What Are the Correct Questions to Ask About the JFK Assassination?

[David Von Pein]

One such error...will explain why the bullet shown in the evidence photo and known as CE 399 could never have been fired from Oswald's rifle, or any other 6.5mm Carcano.

Bobby just called every single firearms expert who has ever examined Commission Exhibit No. 399 for the United States Government a boob and/or a big fat xxxx (i.e., every firearms expert for both the WC and the HSCA who said that CE399 was positively fired in Carcano Rifle #C2766 "to the exclusion").

Now I've got a much tougher choice to make than I had previously thought in my last post....

Should I believe the many veteran firearms examiners who testified for the WC & HSCA?

Or should I go with Bobby "CE 399 could never have been fired from Oswald's rifle" Prudhomme?

If only these choices weren't so doggone hard. Now I'm gonna be up all night trying to decide.

Edited January 18, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

So, would you like to see some lies Frazier told about the shooting tests he did with C2766? They are just like the one he made with the Walker bullet. Frazier 's own arguments mathematically show him to be full of crap.

[David Von Pein]

But what about all the other "firearms experts" who said 399 was fired positively in Rifle C2766, Bob? Are they all "full of crap" too? How do you go about discrediting each of their independent examinations?

Edited January 18, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

Stick around, Dave, and I will show you. It's a shame the FBI didn't set the IQ bar a little higher for their "experts". A child could follow their mistakes.

P.S. Aren't you going to try to prove me wrong about the Walker bullet, or does Langley's firearms expert have the weekend off?

[David Von Pein]

Aren't you going to try to prove me wrong about the Walker bullet...?

Keep talking, Bob. And I'll keep laughing. It's all you deserve.

Nothing you could say regarding this bullet matter could possibly matter less in the long run.

You're a conspiracy hobbyist. Nothing more.

Edited January 18, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Thomas Graves]

David,

Questions about the "Walker note":

1. Who found the note?

2. Where was the note found?

3. When was the note found?

4. Who translated the note?

5. Did the person who translated the note make any comments about the grammatical quality of the note? Or about the formation of certain characters?

6. Is it odd in your view that the note is not signed or dated?

7. Is it odd in your view that there are no Oswald fingerprints on the note?

8. Did Marina upon first being presented the note by U.S. Government officers acknowledge that she recognized the note?

9. Is it possible in your view that someone other than Oswald prepared the note?

10. How skilled, in your view, was Oswald at speaking Russian? Not very? Highly? Some other degree?

Good questions.

Comments regarding specific questions:

5. Did the person who translated the note make any comments about the grammatical quality of the note?

It's logical to assume that if the grammar in the note was good, the translator wouldn't necessarily have mentioned it, whereas if the grammar was bad, the translator would have said so.

6. Is it odd in your view that the note is not signed or dated?

If the note was written by Oswald, Marina would have recognized the handwriting and known that it had been written by him and put by him in the special place where she (allegedly) found it -- therefore there was no need for his potentially self-incriminating signature. If he indeed was to take a shot at Walker and was either arrested for it or were to go into hiding, Marina would have put "two plus two together" and realized that Oswald had not only written the ominous note but had actually followed through on the dastardly deed alluded to in it, and therefore no potentially self-incriminating date on the letter would have been needed for her to realize that he had written the note about his intentions against Walker. What good would it have done Marina if the note had been signed and/or dated? Should Oswald have signed it "I will love you and Junie forever"? Oswald was known for not dating many missives over the years. If someone forged the note, they could have easily forged Oswald's signature (as it apparently was forged on several other Warren Commission documents and pieces of "evidence") and correctly dated it, as well.

7. Is it odd in your view that there are no Oswald fingerprints on the note?

Excellent point. See this analysis by Gil Jesus: http://www.giljesus.com/Walker/note.htm

(The only thing I disagree with Gil about in his analysis of the note is whether or not Marina could read English-language newspapers well enough to be able to send to the Russian embassy any articles that might appear in the local newspapers about Oswald's shooting of Walker. I believe Marina only pretended to Ruth Paine that she couldn't speak or read English very well. In fact, in her Warren Commission testimony, Ruth Paine volunteers the information that one of her neighbors noticed that Marina's English seemed to improve so dramatically between October, 1963 and January, 1964, that the neighbor was "amazed". https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=38&relPageId=498

But I digress...)

--Tommy

Bumped in the interest of keeping this thread "on topic".

[David Von Pein]

Tommy G.,

Do you think Oswald wrote the Walker note? And do you think LHO shot at Walker?

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy G.,

Do you think Oswald wrote the Walker note? And do you think LHO shot at Walker?

With you, David, I'm gonna have to take a fifth, I mean The Fifth.

It is interesting that seven latent fingerprints were found on the note, but none of them were Marina's or Oswald's...

http://www.giljesus.com/Walker/note.htm

--Tommy

Edited January 18, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[David Von Pein]

Tommy,

It seems to be a common misconception among CTers that every time a person handles a piece of paper, that person MUST leave identifiable fingerprints behind. That's just flat-out wrong.

And I find it interesting that so many people around these parts are so good at asking questions, but they refuse to answer any. (Such as the two I just asked Tommy.)

~shrug~

Edited January 18, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy,

It seems to be a common misconception among CTers that every time a person handles a piece of paper, that person MUST leave identifiable fingerprints behind. That's just flat-out wrong.

I agree, David, but I think it odd that neither Marina's nor Oswald's prints were found on the note. What's the chance of that?

--Tommy

PS I guess Malcolm "Mac" Wallace was just unlucky that one of his fingerprints was found (or planted) on a box in the "sniper's lair".

Edited January 18, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[David Von Pein]

I agree, David, but I think it odd that neither Marina's nor Oswald's prints were found on the note. What's the chance of that?

But the only alternative is to call Marina a bald-faced xxxx when it comes to the topic of the Walker note. Do you want to go down that path?

Edited January 18, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Thomas Graves]

I agree, David, but I think it odd that neither Marina's nor Oswald's prints were found on the note. What's the chance of that?

But the only alternative is to call Marina a bald-faced xxxx when it comes to the topic of the Walker note. Do you want to go down that path?

She only said she found the note.

To answer your question, I don't trust her because, for one thing, I think she spoke and read English a lot better before the assassination than she let on, and for another I think she was pressured by the FBI to say certain things after the assassination and perhaps even before.

Don't you think it odd that neither Marina's nor Oswald's fingerprints were found on the note?

--Tommy

Edited January 18, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[David Von Pein]

Don't you think it odd that neither Marina's nor Oswald's fingerprints were found on the note?

I'd be willing to bet that their partial prints ARE on the note. Just not COMPLETE enough prints to be positively identified as theirs.

You probably know more about it than I do. Were there any "partial" prints found on the note which were deemed useless for identification purposes? (I'll bet there were.)

[Thomas Graves]

Don't you think it odd that neither Marina's nor Oswald's fingerprints were found on the note?

I'd be willing to bet that their partial prints ARE on the note. Just not COMPLETE enough prints to be positively identified as theirs.

You probably know more about it than I do. Were there any "partial" prints found on the note which were deemed useless for identification purposes? (I'll bet there were.)

You're probably right, David. David Atlee Phillip's or E. Howard Hunt's or George DeMohrenschildt's "partials" were probably found on the note.

LOL

--Tommy

Edited January 18, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Mark Knight]

Regarding Mr. Prudhomme's discovery of Mr. Frazier's math error:

I think Mr. Prudhomme has a legitimate point. Whether Mr. Frazier's math was simply careless, or whether he intended to mislead the Warren Commission, should be the correct question.

I don't have the answer to that question. But in light of Mr. Prudhomme's discovery of the math error, Mr. Prudhomme shouldn't be derided as some sort of lunatic, simply because he can perform mathematical operations correctly.

Mr. Prudhomme may have jumped to the conclusion that Mr. Frazier intended to mislead...and for that conclusion, I believe the evidence is insufficient to say. But to say flat-out that Mr. Frazier had NO intention to mislead is also a matter of speculation. So in that respect, I think Mr. Von Pein has also jumped to a conclusion not proven by the evidence.

At this point, we can only guess. Did Mr. Frazier have an agenda? Certainly. Does that prove that he did--or did not--intend to mislead the Warren Commission? The evidence is inconclusive.