Mark Ulrik

6 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

This to me is a strange utterance that implies that he had no knowledge of the gun in the holster.

Perhaps the effect he was hoping for.

I suspect Studebaker's print was just more "contrasty". Notice how the number on the tape stands out, while the circled dent is close to indiscernible.

1 hour ago, Gil Jesus said:

And while we're at it, let's throw one more report in there for good measure. This one comes from the papers of Capt. Will Fritz and is a report by SS agent Thomas Kelley who was present during Fritz's interrogation of Oswald on November 23rd ( Saturday ). Kelley reports that at the 6pm interrogation, Fritz showed Oswald "blowups" of the photographs showing him holding a rifle and a pistol.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29106

This can also be found on page 628 of the WR (as mentioned above). You conveniently ignore that Kelley's account contradicts the idea that Fritz had foreknowledge of the BYP.
PS: Why do you always use a much larger font than everyone else?

1 hour ago, Gil Jesus said:

So my question is this: How did Capt. Fritz know about the existance of a photograph showing Oswald holding a rifle "which looked to be the same rifle we had recovered", almost three hours before the photograph was found by his detectives ?

Turn to page 628 of the WR. According to Inspector Kelley (USSS) the question of the location of the backyard came up during a later interrogation session. We seem to have conflicting accounts of the timing. Whose is supported by other evidence?
PS: Why do you always use a much larger font than everyone else?

19 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

One of the problems I have with the BYPs is if you look at the holster in CE 133-A, you'll see the sunlight reflecting off the front of it. As one who has worn both, I can see that that's a holster for a 5 or 6 inch barrel hanging below his belt. The holster for a 2" snub nose is attached to the belt at the top and doesn't hang below it. The holster in the photo is not the same holster recovered from his room.

If you take a sufficiently low-quality image and "enhance" it enough, you can prove almost anything.

35 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

As a truth seeker, I need to resolve this in my own mind, so I've ordered the April, May and June 1963 editions of American Rifleman. I want to see for myself if the Klein's ad for April has the 40" rifle and if they continued advertising it in May and June or if the April ad was an error. I should have the mags in 7-10 days and I'll post what I find out.

Apologizing to Gary Murr would also seem appropriate.

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Mark:

Like that one, an error, with the rifle in his possession.  😙

And somehow Tom Purvis' rifle number means nothing.

As does the 3 million MC rifles. 

Nice magic act.

 

I'm not crazy enough to rule out the possibility that there could be more than one C2766 rifle, but (as you admitted earlier) actually locating the others is another matter. Yet you believe that a private citizen like Lattimer was somehow able to. How do you explain this apparent contradiction?

5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I just gave you two examples which indicate the serial numbers repeated.

And I pointed out that they didn't pan out.

5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The idea that say me, or Gil would have the ability to track down all the other ones, that is pure Von Peinism. How could an individual citizen, by himself, without any of the proper investigative power and aids do such a thing?  Its like asking, OK, if you think there was a hole in the back of Kennedy's head, dig him up and show it to us.  That is just nonsense.  As per Latimer, Gil showed you the quote from his own book.  When his fellow Oswald did it fanatics alerted him to the fact that he was hurting their case, he changed his story.

Please. You're making it sound like I was sending you and Gil on a wild-goose chase. Gil was one who made the claim that multiple C2766 rifles exist – which is only possible if you pretend that 2766 is the same as C2766 and that Lattimer's error (which he admitted) wasn't really an error. Or do you and Gil believe that an individual citizen like Lattimer had the "investigative power" to do what no one else has ever accomplished?

7 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

Yes I do have him on ignore and now you know why.

Plausible deniability would be my guess.

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The guy who owned Empire Wholesale Sporting Goods told the FBI that Mussolini ordered many arms factories in Italy to produce the MC rifles and carbines. With many companies doing so, "The same serial number appears on weapons manufactured by more than one concern. Some bear a letter prefix and some do not." (DiEugenio, The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today, p. 83)

Nevertheless, only one Carcano with the serial number C2766 (number part "2766" and prefix "C") is known to exist.

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The late Tom Purvis showed this since he had one made in 1940 which had the number C5522, made at the Gardone factory.  Obviously they had to pass the number 2766 to get to that number. (ibid). Just do the math, all those factories produced about 3 million of these rifles. Before he changed his story Lattimer said he had one  with that serial number. (Martha Moyer, "Ordering the Rifle", JFK Lancer.)

Had Lattimer actually owned a C2766, it seems likely he would've realized it was a kind of a big deal, so why only mention it in passing? As he later told a curious researcher, it was simply an error that went unnoticed until the book was printed and it was too late to do anything about it.

58 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

What about the fact that more than one rifle had the same serial number ? ( CE 2562 )

You keep recycling claims like this despite knowing full well that there has never been more than one documented C2766 rifle. Why?

2 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

This evidence indicates that the Depository 40" rifle was not available for sale until August, 1963.

If you want to use these ads as an indicator of when the 40" rifles came into stock, you should at least take into consideration that magazines are typically postdated. An August issue will likely hit the stands in (early) July. There's also such a thing as deadlines for reserving ad space and submitting artwork. What were these deadlines for the previous issue? May something?

54 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

That is Shenon for you.

The HSCA Found out about it through Fonzi.

What exactly are you accusing Shenon of here?

10 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

You should keep in mind as well that Shenon's main sources were Liebeler's former colleagues. Evidently, Liebeler was a bit of a horndog, and liked to brag about it. 

Apparently, Liebeler wasn't shy about his womanizing ways, but according to Shenon, he "said nothing to the other lawyers about an awkward encounter with Odio" upon his return from Dallas.

What happened in Dallas: Notes by HSCA investigator Gaeton Fonzi from his interview with Silvio Odio, January 16,
1976, staff files, HSCA, RIF: 180–10001–10132, NARA.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=60438

15 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

Only the serious researchers will pay up.

Or perhaps the biggest narcissists. Why should the people posting the best and most thought-provoking content even have to pay? That people like Pat Speer and a few others choose to post here doesn't pay the bills in itself, but it adds value in other ways that make this forum worth supporting.

I could, however, get behind a payment model that invokes a penalty for using extra large fonts.

13 hours ago, James R Gordon said:

Gil I am sympathetic to your point. But I feel Kathy speaks for a number of members that restricting posting rights to donations conflicts with the spirit of John Simpkin. The present admin team took over to preserve John’s heritage and this would be a backward move.

Thank you for that. I 1000% agree.

Perhaps I went too fast, but I didn't notice the "gift" option.

PS: I'm guessing $7,209.03 is the amount that has been raised since the dawn of time (I only sent $5).

Here's a better scan of Holmes Exhibit 3A:
 

1 hour ago, Gil Jesus said:

Tell that to Bill Brown. He said it.

Are we talking about what he said or what you think he said?

24 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

Yes you did, you implied that Postal had seen his face on television. You said:

" By the time Oswald snuck into the theater, about an hour and ten minutes had passed since the assassination.  He had no idea whether or not his face had been plastered all over the television by this point.  Why risk the ticket seller (Postal) recognizing him?"

Oh boy. Oswald had no way of knowing who had seen what on television. That's not a hard concept to grasp.

Lots of older books are available at archive.org.

Presumed Guilty

7 hours ago, John Butler said:

Did anyone ever think about comparing the Bell film to the Zapruder film as the p. limo approaches the railroad bridge?  Comparing the two what are all those people doing at the end of the grassy area when they are not as far as I can tell in the Zapruder film.  If this observation is true whose film is true and whose film is false?

Don't worry; they are in the Zapruder film. The DP films and photographs have been studied obsessively for decades, and discrepancies like that wouldn't have gone unnoticed.

10 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

There is an app you can install-that is what I use. I currently have about 80 or 85 JFK books (have sold many) and about 50 of them are on Kindle. I will admit that there are times that I prefer the physical book but the Kindle is cost effective and doesn't take up any space in my house. I had the physical version of With Malice when it first came out and sold it (out of greed) when the price went to $60 since I doubled my money. I now have the Kindle version.

There are also online tools that can convert from various epub formats to pdf if that's more convenient.

Don't be such a drama queen, Gil. I'll give you a couple of days to calm down before I respond.