Mark Ulrik

24 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

No problem. I found the reference to the FBI offering to examine the bullet in April ‘63. See if this link works for you, page 32:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HJvu0pIXVMqXsxo6GRwBVZzyfrPkYSiU/view?usp=drivesdk

Works great! CE 2524 is a complete version of that letter, I notice. Includes the last (and not very interesting) page.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1141#relPageId=762

Thanks, Tom. Appreciated. My googling only brought me to the DPUK website where it seems to be password-protected.

3 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I’m with Ben on this. It is hardly conclusive that that weird looking “N” was even made by a human. All the other visible marks are etched in normally like you’d expect, but the alleged “N” is in tiny bubble letters. What kind of tool could even make a mark like that? 

I'd like to know as well. I think the lab guys used a diamond point pencil.

33 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I found the FBI offer document after the article was published. I have a bookmark but I found it in the Malcolm Blunt archive, and whenever I bookmark something there it just takes me to the main Walker folder so I have to dig it up again. Pretty sure I’ve seen it on MFF too though. I’ll try to find it later. I’m sure you can find it if you search a bit. 

The second thing is in the addendum to the Loeffeler memo. The DPD advised Don Moore that they’d been considering sending in the bullet because they thought - without any evidence - that there there was a possibility Oswald might have taken the shot. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145516#relPageId=30

So the FBI offered to examine the bullet when the crime was fresh, but the DPD declined and decided that the bullet was worthless as evidence - then apparently they did a 180 after the JFKA and decided the bullet was in good enough condition to connect Oswald to the shooting. 

So, “pin the crime on Oswald” might be a bit of an exaggeration, but that’s basically what happened. 

Yeah, the lump of metal known as the Walker bullet became a lot more interesting when ballistic evidence turned up in another, possibly related, shooting case.

The Malcolm Blunt archive is hosted by Dealey Plaza UK, right? But available only to those who know the secret handshake.

14 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Mark Ulrik:

Do you purport that DPD officer Norvell marked the true Walker bullet with an "N" that was two millimeters high, or well less than one-tenth of an inch high? And that he marked the bullet with an object other than a sharp awl or stylus?

I don't remember reading anything about what kind of tool he used, but other letters on the bullet are of similar height.

3 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

Another thing is that according to the official story, the DPD crime lab couldn’t figure out the caliber of the bullet, so they gave a verbal report to Day saying that the bullet was mangled beyond recognition. Incredibly, the lab also (allegedly) didn’t take a single evidence photo. 

Well, the FBI figured out the caliber of the bullet in about two seconds. What’s wrong with this picture? 

Beats me. Unlike the DPD, the FBI had other specimens to compare with. Even a trained monkey would have recognized the similarities between CE 573 and CE 399.

3 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

Also, I don’t have the document handy, but the FBI Dallas Field Office actually offered to take the Walker bullet to the FBI lab in April ‘63. So, supposedly, the DPD lab couldn’t figure out the caliber of the bullet used in an attempted assassination of a famous political figure, but they turned down the opportunity to have the bullet examined by the best forensics lab in the country? 

Interesting. Was this offer mentioned in the K&K article? The bullet was in pretty poor condition, though, so maybe the thinking was to wait until other evidence (weapon, other bullets) turned up that it could realistically be matched to.

4 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

Then, after the JFKA, a DPD officer stated that even before the appearance of the Walker note, the DPD was considering sending the bullet in to the FBI lab so they could pin the crime on Oswald. Something does not compute, IMO. 

Refreshingly candid of them to admit that they were determined to pin the crime on Oswald. Source?

These links might work better, Tom:
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59597#relPageId=2
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1139#relPageId=789

PS: Good catch!

Still Stuck on Steel

7 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

after 46 interviews with Marina where she does not disclose her alleged conversations with her dead husband about the walker shooting.

4 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

I dont believe this is a case of her failing to tell the government that she knew her husband took a pot shot at Waker

Didn't you tell us a few moments ago that she failed 46 times?

@Lawrence Schnapf Is it difficult to imagine Marina being less than cooperative because she was afraid the truth could be used against her? Back in the Soviet Union, she would likely have faced serious trouble if it was discovered that she had failed to report on her husband for having tried to shoot a political figure. The defense lawyerly temptation to attack her claims is understandable, I guess, but pretty weak sauce (IMO).

4 minutes ago, Ron Ege said:

Mark, thanks.

Understood.

Would you want to share your views?

It's good of you to ask, but they're not that interesting 🤠

59 minutes ago, Ron Ege said:

Mark, thanks.

Perhaps you right about the package being Oswald's prop and then being discarded, when out of Frazier's sight and before Dougherty saw him entering the building.  Maybe Gil or those more learned here can enlighten us on that possibility.

And, the length estimates were accompanied by descriptions - re the manner of carry, confirming them.  So, we have that. 

Could we allow for the possibility that Dougherty's memory of that day was conflated with his memories of other days that Oswald entered the building.  And, therefore the  "nothing in his (Oswald's) hands".  I thought he brought his lunch that day.  Where was that package (sack) - stuffed in a jacket pocket?

Hi Ron. I was just trying to summarize Gil's post. I disagree with almost everything in it.

According to Gil, the REAL reason Oswald went to Irving Thursday evening was to make up with Marina. I guess it just couldn't wait another day. Gil doesn't completely dismiss the curtain rod story, but suggests it was mainly a fib to conceal private matters from "nosy kid" Buell. According to Gil, it wouldn't even have made sense for Oswald to bring a rifle to work that Friday without even knowing that JFK would be driving through Dealey Plaza (citing Jarman). Gil doesn't rule out that Oswald brought a package to work that morning, but doubt that it actually made it into the building (citing Dougherty). Maybe it was just a throwaway prop intended to satisfy nosy kid Buell? In any case, Gil is convinced that the package couldn't have contained a rifle, due to the length estimates provided by Buell and his sister being "so precise" that they must have been accurate.

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

At work now, will source later. Tom Gram?

Believe me, no one disputes all four officers marked the slug. 

I'm afraid that's not correct.

That's a very good question

I like your hunch, Greg. My hunch tells me that it's possible to overestimate the significance of multiple signatures on police reports. In many cases, the co-signer is probably happy to sign almost anything if it saves him from doing the paperwork himself.

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

We are of different perceptions on many issues regarding the Walker incident, but that is what a forum is for.

I asked in the Walker Bullet article thread what you guys think happened with the bullet that went through the wall. (Cue the crickets.)

47 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Mark Ulrik are you referrfing to Steve Roe?  Didnt he write a piece last week or am i confusing this with anothe article?

I think the emphasis on "steel" flows from the FBI memo that indicates steel-jacketed bullets were often soft-nosed.

would it be more "humane" to kill with a FMJ to the head than to fire soft-nosed bullets that create so much damage but might not kill the animal.  As you probably suspect, I think killing animals for fun is immoral so I dont understand why its ok to use a bullet that is designed to maime as to opposed a FMJ that can create a "clean" kill.   A bit off topic but would like to understand better this view.     

I was, indeed, referring to Steve Roe. His latest piece was in response to an article by Greg Doudna.

I've never hunted a day in my life and have mixed feelings about the concept, but my father was a hunter. Albeit as far from the reckless, trigger-happy sort as you can imagine. He's not around anymore, though, so I asked ChatGPT instead why it is a bad idea to use FMJ ammo for deer hunting:

Quote

Using Full Metal Jacket (FMJ) ammunition for deer hunting is generally considered a bad idea for several reasons:

1) Lack of Expansion: FMJ bullets are designed to penetrate targets without expanding or deforming upon impact. This lack of expansion means that FMJ bullets often pass through the target without transferring a significant amount of energy. As a result, they may not deliver a quick, humane kill.

2) Over-Penetration: FMJ bullets have a higher tendency to over-penetrate, meaning they can pass through the target and potentially continue traveling with significant velocity. This poses a safety risk because the bullet may travel beyond the intended target and potentially cause unintended damage or injury.

3) Limited Tissue Damage: Due to their design, FMJ bullets typically create smaller wound channels and cause less tissue damage compared to hunting-specific bullets. Effective deer hunting requires a bullet that can deliver sufficient energy and create a broad wound channel, which is more likely to result in a quick and humane kill.

4) Legal and Ethical Concerns: Many states have regulations in place that require hunters to use ammunition specifically designed for hunting. These regulations are intended to promote ethical hunting practices and ensure the humane treatment of animals. Using FMJ ammunition for hunting may violate these regulations, leading to legal consequences.

For deer hunting, it is generally recommended to use ammunition specifically designed for hunting, such as soft-point or expanding bullets. These bullets are designed to expand upon impact, transferring energy to the target and creating a larger wound channel, which increases the chances of a clean and ethical kill. Always consult and comply with local hunting regulations to ensure you are using the appropriate ammunition for your specific hunting situation.

On 6/9/2023 at 7:12 PM, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Mark Ulrik- the DPD under Fritz was not known for its evidence-based approach to solving crimes. He had a reputation and bragged about using his interrogations for getting confessions.

so again, dont assume the reference to a steel-jacketed bullet is wrong because an arrest was made. Your energy has been focused on refuting the statements of four DPD, and other law enforcement as outlined by @Benjamin Cole and @Tom Gram   How about evaluating the case with the bullet in evidence now in question. do you think the rest of the case supports that LHO was the person who took a potshot at Walker or is the bullet the critical piece of evidence in your opinion?

This would be a more productive discssion. Does this change the dynamics in the case in your opinion. Afterall, the bullet in evidence could not be linked to the assassination rifle in record to the exclusion of any other rifle.   

Thank you for asking. As we all know, the steel vs. copper controversy has been around for decades, and I don't see how the recent K&K article really changes anything. I agree that the efforts by the WC and FBI to get to the bottom of the steel vs. copper affair were in some respects underwhelming, but the more speculative parts of the article were very unconvincing. But let's wait for Steve's review.

16 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Indeed, the hoose-gow was the terminus for hunting with a steel-jacketed bullet in Maryland in 1945. 

See this: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn88065202/1946-11-28/ed-1/seq-1/#date1=1940&index=14&rows=20&words=bullets+jackets+steel&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1963&proxtext="steel-jacketed+bullet"&y=13&x=19&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=2

The emphasis on "steel" is still odd to me. It makes little difference to the deer what kind of metal the jacket is made of. What really makes a difference is whether it's a soft-nosed hunting bullet or a military-style FMJ bullet. Hunting game like deer with FMJ ammo is just a big no-no.

55 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:

the Myers father/son team

The Haags?

Ben, as stated in my first reply, we can't even be certain that Curry said "steel-jacketed". But it wouldn't matter even if he had said "banana-jacketed" because he got his answer in the form of that 11/23 FBI report identifying all the JFK bullet specimens as copper-jacketed. It would make zero sense for him a week later to be waiting for "confirmation" that those bullets were anything other than copper-jacketed. Am I talking Chinese here?

1 minute ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Mark Ulrik NAA? I didnt mention NAA? Curry has nothing to do with NAA. 

OK, then you must've been talking about other "developments". How are they relevant here?

22 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Michael Griffith you are correct. most of the supporters of the official position have not kept up with the developments and remain frozen in time circa 1964. 

Let's try to stay on topic for a change. Not everything in this case is about NAA testing.

12 hours ago, George Govus said:

I had to go look and see the cover of this book, and what was the typeface font size. Once a graphic designer... There's one new copy listed for sale on Amazon (U.S.). Limited Collector's Edition, classic sixties design, $299. And used copies, too.

Curry's book is pretty common, and it shouldn't be hard to find a moderately priced copy on eBay. I own a couple myself. The "limited" edition is the only one, btw.