate. I would estimate approximately 100, between 100 and 300. I couldn't come any closer than that. So Thomas, this expert - by 1963 - had 8 years in the photgraphic section and since 1951 (12 more years) was involved in photographic analysis... 20 years of analysis and he handles at most 300 examinations or 15 per year as far back as 1940. The camera in question was produced from the late 50's into the early 60's so it is very UNLIKELY that many of his examinations included this camera's output. Especially the ones from 1940-1948. If it is possible that an expertly done process cannot be eliminated AND the players in this tragedy were more than capable of producing such a finished product... is it anysurprise that when looked at VERY CLOSELY, beyond the ability of the naked eye, lines appear EXACTLY where they shouldn't be.... and then, what follows is pure HSCA BS... Aren't fine lines in the chin area examples of EVIDENCE TO INDICATE??? (398) The 133-B negative (CE 749) was digitally processed at the Aerospace Corp. and the University of California Image Processing Institute using several different image-processing techniques. This ocess confirmed that the grain distribution was uniform. (173) (See g. IV-31, JFK exhibit 197.) Under very carefully adjusted display conditions, the scanned image of the Oswald backyard negative did exhibit irregular, very fine lines in the chin area. The lines appeared, however, only with the Aerospace gradient-enhancement process, where the technique was applied at a much higher resolution (i.e., the image area scanned was magnified since only a small portion of the picture was being subjected to the computations) . 399) Although the cause of these lines has not been definitely established, there is no evidence to indicate that they are the result of an attempt to fake the photograph .

Dear Mr. Josephs, Please elaborate. Thank you, --Tommy [...] Please stop trying to make this about his hands... the hands being different is only one small part of MANY MANY reasons the BYPs are not possible. (emphasis added by T. Graves) Thanks (David Josephs) Dear David, Thank you so much for your tutorial on color recognition (in the Edwin Ortiz thread "How Many Rifles Were Found On The Sixth Floor") as it applies to circular geometric objects. Truly profound and not condescending or insulting in the slightest. For your information, I do want to (and tend to) believe that the backyard photographs are fakes. However, when "analyzing" different parts of the photos, I try to do so dispassionately, without letting my wishes and tentative beliefs interfere. Perhaps you should do the same? Perhaps the reason the fingers look thicker in one photo than in another is because the resolution in. Just an idea. And BTW, it was not I who originally posted the photos of the hands on your thread. It was you. Sincerely, --Tommy Yes I did Thomas... as I believe a close look at them clearly shows they are not from the same person... when one adds in the rifle differences I also posted, the Kleins problems, Marina's testimony, the acknowledgment of the photos' existance the night before and many hours before they were even discovered, the loss of one of the negatives, the possession of copies of the photos in places that NEVER should have had them, the proven unreliability of the WCR and HSCA photographic panel, the recognized "fine lines" when viewed for analysis rather than to rationalize, the word of experts not under the cover-up thumb, and the fact so many photographic items were found and taken on 11/22 yet these photos were not... Leads ME to conclude they were created to incriminate Oswald... "...the facts about Oswald seem to pat -- too obvious " ya think?

these are THE carcanos... the top is the NARA photo, the bottom you know... and yes, there is a slight difference in the rotation... Can you tell me where #3 appears on the BYP? Can you tell me why the NARA image does not have the round silver circle #4? Can you explain why every single image of the carcano shows a bottom mount sling ring EXCEPT for the rifle in evidence? Will you ever incorporate the rest of the evidence in considering the authenticity of the BYP... I'd like to know what you feel is the most compelling evidence in SUPPORT of the 3 BYPs being genuine DJ

Dear Mr. Josephs, Please elaborate. Thank you, --Tommy Thomas... let's try something first. Do you see that there are four different color circles below? Red, Green, Blue and Yellow? There are similarities to the circles, but they are clearly not the same. In the photo of his hands... the BYP fingers are FAT, as opposed to slender in the arrest photo.... in fact, slender in every photo of Oswald's hands EXCEPT the one in Japan which hardly looks like Oswald to begin with... Thomas.. I respect you personal opinion on this... If you don't see how differnt the hands are, I'm not here to convince you... just to present what I believe to be ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE that the BYP were created. Whan and if you can prove Oswald ever purchased and rec'd and had that rifle in his possession, the BYP become that much more possible... but you can't. Same goes for the revolver... ordered in January, shipped on the same day as the rifle yet also, NEVER picked up or delivered... Finally, maybe explain how Michael sees the photo Friday night, and Fritz asks Oswald about it Sat morning, three hours before it is even officially "found"... as yet another part of the growing stack of evidence that makes the BYP impossible to begin with... and then there's ole reliable, Marina. Please stop trying to make this about his hands... the hands being different is only one small part of MANY MANY reasons the BYPs are not possible. Thanks

And I can appreciate "focus"... mine has been to take apart the process that gets the rifle from Italy to the 6th floor... and it simply doesn't add up. One of the greatest oversights with regards to the rifle is the acceptance of the FBI's word that what was copied from the microfilm for HIDELL's order did NOT include C2766/VC836 which was written in after the fact... and that Kleins was NOT shipping the larger model for the Item # referring to the scoped 36" rifle... While looking at this microfilm... any other C20-T750 order that was shipped a 40" FC rifle instead would be DIRECT EVIDENCE that what they said was occurring, did occur. Not only did they not take an image of any other order, but the microfilm disappears from its holder... I spoke with Armstrong who went to the archives and specifically asked for a reader and that film in the early 90's... he was told the film was gone. I think we both agree that taking the FBI's word for it when the actual evidence was available to them and NOT USED... is simply a bit too much to overlook. If he never rec'd the rifle - and there is little if ANY evidence that he did... whether the BYP is real or not is again, moot. This is a rifle that was supposedly buried in the ground after Walker... and the man without a single cleaning supply or box of ammo is supposedly bringing thie dissassembled, "well-oiled" rifle with a partial clip to the TSBD. From start to finish, Oswald's weapons cannot be linked to him without some magic. Finally, you may have seen this image of mine - I conceed that the BYP rifle is not clear and sharp... yet these are not micro-details of difference... these are but four glaringly obvious differences in the rifles... 5 if you seperate #1 into both the ring and the metal band.

I look forward to hearing more about that... thanks...

Well good. no offence intended... yet you seem to forget that MANY ITEMS OF EVIDENCE hinge on that photo. The concern I have John. is that once you accept the BYP as real... are you implying that Marina's testimony about the photos is truthful? (and if so do we believe the single photo was taken in Feb as she states, or that she only took one, looking straight thru the viewfinder... ) That Klein's evidence related to the rifle is accurate? That Seaports joke of an undocumented process actually happened? That he actually does stow the rifle in a blanket and moves it with his belongings into the Paine garage... and actually disassembles it on a whim, after making a paper bag WHEN? getting it home Thursday night and preparing it for transport... actually walking a 34" stock and metal parts in a paper bag, puts in the back seat... not a sound is heard of gun parts rattling, or moving... the BAG is not big enough given Wesley and his aunt's recollection... No the puzzle does not hinge on the BYP yet it takes on a very differnt image if you accept these 3 images with only one negative yet with two found... with the image showing up in the most interesting of places over the years... and the DPD given a little slap on the wrist over the LOSING of one of these key items of evidence... then the HSCA photo panel follow-up scam of the century... So John... I am a litle puzzled at your response... Support the authenticity of the BYP REQUIRES you to accept certain other related "facts" that simply do not add up. So in a very real sense... belief in the BYP suggests acceptance of evidence which is easily shon to be inauthentic... So take a stand John... if the BYP are real... explain/support/authenticate the evidence trail that becomes necessarily true as a result.

I'd put Yates up against Bledsoe/Whaley any time... same with Scoggins and Benavidas... the man drove this person to the corner of Elm/Houston while listening to talk about hi powered rifles WHILE holding a 3 1/2 to 4 foot paper bag... like not believing Mercer or Arnold... I'm hoping you refer to the person seeing Wesley drop Oswald off much closer to the building... or someone to corroborate this... on a side note, you ever see that photo in the WCR showing where Welsey parked compared to twhere the TSBD is...? DJ Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; he just said we had a parking lot there and showed me where it was and said you can park in the parking lot. Mr. BALL - Was that the parking lot two or three blocks from the building. Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir, it is down there; right across from the warehouse there. Mr. BALL - Then you would walk from there from that parking lot-- Mr. FRAZIER - Up to the other Depository up there at the corner of Houston and Main. Mr. BALL - We have here a map which has been marked as Commission's Exhibit No. 361. Mr. FRAZIER - I see. Mr. BALL - And north is to the bottom of the map. Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. Mr. BALL - What did the package look like? 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. Mr. BALL - It was, what part of the back seat was it in? Mr. FRAZIER - It was in his side over on his side in the far back. Mr. BALL - How much of that back seat, how much space did it take up? Mr. FRAZIER - I would say roughly around 2 feet of the seat. Mr. BALL - From the side of the seat over to the center, is that the way you would measure it? Mr. FRAZIER - If, if you were going to measure it that way from the end of the seat over toward the center, right. But I say like I said I just roughly estimate and that would be around two feet, give and take a few inches Asked and answered... does the WCR offer anyone seeing Oswald coming in with a bag or rifle? I'm sorry but I don't remember the name of the person seeing him dropped off closer to the TSBD... DJ Mr. BALL - He was alone? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; he was alone. Mr. BALL - Do you recall him having anything in his hand? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't see anything, if he did. Mr. BALL - Did you pay enough attention to him, you think, that you would remember whether he did or didn't? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I can---yes, sir---I'll put it this way; I didn't see anything in his hands at the time. Mr. BALL - In other words, your memory is definite on that is it? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir. Mr. BALL - Or, are you guessing? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so. Mr. BALL - You saw him come in the door? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. Mr. BALL - The back door on the first floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - It was in the back door. Mr. BALL - Now, that back door is the door that opens onto what? That back door would be the first floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes.

Yes Tom... nice spotting the button holes.... I still don't think that's Sturgis... and the right hand watch really does give it away... Cheers DJ

Fair enough... I see something very obvious ... others do not. If you want to accept the provenance of the BYPs - so be it. Having researched the subject from start to finish rather than conclusions based on a single slice of time... My conclusion is that the BYPs were created... possibly even by Oswald himself... as much of the incriminating evidence against him was created, altered, added or manipulated. Discussing the BYP or autopsy or any other aspect as if they stand alone on an island is a classic LNer approach... if one wishes to take 1 piece of a 10000 piece puzzle and declare what the picture MUST look like from that one piece.... I can't stop that kind of analysis. If we put some of these pieces together that should fit and they dont... maybe, just maybe we can realize the picture of a LNer killing the POTUS as detailed in the FBI's WCR is just as much BS as anyone can stand. No offense John... but this assassination puzzle does not hinge on the BYPs. . PAINE - Yes. Mr. JENNER - What were you doing in the meantime? Mrs. PAINE - Packing was haphazard, this packing was haphazard; put the dishes in a box and carried it out to the car. Mr. JENNER - It was in the open so you could see what went into your car? Mrs. PAINE - I think so. I certainly then repacked it to go to New Orleans. Mr. JENNER - Well, I want to stick with this occasion, please. Mrs. PAINE - All right. Mr. JENNER - Was there a rifle packed in the back of the car? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - You didn't see any kind of weapon? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - Firearm, rifle, pistol, or otherwise? Mrs. PAINE - No; I saw nothing of that nature. Mr. JENNER - Did you drive them to your home? Mrs. PAINE - Yes. Mr. JENNER - Were the materials and things in your station wagon unpacked and placed in your home? Mrs. PAINE - Yes; immediately. Mr. JENNER - Did you see that being done, were you present? Mrs. PAINE - I helped do it; yes. Mr. JENNER - Did you see any weapon on that occasion? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - Whether a rifle, pistol or-- Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - Or any covering, any package, that looked as though it might have a weapon, pistol, or firearm? Mrs. PAINE - No. Michael actually and repeatedly handled that blanket and STILL can't say it was a rifle... which, if it was in that blanket, had to be assembled... You ever wonder when and how Oswald gets the paper bag home, the rifle unassembled and into the bag and the bag to the TSBD when the key witnesses stated it was no where near big enough to carry a rifle of that size and the one man who saw Oswald coming into work that morning testified there was nothing in his hands.... The bag story was CYA... never happened. Yet the Yates story - which is the same as taking Welsey's word for it... was NOT accepted? Even though the bag was big enough and the man looked like Oswald... Mr. LIEBELER - The witness yesterday did draw a picture of what he visualized as being in the blanket, and I will offer it in evidence later on in the hearing. How long was this package in your estimation? Mr. PAINE - Well, yesterday we measured the distance that I indicated with my hand, I think it came to 37 inches. Mr. LIEBELER - Approximately how thick would you say it was? Mr. PAINE - I picked it up each time and I put it in a position and then I would recover it from that position, so each time I moved it with the same position with my hands in the same position. My right hand, the thumb and forefinger could go around the pipe, and my left hand grabbed something which was an inch and a half inside the blanket or something thick. Mr. LIEBELER - Did it occur to you at that time that there was a rifle in the package? Mr. PAINE - That did not occur to me. John, can you address why it is that ever single piece of evidence that suggests Oswald did not do what he is accused of was UNACCEPTABLE while any hint of testimony or evidence that supports Oswald did it was treated as GOLD? Even a broken clock is right twice a day... do you not find it stretching the bounds of credibility that not a single person, event, or piece of physical evidence that suggests MORE than Oswald... was either thrown aside, discredited or shaefully and mercifully attacked...? Or do you not see that either?

..can you simply trust your eyes here John? the BYP showing C2766 is full of problems not related to the photo itself.... as I've discussed many times in many threads about Kleins and the FBI. when one adds up all the inconsistencies... AND now add in that these hands dont look the same... it becomes easier and easier to understand why the DPD lost a negative yet we wind up with three poses, a woman who doesn't remember how the camera works to begin with... and cant get her story straight as to when it even occurred, and the fact that rifle and the ballistic evidence do not match up... Oh, and the rifle is not even C2766 in the photos...

[delete]

Are you sure that's Sturgis? Below is the same image flipped.... and all of a sudden the table is filled with left handed drinkers.... I think the image is correct and that is not Sturgis my .02

Once delusional... forever delusional.... your reputation preceeds you Len.... Nothing you do or say related to JFK is taken seriously by anyone, on any forum, or in any circles where serious people discuss the case. But you have yourself a nice day...

Len... you aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know... Go pull wings off flies or something... I'm done with ya...

Thanks Steve... and very true... Didn't the Dodd people also order Carcanos from Kleins right around this time? http://educationforu...er Paul... the above is a link to a discussion about the revolver and a post of mine in a different thread that sums it up, thanks to great work from Gil Jesus.... This is it... the sum total of ALL the evidence related to the purchase of the supposed murder weapon of JD Tippit. Serial # hadwritten on the order... sounds familiar No records related to the $10 cash deposit or the envelope that and the coupon arrive in No records of the $1.27 Railway collects No record of the $19.95 forwarded from Railway No record of anyone at Railway picking up the carton No record of another Money Order or cash rec'd to pay the COD balance for the pistol No record of when Seaport recieves the coupon although it is at least 6 weeks before they process it (if 1/2 or 1/27 is the date on the coupon) and yet both weapons are shipped to the PO Box on the same day...) but other than that... a perfectly legit transaction... Thanks Gil... DJ http://educationforu...=15#entry248196 Below is a collection of evidence related to the revolver. One should remember that even in 1963 businesses paid taxes and kept records of their transactions.... As I state above... none of the standard records of business are availble to substantiate any portion of this lie.... the $10 deposit, the $19.95 sent from Railway, the $1.27 cod collected by railway, or anyone picking up and paying the $19.95 + $1.27 cod to release the weapon. Mr. BALL. And it was shipped to you by the Empire Wholesale Sporting Goods, Ltd., on what date? Mr. MICHAELIS. It went---it was on 10/19/62, in St. Albans, Vt., and from then on it was directed to our place of business, which was at that time 1225 South Grand Avenue. However, the merchandise in question did not arrive before January 3, 1963. Mr. BALL. Is that the date it did arrive? Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes. It was received January 3, 1963. Mr. BALL. Off the record. (Discussion held off the record.) The order is dated either 1/2 or 1/27 1963. They have in their possession 500 of these revolvers as of Jan 3, 1963. They shorten the barrel and wait until March 20th to ship it? Mr. BALL. Now, this particular mail order, did you have anything to do with filling that order? Mr. MICHAELIS. No. Mr. BALL. Then what would have happened? Mr. MICHAELIS. She (Emma Vaughn) would have processed the order in writing up invoice No. 5371. After 1 week she gave out the order to the order filler and packer. And yet again... does it not make sense that we see the orders prior to and after this order to establish its time and place in the process? Michaelis Ex 1 is a mishmosh of order dates and seriel numbers http://www.history-m...Vol20_0318a.htm you will notice that "Seaport" also ships inv # 3344 and #5056 on the 21st.. now unless there are three seperate invoice books what is going on here? Mr. BALL. And it shows deposit, $10. Balance c.o.d., $19.95. What is the significance of that? Mr. MICHAELIS. We received, together with the order, the amount of $10 in cash. Since the sales price is $29.95, the merchandise was shipped with a c.o.d for the balance of $19.95. Mr. BALL. Does this invoice show the date it was shipped? Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes. Mr. BALL. What was that? Mr. MICHAELIS. March 20. Mr. MICHAELIS. This document is required in addition by the Railway Express Agency for all c.o.d. shipments, and indicates again the name of the consignee, his address, and lists our invoice number which is, in this case, No. 5371. It directs the Railway Express Agency to remit the amount to be collected to Seaport Traders, Inc. The amount of the c.o.d. is $19.95, and the service charge has to be collected from the consignee.

These are his hands from the day of arrest and from the BYP.... regardless of photogrammetry.. the hands simply do not match. IMO Wesley and his sister made the entire story up about the bag... if anything it was a small lunch sack. I have to run at the moment but will address the revolver - which is MCH WORSE than the rifle in terms of the documentation... Seach on this forum and you will find my and many others' thoughts on the matter... Talk soon DJ

Interesting questions Paul... I hope I can do it some justice Montgomery comes out of the building and is photographed holding a paper bag.... this bag if fully extended yet from all appearances there should have been NOTHING in that bag... Again - it supposedly was folded up in the floor in the SE corner of the 6th floor. there was NOTHING inside as it was described laying on the floor.... and there would be no reason for Montgomery to putanything INSIDE the evidence as it was assumed it carried the unassembled rifle... why contaminate the evidence? GMACK from Monty's oral history tells us that a venetian blind was in the bag... which blind and from where, no one has an answer. "ALL THE EVIDENCE" about the rifle is from before Walker... what "evidence"? The Klein's documentation? the Photo? Marina's testimony? Could you please spell out what you refer to here so I have an understanding of what you are questioning. Neither Ruth nor Michael state that they EVER saw a rifle at thier home. Mr. JENNER - I 'don't wish to be persistent, but was there anything that you saw about the duffelbags that lead you at that time to even think for an instant that there was anything long, slim and hard like a pole? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - Or a gun, a rifle? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - No? Nothing? Mrs. PAINE - Nothing. I did not move these bags. Mr. JENNER - To the extent you saw them is all I am inquiring about. You did not touch them, you did not lift them, but you saw them. Mrs. PAINE - I did. Mr. JENNER - There appeared--the entire circumference of these bags which you could see was smooth? Mrs. PAINE - Well, smooth, bumpy, but irregular. Mr. JENNER - But no stick, no hard surface. Now, what about the diameter of these bags, these duffelbags, what would you say it was? Mrs. PAINE - About like this, 15, 18, 20 inches across. Mr. JENNER - Eighteen, twenty inches across? Mrs. PAINE - Probably more than that. Mr. JENNER - This is 15 inches. Mrs. PAINE - About like this; a little more than 15, probably. Mr. JENNER - Was there a rifle packed in the back of the car? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - You didn't see any kind of weapon? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - Firearm, rifle, pistol, or otherwise? Mrs. PAINE - No; I saw nothing of that nature. Mr. JENNER - Did you drive them to your home? Mrs. PAINE - Yes. Mr. JENNER - Were the materials and things in your station wagon unpacked and placed in your home? Mrs. PAINE - Yes; immediately. Mr. JENNER - Did you see that being done, were you present? Mrs. PAINE - I helped do it; yes. Mr. JENNER - Did you see any weapon on that occasion? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - Whether a rifle, pistol or-- Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - Or any covering, any package, that looked as though it might have a weapon, pistol, or firearm? Mrs. PAINE - No. Representative BOGGS - Did you see the rifle that he had in the room in your home? Mrs. PAINE - In the garage, no. Representative BOGGS - In the garage, you never saw one? Mrs. PAINE - I never saw that rifle at all until the police showed it to me in the station on the 22d of November. Mr. LIEBELER - Did you ever observe or hear prior to the assassination that Lee Oswald had been practicing with a rifle? Mr. PAINE - No, I didn't know prior to the assassination, we didn't know he had a rifle. I had supposed from my conversation with him back on Neely Street that he would like to have a rifle but I didn't gather that he did. Mr. LIEBELER - Aside from whether or not you knew that he had a rifle, did you ever hear or observe him practicing with a rifle? Mr. PAINE - No, I did not. ========== Marina says he buried the rifle.... yet he had no cleaning supplies and there is no indication of that ever happening.======== Mr. RANKIN. Did he say any more than that about the shooting? Mrs. OSWALD. Of course in the morning I told him that I was worried, and that we can have a lot of trouble, and I asked him, "Where is the rifle? What did you do with it?" He said, that he had left it somewhere, that he had buried it, it seems to me, somewhere far from that place, because he said dogs could find it by smell. I don't know---I am not a criminologist. I think it's important to note that you've stated some conclusions about the rifle that really doesn't follow the evidence... Interesting conversation.... very enjoyable... DJ

While I've only followed the "It was Oswald on the steps" argument off and on, I must say this clip from the Martin film seals the deal. The shirt in the clip s NOT the shirt worn by Oswald at the police station, and it is NOT the shirt Lovelady wore when photographed by the FBI. It is--quite clearly--the shirt Lovelady later showed Groden. Does anyone recall how Cinque and Fetzer explained this one? I mean--what--this film was faked, and then fed Robert Groden, in hopes he'd put a DVD out 30 years after the killing in which this clip was featured? I do have a question for you Pat... According to every report of the interrogation, Oswald tells us he changed his clothes - shirt and trousers - when he get to his room. The inventory of his room included items found in the dresser drawer where he says he put them that matches the description of what he was wearing at work: Grey trousers and a brown collared shirt... Whether those are the EXACT clothes we are not sure... but we either ACCEPT that he changed or we DON'T. If he changed, then what we see in this image would have NOTHING to do with his Arrest clothing.... We also find on 11199-G that his clothes from Beckley were NOT photographed or given an Item # between 1-455. AND Drain took the brown shirt on 11/22. We find later that Bledsoe talking about the ripped buttons had to be AFTER THE FACT since IF he was even on that bus, he changed his shirt before being arrested.... which is the sihirt with the ripped-off buttons. Fetzer's initial evidence for Doorman being Oswald comes from Fritz's notes... as does the information about his changing.... the discussion is moot before it even begins... yet he still gets mountains of airtime about Doorman wearing the shirt Oswald was arrested in... Do you agree that Oswald changed and there is something fishy going on with his clothes?

Len... Your tactics are obvious... your feigned stupidity is obvious... What did Kleins send for C20-T750 orders from ads placed in Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov and Dec 1962? They did not receive ANY shipments from Crescent until Feb 22, 1963... Where did they get the rifles for THOSE ads? Simple question... it needs a simple answer and supporting evidence.