Jump to content
The Education Forum

WECHT CONFERENCE WAS OUTSTANDING!


Recommended Posts

"The autopsy protocols of those dying from 6.5 mm bullet wounds to the head follow. These refer to the bullets as .25 caliber, which wasn't quite true. According to Bolt Action Rifles, by Fred de Haas and Wayne Zwoll, "much erroneous information circulated about that "small caliber Jap rifle" during WWII, with many believing its 6.5 mm bullets, which were .263 caliber, to be only .25 caliber. These protocols have been arranged in order of shot distance. For the sake of brevity, references to wounds other than head wounds have been removed."

This information is incorrect. The calibre of all 6.5mm rifles is actually .257 (.25 calibre). The .263" referred to by de Haas and Zwoll is actually the diameter of the bullet. North American .257 calibre rifles shoot a bullet .264" in diameter. The 6.5mm Carcano is unique amongst 6.5mm (.257) rifles in that it fires a bullet .268" in diameter.

Just because someone writes a book does not mean that he knows his butt from his elbow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Okay, Robert, this is the part where you tell us .268 mm bullets are unique among all bullets, and leave entrance wounds not at all like those of .263 bullets. No abrasion collars. No guttering. Just tiny little holes.

Except you're forgetting something. Dr. Olivier made a report on the wound ballistics of the Carcano. In his report he showed one entrance hole. It was a small hole. It was also acknowledged that nine of the 10 bullets he'd tested broke up. This small hole was most obviously the hole created by the one bullet that failed to break up. You see, a number of the other skulls were presented from the side. The entrance holes on these skulls were large, not small.

So, in light of this report, and the report on the Bougainville campaign before it, there is simply no reason to believe the entrance wound for a Carcano bullet which deformed upon the skull would be a small one.

If you want to prove otherwise--and present us any reason to believe the bullet fragments found in Kennedy's head and in the car came from a bullet creating a small wound on the front of Kennedy's head--which went unseen by all but one, who nevertheless insisted that it was NOT the entrance of a bullet--then please do so.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys,if JFK was shot by a 6mm it was probably .25-06 or.243, not an MC. We're wasting valuable time. When they control the collection submission of evidence To the WC where they knew no serious investigation would be done

If Oswald. was a lone nut and Ruby a small time strip club owner, why seal the files for such a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys,if JFK was shot by a 6mm it was probably .25-06 or.243, not an MC. We're wasting valuable time. When they control the collection submission of evidence To the WC where they knew no serious investigation would be done

If Oswald. was a lone nut and Ruby a small time strip club owner, why seal the files for such a long time.

A .243 is not a 6.5mm or .257. This is one of those confusing designations and gets this from its parent calibre, the .308.

The .308 is actually a .30 calibre rifle, shooting the same bullet as the .30-06. As its rifling grooves are .004" deep on each side, .004" + .004" + .300" = .308". The same is true of the .243, which uses a necked down .308 brass cartridge. Its groove and bullet diameter are both .243" while its bore diameter or "calibre" is .237".

Time we have lots of.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was only giving possible examples. I'm fully aware of calibers and their origins. I've been a published writer in the firearms field since the mid70's.

I don't believe any of the official evidence. We have routinely lied to. The reason we know what know from the official record is the sloppiness or stupidity of those in possession of it.

So. We're all going to live forever?

Once those who were alive when JFK was murdered are gone it will all turn to idle speculation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was only giving possible examples. I'm fully aware of calibers and their origins. I've been a published writer in the firearms field since the mid70's.

I don't believe any of the official evidence. We have routinely lied to. The reason we know what know from the official record is the sloppiness or stupidity of those in possession of it.

So. We're all going to live forever?

Once those who were alive when JFK was murdered are gone it will all turn to idle speculation

You're a published writer in the firearms field and you don't know the difference between a .243 and a .25-06?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they were used just as examples not as interchangeable items. Check your egos at the door or we'll never solve this thing.

They could have shot him with any caliber they wanted since the fix was already in. To believe the "evidence" controlled by those with the most to hide is a clear sign of delusion.

As a homicide cop I attended hundreds of gunshot autopsies AND I never saw a rifle entrance wound in the back of the head that did not totally disrupt the facial features. Spending time based on the honesty of the Warren Commission is absolutely ludicrous. This was a homicide that was never competently investigated. I had murders of drug dealers were I preserved the crime scene, excluded all nonessential personnel and worked it hard until the right people were in jail. None of this was done in Dallas.

Evan Marshall

www,stoppingpower.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they were used just as examples not as interchangeable items. Check your egos at the door or we'll never solve this thing.

They could have shot him with any caliber they wanted since the fix was already in. To believe the "evidence" controlled by those with the most to hide is a clear sign of delusion.

As a homicide cop I attended hundreds of gunshot autopsies AND I never saw a rifle entrance wound in the back of the head that did not totally disrupt the facial features. Spending time based on the honesty of the Warren Commission is absolutely ludicrous. This was a homicide that was never competently investigated. I had murders of drug dealers were I preserved the crime scene, excluded all nonessential personnel and worked it hard until the right people were in jail. None of this was done in Dallas.

Evan Marshall

www,stoppingpower.net

Evan, there were a number of police officers and a few ex-cops and private investigators at the conference, and while former NYC prosecutor Robert Tanenbaum gave his talk at the same time mine was scheduled in another room, and I missed what he had to say, I did transcribe his presentation at the 2003 Wecht conference - in which he says "the police are the bedrock of every investigation."

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2013/07/robert-k-tanenbaum-wecht-conference-html

Which you might find illuminating.

As for ballistics and science testing - Oswald was given a number of tests in his cell, including a nitrate test - that he allowed them to do - and even joked about it with the technicians testing him - saying "I know what you're doing, you're checking to see if I fired a gun."

And the tests for his cheeks came out negative, but hands positive, though they said the nitrates on the hands could have come from a source other than firing a pistol.

According to Lisa Pease, the FBI conducted many tests with the MC found on the Sixth Floor, and in every case the cheeks tested positive for nitrates, so they knew he didn't fire that rifle that day.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Lisa Pease, the FBI conducted many tests with the MC found on the Sixth Floor, and in every case the cheeks tested positive for nitrates.

Lisa Pease is wrong. ....

"We directed that experiments be made with the rifle found on Nov. 22 on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, and we also used the same type of ammunition as the cartridge cases found in that building. There were negative reactions on both hands and on the cheek of the FBI agent who fired the assassination weapon. Thus, we had the other side of the coin: A negative reaction from the paraffin test did not prove that a person had not fired a rifle." -- Page 18 of David Belin's 1973 book "November 22, 1963: You Are The Jury"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Lisa Pease, the FBI conducted many tests with the MC found on the Sixth Floor, and in every case the cheeks tested positive for nitrates.

Lisa Pease is wrong. ....

"We directed that experiments be made with the rifle found on Nov. 22 on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, and we also used the same type of ammunition as the cartridge cases found in that building. There were negative reactions on both hands and on the cheek of the FBI agent who fired the assassination weapon. Thus, we had the other side of the coin: A negative reaction from the paraffin test did not prove that a person had not fired a rifle." -- Page 18 of David Belin's 1973 book "November 22, 1963: You Are The Jury"

It's nice to know my work on this has not gone unnoticed, LOL.

Chapter 4d on my website has been the definitive word on this topic for years now. I worked on it for almost a year, so it better be.

The truth is this: you're both right. Sort of.

The paraffin test for nitrates was not entirely accurate, and had many false positives, and negatives. Nitrates are found in a lot of everyday items. This accounts for many of the false positives. It also had some false negatives. These were quite often related to the police waiting too long to perform the test.

It follows then that the negative result for Oswald's cheek is a bit surprising, should Oswald have killed Kennedy. If this negative result came as a consequence of the police taking too long to perform the tests, it only makes sense that the tests on his hands would also have been negative. But they were not.

And that's just a peek inside the room. When one looks further, one finds that, while paraffin tests for nitrates are no longer performed, and no longer considered scientifically valid, the neutron activation analysis of paraffin casts in the search for the specific components of gunshot residue is still considered valid, and admissible in court.

So, were these tests performed?

YES. We weren't supposed to know about them, but they were. The FBI was scared to death these tests would exonerate Oswald, so they opted to keep them secret from the Warren Commission. A loudmouth from the Atomic Energy Commission named Paul Aebersold, however, spilled the beans, and told some people about these tests, and how they could help in the investigation. Word made its way to the Commission. In January, 1964, the FBI finally confessed that, yes, they were in the process of conducting these tests.

There were three parts to the tests.

1. The first part of the test was to have subjects fire Carcano rifles. After a few hours, they would take paraffin casts of the shooter's cheek and hands, perform NAA on these casts, and see if gunshot residue was still apparent. This part was farmed out to Dr. Vincent Guinn, and was paid for by the AEC. I found a government website that sold old reports and was able to purchase a copy of Guinn's report. He concluded that, yes, indeed, gunshot reside is still apparent on paraffin casts hours after a shooting. These are the tests discussed by Weisberg in Post Mortem, and apparently mentioned by Pease. They were not technically FBI tests, although Guinn called the FBI's John Gallagher to give him his results. The FBI never told the WC about these tests.

2. The second part of the test was to have a subject fire the rifle found in the school book depository. This test showed that, yes indeed, Oswald's rifle leaked measurable amounts of gunshot residue.

3. The third part was to test the paraffin casts of Oswald's cheek and hands, to see how much residue could be found.

As, stated, these tests were never supposed to have become public knowledge. Towards the end of the commission, however, Dr. Guinn made a public appearance before his fellow scientists, and spilled the beans that he'd been working for the Warren Commission. Well, the FBI flipped out. They'd already sent Cortlandt Cunningham to testify before the Commission, and tell them the paraffin test for nitrates was unreliable. He'd told them, moreover, that in his personal opinion (note that this is a personal opinion--on which the FBI normally never testifies) a rifle wouldn't leak residue. They thought they'd disposed of this matter. But Guinn opened his mouth. Now, the FBI, Redlich and Eisenberg would need a new strategy to shut down talk about a test being performed that showed Oswald was innocent.

While they were preparing the report for publication, at the very last second, they decided to put Gallagher on the stand, and discuss the tests performed months earlier. His testimony was not quite on the up and up, as his words were word for word the words used in an earlier report he'd written Hoover. He said the tests were inconclusive. He said the test performed on the hand casts suggested Oswald's guilt. And he said the cheek cast had more barium on the outside of the cast, than the inside, and was therefore tainted, and inconclusive.

Well, this last bit sent bells ringing in my head. I contacted the Weisberg Archives, and got copies of the documents regarding these tests Weisberg had received from both the FBI and AEC. Sure enough, there was more barium on the outside of the cast than on the inside. But, much more shocking, there was far less antimony on Oswald's cheek than should have been expected, should he have fired a rifle. In other words, the one part of the test that was not tainted, suggested Oswald's innocence.

No wonder the FBI and WC tried to hide these tests!

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done Pat, I was going to go into the Weisberg material but you did a far better job than I would have.

This incident reflects the problems with taking the material offered by the FBI to the WC strictly at face value, testimony offered into the record often did not quite

contain all elements of the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...