Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Most Important Error the FBI told the Warren Commission about the Rifle


Recommended Posts

Tom Neal @ post #57:

The photo of Oswald firing an M-1 -- he would have had to clean this weapon after firing, I believe. And would have had to be able to disassemble and re-assemble the M-1 blindfolded.

In the military, one learns respect for weapons. In Viet Nam, for example, your best friend was your rifle. You took good care of it.

Yet the alleged murder rifle recovered from the TSBD was corroded. Not just worn, but corroded. That means its owner didn't clean it after each firing. Which is what any American soldier, EM or officer, is taught to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 282
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Is it established with certainty that Klein's mounted a scope on the rifle alleged to be the murder weapon?

Just a question.

John,

I have a vivid memory of reading that when the FBI ordered a number of "Oswald" rifles with scopes for testing purposes, Klein's called back to ask them "how" they wanted the scopes mounted. They replied, 'the same way you mounted the scope on the "Oswald rifle", of course. Klein's technician responded that although they do mount scopes, they had never mounted one on that type of rifle. As I recall, this fellow did all of Klein's scope mounting, and he was not an actual gunsmith.

Unfortunately, I do not recall where I read this, but it was reported by someone who is well known in the JFK assasination community as a reliable source. If you'd like I can attempt to track down the source.

Tom

Why would the FBI have to tell Klein's where to mount the scope if Klein's normally mounted scopes on these rifles ?

Malcolm,

If you re-read the post, the FBI ordered Carcano 91/38 rifles and they wanted scopes mounted. The tech that mounts scopes for Kleins said they don't mount scopes on that rifle - meaning a 91-38. They do however, mount them on other models, such as the one in the advertisement that the WC decided Oswald had used to place his order.

As Robert says, they could only mount them one way - the same way they did on the OTHER rifles they sell. So why did they ask? We don't know precisely what was said to Klein's when they placed the order, but (presuming Klein's actually did ask the Feds) they must have had some reason to request mounting instructions. I don't recall exactly when the scope was described as "mounted for a left-handed shooter," but I believe that was what the FBI inventory stated. Purely speculation on my part, but suppose the Feds requested 91-38s with the scopes "mounted for a left-handed shooter?"

This implies something different than the normal mounting, and the Tech may have thought, as I would, how do you mount THIS scope for a left-handed shooter? So he called to confirm what they wanted.

Again, just speculation on my part,

Tom

Interesting speculation, Tom, and one that never occurred to me before. As we have seen, the experts at the FBI might not have been as expert as we were told, and someone might have thought the side mounted scope on the Carcano was mounted that way for a left handed shooter.

Imagine the confusion that the Tech at Klein's must have experienced when the FBI put in their request!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Neal @ post #57:

The photo of Oswald firing an M-1 -- he would have had to clean this weapon after firing, I believe. And would have had to be able to disassemble and re-assemble the M-1 blindfolded.

In the military, one learns respect for weapons. In Viet Nam, for example, your best friend was your rifle. You took good care of it.

Yet the alleged murder rifle recovered from the TSBD was corroded. Not just worn, but corroded. That means its owner didn't clean it after each firing. Which is what any American soldier, EM or officer, is taught to do.

Hi Jon

This is one of those things where it was obvious the interior of the barrel was corroded, but not obvious exactly when the corrosion took place. C2766 was manufactured in 1940 and likely used for most of the Second World War. Being a soldier's rifle, and spending most of its war life outdoor in the elements, it may not have received the proper care a rifle needs. After the war, Italy completely abandoned the Carcano in favour of the American M1 Garand, so it can be assumed C2766 went into storage. How good that storage was, no one knows. Suffice it to say, though, that C2766 may have suffered the majority of its barrel corrosion prior to 1950. Or, the barrel may not be corroded from rust at all. It may be corroded simply from having been in many battles and having many thousands of rounds fired through it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert,

My point is that Oswald was trained as a marine to respect his rifle. That was ingrained in basic training. Deeply. Respect for one's rifle is what kept one alive.

The alleged murder weapon was given no respect by the person who had possession of it on and immediately preceding November 22, 1963.

Oswald, having been trained as a marine, would have taken care of the rifle. Good care. That's how he was indoctrinated.

Ergo, that rifle was not possessed by Oswald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing a soldier (marine or otherwise) would not do is leave a live cartridge in the chamber of a rifle. That is one very big taboo not tolerated at all by range masters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it established with certainty that Klein's mounted a scope on the rifle alleged to be the murder weapon?

Just a question.

John,

I have a vivid memory of reading that when the FBI ordered a number of "Oswald" rifles with scopes for testing purposes, Klein's called back to ask them "how" they wanted the scopes mounted. They replied, 'the same way you mounted the scope on the "Oswald rifle", of course. Klein's technician responded that although they do mount scopes, they had never mounted one on that type of rifle. As I recall, this fellow did all of Klein's scope mounting, and he was not an actual gunsmith.

Unfortunately, I do not recall where I read this, but it was reported by someone who is well known in the JFK assasination community as a reliable source. If you'd like I can attempt to track down the source.

Tom

Hi Tom

I recall reading the same thing. Unfortunately, it does not make a lot of sense, from the viewpoint of the scope installer at Klein's.

The truth of the matter is this, all models of Carcano rifles, be they long rifles, short rifles, carbines, 6.5mm or 7.35mm, have the identical receivers, bolts and chambers on them, and fire the identical brass cartridge. In the case of the 7.35mm calibre short rifle, the neck of the cartridge is opened up for the wider bullet, and the case length trimmed back by 1 mm but, other than that, it is the same cartridge.

If Klein's had installed scopes on carbines, they would mount in the exact same way on C2766, which was a short rifle.

Hi Robert,

As I replied to Malcolm in an earlier post, I have no idea why they would ask. I couldn't agree with you more that there is only one way to mount the scope. But:

TO RE-QUOTE FROM MY REPLY TO MALCOLM: We don't know precisely what was said to Klein's when they placed the order, but (presuming Klein's actually did ask the Feds) they must have had some reason to request mounting instructions. I don't recall exactly when the scope was described as "mounted for a left-handed shooter," but I believe that was what the FBI inventory stated. If true, then they had thought that, or the Dallas PD did, from pretty much assassination day. Purely speculation on my part, but due to the above, suppose the Feds requested 91-38s with the scopes "mounted for a left-handed shooter?"

This implies something different than the normal mounting, and the Tech may have thought, as I would, how do you mount THIS scope for a left-handed shooter? So he called to confirm what they wanted.

Again, just speculation on my part,

Tom

Did someone get confused over the "left handed shooter"? i.e. The scope on C2766 had a mount that was affixed to the left hand side of the rifle and, as I understand it, the scope itself was offset to the left - did this cause some confusion and someone thought that, due to the way the scope was mounted, it was designed for a left handed shooter whereas, in reality, it was the only way to mount the scope on this type of weapon in order to allow the bolt to be operated properly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it established with certainty that Klein's mounted a scope on the rifle alleged to be the murder weapon?

Just a question.

John,

I have a vivid memory of reading that when the FBI ordered a number of "Oswald" rifles with scopes for testing purposes, Klein's called back to ask them "how" they wanted the scopes mounted. They replied, 'the same way you mounted the scope on the "Oswald rifle", of course. Klein's technician responded that although they do mount scopes, they had never mounted one on that type of rifle. As I recall, this fellow did all of Klein's scope mounting, and he was not an actual gunsmith.

Unfortunately, I do not recall where I read this, but it was reported by someone who is well known in the JFK assasination community as a reliable source. If you'd like I can attempt to track down the source.

Tom

Hi Tom

I recall reading the same thing. Unfortunately, it does not make a lot of sense, from the viewpoint of the scope installer at Klein's.

The truth of the matter is this, all models of Carcano rifles, be they long rifles, short rifles, carbines, 6.5mm or 7.35mm, have the identical receivers, bolts and chambers on them, and fire the identical brass cartridge. In the case of the 7.35mm calibre short rifle, the neck of the cartridge is opened up for the wider bullet, and the case length trimmed back by 1 mm but, other than that, it is the same cartridge.

If Klein's had installed scopes on carbines, they would mount in the exact same way on C2766, which was a short rifle.

Hi Robert,

As I replied to Malcolm in an earlier post, I have no idea why they would ask. I couldn't agree with you more that there is only one way to mount the scope. But:

TO RE-QUOTE FROM MY REPLY TO MALCOLM: We don't know precisely what was said to Klein's when they placed the order, but (presuming Klein's actually did ask the Feds) they must have had some reason to request mounting instructions. I don't recall exactly when the scope was described as "mounted for a left-handed shooter," but I believe that was what the FBI inventory stated. If true, then they had thought that, or the Dallas PD did, from pretty much assassination day. Purely speculation on my part, but due to the above, suppose the Feds requested 91-38s with the scopes "mounted for a left-handed shooter?"

This implies something different than the normal mounting, and the Tech may have thought, as I would, how do you mount THIS scope for a left-handed shooter? So he called to confirm what they wanted.

Again, just speculation on my part,

Tom

Did someone get confused over the "left handed shooter"? i.e. The scope on C2766 had a mount that was affixed to the left hand side of the rifle and, as I understand it, the scope itself was offset to the left - did this cause some confusion and someone thought that, due to the way the scope was mounted, it was designed for a left handed shooter whereas, in reality, it was the only way to mount the scope on this type of weapon in order to allow the bolt to be operated properly?

That's the way it seems to be, Ian. This should also cast a little doubt over some of the "experts" who testified to the WC.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL Chris, you must have really done some digging, in order to come up with the 6.5x50mm Carcano Type "I" made for the Japanese Navy. This was a fairly limited production model that very few people today have even heard of. As the article you linked to states, It was basically the standard Carcano receiver and bolt, mated to a barrel chambered for the Arisaka 6.5x50mm cartridge.

Interestingly, the bullet loaded into this cartridge was almost identical to the Carcano bullet. Both weighed 160-162 grains, both were round nosed and both were virtually identical in length. The main difference was the Arisaka 6.5mm bullet was .264" in diameter, as were most 6.5mm bullets, while the Carcano bullet was .268" in diameter, although there is a great deal of evidence showing the 6.5mm Carcano cartridges made by the Western Cartridge Co. (Oswald's alleged cartridges) were loaded with bullets only .264" in diameter.

While there were small differences, even the brass casings were very similar.

6.5x50mm%20Arisaka1.gif

cd65x52carcano.jpg

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it does, Chris.

Carcano M91 Production Information Type Bolt-Action Rifle

Technical Specifications

Total length 129 cm

Barrel length 78 cm

Empty weight 3.8 kg

Action Bolt Action

Caliber 6.5x52mm Mannlicher-Carcano

Magazine capacity 6-round en bloc clip

Range 2,000 m

RPM 12 rpm

http://world-war-2.wikia.com/wiki/Carcano_M91

The 6.5x50mm Type "I" was, for all intents of purpose, an M91 Carcano long rifle. Only the magazine, chamber and sights were changed. Some small modifications were made to the stock, as well, which can be seen below.

01-Carcano-M1891-1024x175.jpg

M91 Carcano

10-Carcano-Type-I-1024x175.jpg

Japanese Type "I"

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be some confusion over the scope's being installed for a left-hander. This was not a comment made by the FBI. It was a comment made by a top military gunsmith, as reported by a Warren Commission attorney. It is not a direct quote, moreover, but a paraphrase. So it's tough to say what was meant by the comment. As for me, I suspect it has something to do with the scope's misalignment being an advantage to a left-eye dominant shooter, but not a right-eye dominant shooter.

From patspeer.com, chapter 9:

In any event, when, subsequent to the FBI, the Army tested the rifle, they found it necessary to add wooden shims beneath the scope mount to bring it into alignment. This was acknowledged in the 3-31-64 testimony of Ronald Simmons, Chief of the Infantry Weapons Evaluation Branch of the Ballistics Research Laboratory of the Department of the Army. The gunsmith who'd worked on the rifle made an interesting observation, moreover, which he passed on to Warren Commission counsel Melvin Eisenberg on April 6. 1964. Eisenberg's Memo for the Record on this conversation was published in the commission's volumes as CE 2560. It reads "There were three pieces in the scope examined by the BRL gunsmith. Two pieces were .015 inches thick, so placed as to elevate the scope with respect to the gun. One piece was .020 inches thick so placed as to point the scope leftward with respect to the gun. The gunsmith observed that the scope as we received it was installed as if for a left-handed man." Well, this is fairly confusing, as it suggests the shims were already on the rifle when received by the BRL, when Simmons testified to the opposite. We can only assume, then, that Eisenberg's words are misleading, and that he should have written "three pieces in the scope added in by the BRL gunsmith," and not "examined by the gunsmith."

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...