NEW INFORMATION ON DPD SEMOUR WEITZMAN

[Bernice Moore]

dpd seymour weitzman

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...57273&page=

THANKS...

[Bernice Moore]

Video - Seymour Weitzman claims he was wrong to identify the rifle as a Mauser

HI DUNCAN; THEN HE SHOULD NOT HAVE WRITTEN HE DID... B

[Don Jeffries]

Seymour Weitzman was a very important witness, who was never adequately questioned by the early critics. The HSCA located him in a VA hospital, I believe, where he appeared to suffer from some sort of mental or emotional problems. They did indicate, in their report, that he was still frightened about what he saw and encountered on November 22, 1963, and believed it was all a huge conspiracy.

[Mike Williams]

Seymour Weitzman was a very important witness, who was never adequately questioned by the early critics. The HSCA located him in a VA hospital, I believe, where he appeared to suffer from some sort of mental or emotional problems. They did indicate, in their report, that he was still frightened about what he saw and encountered on November 22, 1963, and believed it was all a huge conspiracy.

In reading the Lancer thread there are a few initial concerns.

1) He was held as a prisoner of war by Japan. As this would not have been the E.T.O, I wonder how familiar he was with a Mauser.

2) The comment that he identified it by the scope. Almost any scope can be mounted to almost any rifle. This would seem a less than conclusive method of identification.

[Mike Williams]

Seymour Weitzman was a very important witness, who was never adequately questioned by the early critics. The HSCA located him in a VA hospital, I believe, where he appeared to suffer from some sort of mental or emotional problems. They did indicate, in their report, that he was still frightened about what he saw and encountered on November 22, 1963, and believed it was all a huge conspiracy.

In reading the Lancer thread there are a few initial concerns.

1) He was held as a prisoner of war by Japan. As this would not have been the E.T.O, I wonder how familiar he was with a Mauser.

2) The comment that he identified it by the scope. Almost any scope can be mounted to almost any rifle. This would seem a less than conclusive method of identification.

Weitzman wasn't the only one there. Roger Craig identified it as a Mauser. Eugene Boone identified it as a Mauser. Weitzman did. Fritz was there. Henry Wade passed this information onto reporters quite certain that it was a Mauser. And then for the next 2 days it was reported as a Mauser.

Did none of these people read what was stamped on the rifle and thereby leaving themselves open to making such a monstrous and monumental mistake?

Craig stuck to his guns and was haunted for the rest of his life. Weitzman didn't stick to his guns and seemed to be haunted for the rest of his life. Looks like catch .22 or should that be catch 7.65?

Let's not mention the Enfield 303...BWF.

This one stretches credulity way past the point of breaking...

You mean in much the same way that the news gives incorrect info today?

You do realize this all could have begun with one person making an off the cuff errant identification?

I do not believe for one minute there was a Mauser up there.

[Karl Kinaski]

Video - Seymour Weitzman claims he was wrong to identify the rifle as a Mauser

Is that Clip part of the 1967 CBS-JFK-Disinfo TV-Series with Dan the Rat Rather?

Something Tom Hanks wanna copy in the near future?

KK

[Karl Kinaski]

Seymour Weitzman was a very important witness, who was never adequately questioned by the early critics. The HSCA located him in a VA hospital, I believe, where he appeared to suffer from some sort of mental or emotional problems. They did indicate, in their report, that he was still frightened about what he saw and encountered on November 22, 1963, and believed it was all a huge conspiracy.

In reading the Lancer thread there are a few initial concerns.

1) He was held as a prisoner of war by Japan. As this would not have been the E.T.O, I wonder how familiar he was with a Mauser.

2) The comment that he identified it by the scope. Almost any scope can be mounted to almost any rifle. This would seem a less than conclusive method of identification.

Weitzman wasn't the only one there. Roger Craig identified it as a Mauser. Eugene Boone identified it as a Mauser. Weitzman did. Fritz was there. Henry Wade passed this information onto reporters quite certain that it was a Mauser. And then for the next 2 days it was reported as a Mauser.

Did none of these people read what was stamped on the rifle and thereby leaving themselves open to making such a monstrous and monumental mistake?

Craig stuck to his guns and was haunted for the rest of his life. Weitzman didn't stick to his guns and seemed to be haunted for the rest of his life. Looks like catch .22 or should that be catch 7.65?

Let's not mention the Enfield 303...BWF.

This one stretches credulity way past the point of breaking...

You mean in much the same way that the news gives incorrect info today?

You do realize this all could have begun with one person making an off the cuff errant identification?

I do not believe for one minute there was a Mauser up there.

Than be happy with it...

KK

[Karl Kinaski]

Seymour Weitzman was a very important witness, who was never adequately questioned by the early critics. The HSCA located him in a VA hospital, I believe, where he appeared to suffer from some sort of mental or emotional problems. They did indicate, in their report, that he was still frightened about what he saw and encountered on November 22, 1963, and believed it was all a huge conspiracy.

In reading the Lancer thread there are a few initial concerns.

1) He was held as a prisoner of war by Japan. As this would not have been the E.T.O, I wonder how familiar he was with a Mauser.

2) The comment that he identified it by the scope. Almost any scope can be mounted to almost any rifle. This would seem a less than conclusive method of identification.

Weitzman wasn't the only one there. Roger Craig identified it as a Mauser. Eugene Boone identified it as a Mauser. Weitzman did. Fritz was there. Henry Wade passed this information onto reporters quite certain that it was a Mauser. And then for the next 2 days it was reported as a Mauser.

Did none of these people read what was stamped on the rifle and thereby leaving themselves open to making such a monstrous and monumental mistake?

Craig stuck to his guns and was haunted for the rest of his life. Weitzman didn't stick to his guns and seemed to be haunted for the rest of his life. Looks like catch .22 or should that be catch 7.65?

Let's not mention the Enfield 303...BWF.

This one stretches credulity way past the point of breaking...

You mean in much the same way that the news gives incorrect info today?

You do realize this all could have begun with one person making an off the cuff errant identification?

I do not believe for one minute there was a Mauser up there.

As Bernice already stated, why write it in a sworn affidavit then?

Surely, if you hadn't seen it properly, the correct language would have been to write

"...I saw what appeared to be a 7.65 Mauser" or

"...I saw a rifle that I thought to be a 7.65 Mauser" or

"...after catching a glimpse of the rifle I assumed it to be a 7.65 Mauser" or

"...upon inspecting the weapon my initial impression was that it was a 7.65 Mauser"

Instead, Weitzman wrote "IT WAS A 7.65 MAUSER" - it doesn't get much clearer than that Mike.

You miss my point on the media aspect of this case. The media reported what the DPD and the District Attorney told them.

This "misidentification" could have had a massive impact upon any future prosecution of Oswald.

Weitzmann not only identified the rifle he identified the scope on it too. (And very accurate). Which was an completely other type than the Carac. scope...

KK