Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

With the Mauser we have both Craig and the detective who once owned a gun shop visibly seeing the metal stamp "Mauser" on the barrel. So, since the police statement was filled out and signed by the detective, we know some of what Craig is saying is credible. And it looks like he could have been murdered as well and made to look like a suicide. That also lends credibility.

So, unless Oswald just lucked out that his friend's green Rambler was passing by at the time, we have what looks like a planned rendezvous and therefore conspiracy.

Gerald Ford lied when he said the mis-identification of the Mauser was a mistake someone made when talking to the media. Truth is it was witnessed and confirmed by two police officers at the scene. Ford should have easily known that since there was a police report on it. Why did Ford lie?

The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:

Shortcut to: http://216.122.129.112/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&topic_id=80283&mesg_id=80283&page=

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "Mauser" business has been blown up to absurd levels by conspiracy theorists since 1963.

The fact is (and always was) that the police just simply goofed on 11/22/63 when multiple officers thought (incorrectly) that the rifle pulled from the box stacks on the sixth floor of the TSBD was a Mauser.

And both Eugene Boone and Seymour Weitzman have stated publicly that they were both in error regarding their respective initial "Mauser" identifications (and these retractions don't even count both Boone's and Weitzman's Warren Commision testimony, wherein they each corrected their initial "Mauser" mistake):

SEYMOUR WEITZMAN (ON CBS-TV IN JUNE 1967) -- "To my sorrow, I looked at it and it looked like a Mauser, which I said it was. But I said the wrong one; because just at a glance, I saw the Mauser action....and, I don't know, it just came out as words it was a German Mauser. Which it wasn't. It's an Italian type gun. But from a glance, it's hard to describe; and that's all I saw, was at a glance. I was mistaken. And it was proven that my statement was a mistake; but it was an honest mistake."

EUGENE BOONE (IN 1986):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Addsk7GpnaA&p=974A39F551630434

Plus, I think it's also worth noting that the initial "Mauser" error was corrected in the media just a little more than 24 hours after the assassination, because I have the video of CBS-TV's Walter Cronkite announcing to the world on the afternoon of November 23rd that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was not a Mauser at all, but instead it was an Italian Mannlicher-Carcano (or, to use Cronkite's hilarious mispronunciation at the 4-minute mark of the video below -- a "Mann-lisher Car-CHANT-o"):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrtLLQpA4uU&p=364F4A4B1BBC9DC6

And, btw, Bernice, there is no date on this article at all -- unless the "_68.jpg" at the tail end of your image file is supposed to signify the date--as in "1968". Is that the date you're talking about? And I have no idea where the SECOND date notation would be on that article. ~shrug~

RogerCraigInterview.jpg

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "Mauser" business has been blown up to absurd levels by conspiracy theorists since 1963.

The fact is (and always was) that the police just simply goofed on 11/22/63 when multiple officers thought (incorrectly) that the rifle pulled from the box stacks on the sixth floor of the TSBD was a Mauser.

And both Eugene Boone and Seymour Weitzman have stated publicly that they were both in error regarding their respective initial "Mauser" identifications (and these retractions don't even count both Boone's and Weitzman's Warren Commision testimony, wherein they each corrected their initial "Mauser" mistake):

SEYMOUR WEITZMAN (ON CBS-TV IN JUNE 1967) -- "To my sorrow, I looked at it and it looked like a Mauser, which I said it was. But I said the wrong one; because just at a glance, I saw the Mauser action....and, I don't know, it just came out as words it was a German Mauser. Which it wasn't. It's an Italian type gun. But from a glance, it's hard to describe; and that's all I saw, was at a glance. I was mistaken. And it was proven that my statement was a mistake; but it was an honest mistake."

EUGENE BOONE (IN 1986):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Addsk7GpnaA&p=974A39F551630434

Plus, I think it's also worth noting that the initial "Mauser" error was corrected in the media just a little more than 24 hours after the assassination, because I have the video of CBS-TV's Walter Cronkite announcing to the world on the afternoon of November 23rd that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was not a Mauser at all, but instead it was an Italian Mannlicher-Carcano (or, to use Cronkite's hilarious mispronunciation at the 4-minute mark of the video below -- a "Mann-lisher Car-CHANT-o"):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrtLLQpA4uU&p=364F4A4B1BBC9DC6

And, btw, Bernice, there is no date on this article at all -- unless the "_68.jpg" at the tail end of your image file is supposed to signify the date--as in "1968". Is that the date you're talking about? And I have no idea where the SECOND date notation would be on that article. ~shrug~

RogerCraigInterview.jpg

Dave

Please tell me you are not playing the old "DUMB OLE DPD" card are you serious?.

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ian, it's more like the "DUMB OL' SHERIFF'S DEPT." card, since Boone and Weitzman were with the Dallas County Sheriff's Office.

But, yeah, Fritz was DPD, and he apparently thought the rifle was initially a Mauser too.

But none of the officers were allowed to make an honest mistake, right Ian? Every error HAS to be of a sinister nature, right?

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites

What the evidence and testimony actually showed

The two Sheriff's Deputies who found a rifle on the sixth floor of the Texas

School Book Depository, and a highly decorated deputy who saw it before it was

taken from the floor, all identified it as a "7.65 mm Mauser". Subsequent documents

and affidavits filed by these deputies continued to identify it in that same

manner (Commission Exhibit Decker 5323). CIA documents still identified it as a

"Mauser", four days later. One of the officers, decorated Deputy Sheriff, Roger

Craig, continued to insist that this identification was correct, even after his testimony

before the Warren Commission. He maintained that the gun he saw had

the word "MAUSER" stamped on the barrel. Craig also told researchers that his

Warren Commission testimony had been altered in fourteen different places by

Warren Commission counsel David Belin, so that it appears to be "bland" in the

26 volumes [of Warren Commission).

Another of the deputies in question, Constable Seymour Weitzman, had also

sold rifles while working for many years in a sporting goods store, and therefore

had a vast amount of experience in both handling and identifying them. Police

officers are trained to properly observe and notate evidence. In fact, their observations

are more readily accepted in a court of law than those of most other witnesses.

The Warren Commission Report attempts to slide past this “problem”

with the weapon by saying that the deputies only had a “glance” at the weapon.

The tape recording of a news broadcast of 22 November 1963 on Dallas radio

station K-BOX said (CE-304):

Sheriff’s Deputies identify the rifle as a seven point sixty-five Mauser, a Germanmade

Army rifle with a telescopic sight. It had one shell in the chamber. Three

spent shells were found nearby.

Additionally, in his book On the Trail of the Assassins, Jim Garrison claims to

have viewed a Dallas TV newsreel from that day, which he stated shows a police

officer bringing another rifle down the fire escape from the roof. Five separate

documents with descriptions of the rifle originally found on the sixth floor of the

Texas School Book Depository were missing from the FBI files on the President’s

assassination when presented to the Warren Commission. Those documents

were:

1. Dallas Police Department Lt. Carl Day’s dictated memorandum on the

weapon;

2. Day’s description to the FBI’s Special Agent Bardwell Odum;

3. Odum’s subsequent description, which was broadcast over FBI radio;

4. Constable Weitzman’s original report to the FBI; and

5. Dallas Police Department Detective C. N. Dhority’s written report.

The legal “chain of possession” of CE-139 was never properly established. The

officers who found a gun should have either marked it for identification purposes

immediately, or watched as the detective who removed it did so. Neither

identification procedure took place at the scene. It appears that this was finally

done some six hours later, at Dallas Police Department Headquarters, after the

found weapon had passed through countless other hands, and had allegedly lain

in the evidence room for several hours.

What chain of possession that existed after that was again broken when the rifle

was taken to FBI Headquarters in Washington, DC, by FBI Special Agent Vincent

Drain on the night of 22 November 1963, unaccompanied by any officer of

the Dallas Police Department. In 1963, even though threatening the President

was a federal crime, the assassination of a President was not. It was merely considered

an all-too-common, local murder. This meant that the FBI had no jurisdiction

whatsoever in the case. If the weapon needed to be sent to an FBI lab for

analysis, it needed to be accompanied by a Dallas officer to maintain the legal

“chain of possession”. The reasons behind this continuous improper handling of

such vital evidence, in such a high profile case, by highly trained local and federal

officers, are very suspicious. This type of handling would have been questionable

enough for the weapon to have been excluded from the evidence in any

trial of Lee Harvey Oswald. Therefore, how fortunate for them that there was no trial.

http://www.assassina.../v3n2dolmar.pdf

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to post
Share on other sites
David my error, you are correct on the one newspaper article; the 68 means 1968 for the date.

Thank you, Bernice.

Since my last post about that Craig article, I've found out a little more about it via two sources -- Vincent Bugliosi's book and John McAdams' website. The latter has an excellent article all about Roger Craig's lies (and the McAdams page is something I have read before, but I had forgotten all about it when this topic came up here at this forum).

I've now discovered the L.A. Free Press interview with Craig (and Penn Jones) occurred in March of 1968, six years before Craig added his "7.65 Mauser stamped on the barrel" lie to his already-lengthy list of lies.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/craig.htm

http://img36.imageshack.us/i/craigandjonespage10.jpg/

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites
David my error, you are correct on the one newspaper article; the 68 means 1968 for the date.

Thank you, Bernice.

Since my last post about that Craig article, I've found out a little more about it via two sources -- Vincent Bugliosi's book and John McAdams' website. The latter has an excellent article all about Roger Craig's lies (and the McAdams page is something I have read before, but I had forgotten all about it when this topic came up here at this forum).

I've now discovered the L.A. Free Press interview with Craig (and Penn Jones) occurred in March of 1968, six years before Craig added his "7.65 Mauser stamped on the barrel" lie to his already-lengthy list of lies.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/craig.htm

http://img36.imagesh...onespage10.jpg/

THANKS for the information i will check into it at penn's site and files to see if any other info comes to light.. do you really think everything that craig stated were lies, in your opinion, do you not believe his life after that day in november, was not a terrible tragic turn and that he was in fear for his life as time went on...which was also acknowledged by others that knew him b..

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernice,

Why on Earth would anyone want to kill Roger Craig AFTER he had already spilled his guts about various things that seem to lead toward "conspiracy" in the case?

The same logical question needs to be asked about Lee Bowers too? Why wouldn't "they" have knocked off Bowers BEFORE he was filmed by Mark Lane spilling his guts in the movie version of "Rush To Judgment"?

It makes no sense to let these witnesses live for years and years -- and in the case of both Craig and Bowers, to let them go in front of cameras and preserve their tales on film and videotape.

"They" can bump off the President, with tons of Secret Service and cops all around, but they can't manage to bump off unprotected witnesses like Lee Bowers and Roger Craig until YEARS after the assassination?

That's crazy.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites

ALSO 3 DEPUTY SHERIFFS SEYMOUR WEITZMAN: found a small piece of skull in

the

plaza---7H107;

JACK FAULKNER: "No More Silence" by Larry Sneed (1998), pp.

215-223+photos---[p.216] "As we were crossing Elm Street, [A.D.]

McCurley picked up a

white piece of bone near the north curb. He asked me, "Do you suppose

that could be part of

his skull?" I said, "There's no blood on it," and he put it down. Later,

we got to thinking, and

somebody said your skull doesn't necessarily have to be touching

something that's bloody. We

went back and looked for it later but never found it. To this day, I

believe it was a piece of John

Kennedy's skull."

bbbbbBBBBBhttp://127.0.0.1:4664/cache?event_id=83734&schema_id=4&q=weitzman&s=n9igNxXw_Ux1FxmYK0MD-KPd4hk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the low down:

weitzman

Go back to previous topicForum nameJFK Assassination ResearchTopic subjectEmails from someone who knew Seymour WeitzmanTopic URLhttp://1078567.sites.myregisteredsite.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&topic_id=5727357273, Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Denis Morissette, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

According to a woman who contacted me, Weitzman would have kept the piece of bone he found in Dealey Plaza.

I obtained this person's permission to post her emails here, and even invited her to join the forum.

EMAIL 1

I knew my "Uncle Sy" from at least 1961 to 1971. He was my fathers best friend. My father was DCDS and was in county radio room most of that day with Sheriff Decker. All I know of Uncle Sy before that is his work in retail garment business, and his problems due to tourture in Japanese prison camp during WWII. He suffer from what were explained to me as "blackouts" (akin to alcoholic blackouts). He was probably hospitalized at the end of his interment by the V.A., but I am not sure. He was a "pilot's gunner", but I don't recall if it was a B-17 or B-29. Contrary to all that has been written or said He did NOT mis-identify the rifle. He was adament (in Private) that the gun he found was a German Mauser. He was the first to see the gun, and identified it by the scope. I know he recanted later and said he must have been mistaken, but in private, around people he trusted, he always said it was definitely as Mauser. WHY DID HE CHANGE HIS STORY??? A day or two after the assassination he was fired from the Constable Department. I was only 9 years old when all this happened, and I knew from the things I heard and the attitudes of Uncle Sy, my father and other close friends of theirs, something was very wrong. I spent as much time in Uncle Sy's house as I did my own and the atmosphere changed dramaticly. To me he was a great man, always happy, outgoing, joking,and very loving. Afterwards the house became very quiet, dark, dismal. He went back into retail shortly there after. In 1968 he and my father parted company,I think because he sided with my mother during my parents divorce, but I'm not sure. The next and last time I saw him was in 1970 or 71 in Houston. When we arrived at his apartment, it was just like the old days. Everyone was happy and glad to have the chance to catch up with each other. When the subject of the assassination came up that dark atmosphere returned. My father made me leave the building, something that had never happened before. I was always privy to conversations about every thing. I believe by then they were both worried about people who were connected to the assassination dying before there time. But he was very much sane. And he still had the piece of JFK's skull. He never gave it to a man at the scene like he said in public. He was very much sane, but very scared to state the truth in public ever again. I never saw him again, but have thought of him almost daily all my life. I loved him as if he were my father. I never saw any signs of mental illness. Infact, he was a brilliant man, who was a success in everything he did. But something or someone put too much pressure on him in the days after the assassination and it took its toll. Something broke a beautiful, wonderful soul.

=========================================================

From Denis: I then asked her who could have that piece of bone.

================================================================

EMAIL 2

Sorry, No. I don't know who claimed his estate or who took care of his belongings when he was put into the V.A. hospital. He had a sister, and two childre by his first wife. He had not seen his children since they were babies. then around the time of the assassination he was reunited with them. His son, Seymour Weitzman Jr. was in the Marine Corp at the time and I don't remember if he went to Viet Nam and if he did if he survived it. I don't remember his daughter's name, his sister was named Ester but I don't rember her married name, only that her husband was named Billy.He had a brother, Ben, who owned a bicycle shop in Dallas. His second wife, Aunt Jean, Passed away in 1970 I believe, and MaMa had passed sometime between 1968 and 1971. As I said , that day in late 1970 or early 1971 was the last day I ever saw him. He was living alone in a small apartment in Houston. He gave me some jewelry of Aunt Jean's, but what happened to the rest of his belongings, I don't know . I wish I did. None of his family was mentioned during that visit (with the exception of his late wife and mother). I know nothing of the circumstances of him going into the V.A. hospital later. I wish I did. After 1972 I was living in Arkansas and tried to reach him, but he always had an unlisted phone and we didn't have computers then. If the state was awarded his estate someone probably threw it out not knowing what it was. I don't know if his children or siblings would even know what it was if they came across it. I hope they knew, but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't. I have probably not been of any help to you, but when I started reading about Uncle Sy and the things people have been saying about him all this time I had to speak out. None of these other people knew him. None of these other people were there. Has no one else that knew him ever answered your inquiery?? He was a man worth defending.

====================================================

EMAIL 3

You can post as you wish, but for know I would only like to correspond with you. I may join the board later. People will probably think I'm a nut. I assure you what I say is the truth. My father died several years ago of cancer and can not back me up. But as he had saftey concerns too, I'm not sure he would any way. Does this sound nutty? As I said I was privy to many conversations among law enforcment people in Dallas at the time. I was the only child in a room of adults sitting quietly to the side listening. Dallas knew of assassination threats before JFK came to town. That's a given. On the day of the assassination I was a 5th grader at Victor H. Hexter Elementary. My teacher, Mrs.Gibson, was at the door of the classroom telling each student as we came in from recess about the event. When she told me, I said, "Oh,that. I knew that was going to happen." She looked at me in disbelief as I went on about my day like nothing happened. It was no surprise to me. I can't remember what I had heard watching all those men sitting around our kitchen table drinking coffee. Much of it was so ordinary to me I disregarded it. But I knew something was going to happen. Another nutty conection. Before my father was a cop he worked at the Holiday Inn - Love Field. There was a man who came there alot , mostly to eat and enjoy the club that was there. I hung around the pool alot and became friends with the man who would sit around the pool in a suit and tie talking to other men in suits and ties. He became another "Uncle" of mine, being a friend of my fathers. He was my "Uncle Jack". He didn't have to sneak into the DPD garage to get Oswald. He walked in and out at will. His clubs were filled with officers on and off duty. They all knew him. He made friends on both sides of the law because he was an unimportant man who wanted desperately to be important. Now, the nuttiest thing of all . In 1977 my father came to visit me and my new family. I asked him to tell my new husband about the assassination. My husband didn't believe me when I told him. He believed my father. That is the first time my father voiced his concerns about the safety of people involved. My father was as right wing as they come and never went against the government. What they said was the truth as far as he was concerned was the truth. But first came the incident with Uncle Sy losing his job and being in fear, then my father said something else happened. About two weeks after the assassination, my father and other officers were ordered to Love Field. When they got there they were told to stand in a perimeter guard ,(I think 100 ft.) around a large plane. My father said it was either Air Force 1 or 2. He wasn't sure which. There were other guards with rifles directly under the plane. My father and the other officers were told to fan out on three sides of the plane ( while something or someone was being loaded on the other side). They were told if they turned around during their assignment they would be shot (presumably by the men under the plane). The plane was loaded without incident, the men were dismissed knowing not to speak of it. My father and I had many conversations about the assassination, but it took until 1977 for him to tell me this. I don't know if I would believe me either. Thanks for listening

10412.jpg

57286, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Steve Thomas, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Denis,

>I obtained this person's permission to post her emails here,

>and even invited her to join the forum.

Very interesting.

Steve Thomas

57289, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Bruce Kelly, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

The accuracy of what is reported by this correspondent could be checked on some of the facts asserted. For example, "A day or two after the assassination he was fired from the Constable Department." Is this true?

Please note, even if statements she writes are not accurate, this does NOT mean that she is lying or making things up. She may have been told the inaccurate information, or years later she may not be remembering it quite accurately.

But if those with knowledge can assess some of the particular statements, this gives some indication of the overall accuracy.

Bruce

57337, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Steve Thomas, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Bruce,

>The accuracy of what is reported by this correspondent could

>be checked on some of the facts asserted. For example, "A day

>or two after the assassination he was fired from the Constable

>Department." Is this true?

>Bruce

This is what he told the Warren Commission on April 1, 1964:

Mr. BALL - Will you state your name?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Seymour Weitzman.

Mr. BALL - What is your occupation?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Deputy constable, Dallas County.

"At the end of 1960, I closed up all the stores, retired from the discount operation and went to work for Robie Love in Dallas County, precinct 1.

Mr. BALL - You've been there ever since as deputy constable?

Mr. WEITZMAN - That's right. "

Steve Thomas

57300, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Denis Morissette, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

I'd like to know who her father was. I have not obtained a response yet.

57307, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by James Richards, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Denis,

Most interesting indeed.

Here are some names that might be of help or that might jog distant memories for your contact.

Weitzman's father was named Harry, had a brother named Ben and a sister Esther Mae. Two uncles, Lyn and Leo. There was also a David Weitzman in the family but I do not know what the relationship was there.

Seymour achieved the rank of Staff Sergeant in the Army Air Force and did his training at Fort Sill and at Will Rogers Field in Oklahoma.

This photo below shows Weitzman in 1942.

FWIW.

James

10413.jpg

57311, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Denis Morissette, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Thanks. I'll tell her that we have a photo of Seymour on this board.

87134, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Bob Ringler, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

This is so interesting I think it deserves to be brought back to our minds.

Apparently, weitzman was fired a few days after the assassination.

87159, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Dave Ciardello, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Hi Dennis!

Those emails remind me of two individuals: Bonnie Ray Williams and Eugene Boone. I believe i already posted here a few years ago my encounters with people who were very close personal friends with both men.

When i worked for Texas Instruments(84-95), i worked with a guy who always talked about a really great guy named "Gene". He was considered

family for mamy years(the guy's father and "Gene" were like brothers).

Well one night i brought in a JFK assassination book (maybe "The Last Investigation")and the co-worker told me that the "Gene" he was always talking about was non other than Eugene "Gene" Boone! I got really excited and asked him if he could help me arrange an interview with "Gene" and he said it was out of the question. He told me that "Gene" was a fun loving really outgoing kind of person(at least with his father and other family members). But one topic that changed all that in an instant were the events(as they related to him)surrounding the JFK assassination. He would absolutely refuse to talk about it no matter how many times they would ask him. His whole demeanor would change and everyone knew that he was extremely uncomfortable when the topic was mentioned. Finally, on only one occasion he brokedown and made only one comment to them(as of 1989 that i am aware of). He stated that the rifle introduced to the world as the murder weapon that was used to kill JFK was NOT the rifle he discovered on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository building on November 22nd, 1963.

My other encounter was with a lady who also worked at Texas Instruments at the same time i was employed there. She had grown up with Bonnie Ray Williams (she also knew Harold Norman)and he was like a big brother to her. She was reminiscing about how they were always together and how Bonnie was very outgoing and a very jolly kind of guy. But that all changed forever when he testified before the Warren Commission. He became introverted and avoided her and others. She pleaded with him to tell her what was wrong that he wasn't the same Bonnie Ray Williams that she grew up with and wanted to help him. He

told her that on 11/22/63, the three of them (Williams, Norman, and Jarman) all heard shots and believed they were coming from somewhere

west of the Texas School Book Depository building and ran to the west end of the 5th floor and observed two men(one with a rifle) running away from the picket fence across the railroad tracks. They decided not to mention it to the police because the police had (at that point in time)decided that the (sole)source of the shots was "Oswald's" window on the 6th floor and being black in the sixties in the deep south, they weren't about to contradict the police. Bonnie said of his testimony before the Warren Commission that he gave them what they wanted(whatever that was). This lady seemed credible to me. I tried for weeks to gain her trust so she would open up to me and talk. Her response to me was always the same, "I don't want to die". She also had a friend who worked at the Carousel Club who was murdered shortly after the assassination. A fellow co-worker told me about this lady and that she knew alot about the assassination but was afraid to talk about it with others.

Those emails you posted reminded me of two men who were most deeply

affected by their experiences of November 22nd, 1963 particuliarly

Bonnie Ray Williams. I truely believe that Seymour Weitzman was another who was experiencing something related to the JFK assassination that deeply troubled him.

Thanks for sharing those emails with us Dennis!

Dave Ciardello

87196, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Miles Scull, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Harold Norman, on June 15, 1994, told Gary Shaw that he was afraid to tell Shaw the real story of what happened, but would; that his running to the west window was part of that story.

Norman died on September 17, 1994, before he could tell Shaw what actually happened.

Seems to be a pattern here.

87163, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Debra Conway, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Dennis,

Thank you so much for sharing the emails with us on this forum. Please extend my gratitude to Mr. Weitzman's niece. There are so many witnesses who have admitted they were threatened or felt threatened, it is a shame only their families may know the truth of their experiences.

Best,

Debra

87164, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Phil Dragoo, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

Someone involved with Seymour Weitzman in the discovery and identification of the weapon as a 7.65 Mauser was Roger Craig whose nephew Jerry Craig posts as a forum member beginning on page 2 of this thread:

These two members of the Dallas County Sheriff's Department are examples of the dark side of the official orthodoxy, enforcement through threats and murderous violence.

87166, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Denis Morissette, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

>Dennis,

>

>Thank you so much for sharing the emails with us on this

>forum. Please extend my gratitude to Mr. Weitzman's niece.

>There are so many witnesses who have admitted they were

>threatened or felt threatened, it is a shame only their

>families may know the truth of their experiences.

>

>Best,

>

>Debra

Thanks for everyone who commented on this thread.

The original post dated a little more than three years ago. ;-) Maybe I can try to re-communicate with this lady?

87185, RE: Emails from someone who knew Seymour Weitzman

Posted by Bob Ringler, Wed Dec-31-69 05:00 PM

According to weitzmans 1964 testimony to Mr.Ball weitzman still worked for the Dallas Sherrif Department. But the first email says he was fired 2 day after the assassination. How do we resolve this?

Mr. BALL - Mr. Weitzman, I'm Joe Ball and this is Lillian Johnson, the court reporter. Will you please stand and raise your right hand?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Do you solemnly swear the testimony you will give before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. WEITZMAN - I do.

Mr. BALL - Will you state your name?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Seymour Weitzman.

Mr. BALL - What is your occupation?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Deputy constable, Dallas County.

Mr. BALL - What is the location of your place of business?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Precinct I which is the old courthouse, third floor, room 351.

Mr. BALL - Where were you born?

From the email above

EMAIL 1

...A day or two after the assassination he was fired from the Constable Department. I was only 9 years old when all this happened,

http://www.jfklancer..._id=57273&page=

b

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernice,

Why on Earth would anyone want to kill Roger Craig AFTER he had already spilled his guts about various things that seem to lead toward "conspiracy" in the case?

The same logical question needs to be asked about Lee Bowers too? Why wouldn't "they" have knocked off Bowers BEFORE he was filmed by Mark Lane spilling his guts in the movie version of "Rush To Judgment"?

It makes no sense to let these witnesses live for years and years -- and in the case of both Craig and Bowers, to let them go in front of cameras and preserve their tales on film and videotape.

"They" can bump off the President, with tons of Secret Service and cops all around, but they can't manage to bump off unprotected witnesses like Lee Bowers and Roger Craig until YEARS after the assassination?

That's crazy.

well he was writing the manuscript, that i believe at the time was known about, and he would not apparently, shut up as he had been told to, especially, whomever were shaken up after he was in contact with Garrison, which in the end seems to have resulted in his firing, why do so if what he was saying, was not true, after all he had been awarded the best there were two years i believe and all are to buy into the fact that he overnight turned into a clutz officer, that dog don't hunt, perhaps it took time to finally get him,as he had been in the military and a trained policeman, and was more wise in regard to such things as the ordinary citizen,he would know and was wise to what could go on behind the scenes and did and does, to this day, and i imagine they also have their own clutzes within..who simply goof a job, and therefore must try try again, .if there was nothing to it, then why such as his wife , that he was separated from, believe that she was being followed..??..and was possibly in danger, ?? after all they could kill many if and when if all goes according to hoyle, but they whomever cannot , could not bump them all off at once.. that would be way too obvious,which became so in time, anyway with some witnesses, but one at a time seems to have been the scenario, but by creating different situations of death , imo anyone who thinks after all this time, today,with all the findings that their government has released and been found out about, that the u.s government has not and had it's behind the scenes, death squads or whatever one wants to call them, which has been uncovered and is available in documented government releases, perhaps ought to wake up some...and not be so naive unless they cannot survive in their make believe world believing that their government, cannot be lilly white..........b

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...