DEBUNKING CONSPIRACY MYTHS

[David Von Pein]

28 minutes ago, Johnny Cairns said:

How is Wade getting CE399 into evidence? 

By calling to the stand Darrell Tomlinson and O.P. Wright, who will each say what they said in CE2011 --- and that is that CE399 looks like the same bullet they each saw at Parkland Hospital on 11/22. It's not a positive identification, that's true. But no court would expect those first two witnesses who touched the bullet to give a POSITIVE identification anyway, because neither man marked the bullet (nor were they expected by anyone to mark the bullet).

And then it will be established by Henry Wade at trial that Bullet CE399 was a bullet that was positively fired in the rifle owned by Lee H. Oswald....which also happens to be the same gun that was found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building just 52 minutes after shots were fired into the President's limousine by that very same C2766 Carcano rifle (with that proof being provided by the introduction into evidence of CE567 and CE569, the two front-seat bullet fragments linked conclusively to Rifle C2766).

Given the totality of the bullet and rifle and shell (CE510) evidence which all corroborates each other and ties together and leads straight back to Rifle C2766, getting CE399 into evidence would be a piece of cake and is a piece of evidence that no trial judge would be inclined to exclude (except perhaps the corrupt Jim Garrison).

Also See:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vince-bugliosi-on-ce399.html

 

Edited June 14 by David Von Pein

[Johnny Cairns]

2 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

By calling to the stand Darrell Tomlinson and O.P. Wright, who will each say what they said in CE2011 --- and that is that CE399 looks like the same bullet they each saw at Parkland Hospital on 11/22. It's not a positive identification, that's true. But no court would expect those first two witnesses who touched the bullet to give a POSITIVE identification anyway, because neither man marked the bullet (nor were they expected by anyone to mark the bullet).

And then it will be established by Henry Wade at trial that Bullet CE399 was a bullet that was positively fired in the rifle owned by Lee H. Oswald....which also happens to be the same gun that was found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building just 52 minutes after shots were fired into the President's limousine by that very same C2766 Carcano rifle (with that proof being provided by the introduction into evidence of CE567 and CE569, the two front-seat bullet fragments linked conclusively to Rifle C2766).

Given the totality of the bullet and rifle and shell (CE510) evidence which all corroborates each other and ties together and leads straight back to Rifle C2766, getting CE399 into evidence would be a piece of cake and is a piece of evidence that no trial judge would be inclined to exclude (except perhaps the corrupt Jim Garrison).

Also See:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vince-bugliosi-on-ce399.html

 

I would be very happy for Wade to call Tomlinson and Wright to the stand, by why stop there? Why not also called Richard Johnsen and James Rowley also? These men were also in the custody chain. 
 

Tomlinson, who wasn’t shown and asked to ID 399 during his Commission testimony, wouldn’t be a good witness for the state unfortunately, why? Because he refused to state that the bullet came from Connolly’s stretcher. Also the very nature of the discovery of the bullet, would throw up major problems as this was allegedly found on an unguarded stretcher, meaning anyone could place or remove anything from it. He also refused to ID 399 when shown it by JT at Parkland in 1966. 
 

As for Wright, whom the Commission neglected to call, when he was shown pictures of CE399 by Thompson at Parkland, he flat out rejected that specific bullet as looking like the bullet he held in his possession that day. He claimed that the bullet had a pointed tip, not round. If you would like some quotes of his rejection of 399, I can of course provide them. Why would Wade/you want to call him as a witness? 
 

CE2011, also states that SA Johnsen and Rowley couldn’t ID, CE399 when asked to ID it, why did you leave that out? 
 

Of course Odum, who was alleged to have shown Tomlinson and Wright 399, according to CE2011, flat out rejected that he had done so! Again, why would you want him to take the stand? 
 

Then to top it all off, you would have to sell to the jury that this virtually pristine bullet caused all the non fatal wounds in two men, breaking bones along the way. 
 

Dr Joseph Dolce, Chief Consultant of Wound Ballistics for the US Army, supervised the ballistic test conducted by the Warren Commission. Even though he oversaw the Commission’s own ballistics tests, he was not called to give testimony before the Warren Commission. This is what Dr Dolce had to say regarding Commission Exhibit 399: “No it could not have caused all the wounds, because our experiments have showed beyond any doubt that merely shooting the wrist deformed the bullet drastically and yet this bullet [399] came out as almost a perfectly normal pristine bullet… And so, they gave us the original rifle, the Mannlicher Carcano plus 100 bullets, 6.5mm, and we went, and we shot the cadaver wrist as I have just mentioned and in every instance the front or the tip of the bullet was smashed. It’s impossible for bullet to strike a bone, even at low velocity and still come with the perfectly normal tip. The tip of this bullet was absolutely not deformed in no instance whatsoever, in no amount. Under no circumstances do I feel that this bullet [399] could hit the wrist and still not be deformed. We proved that by experiments.”

Of course, men like Dr. Robert Shaw and even Humes and Finck would cast serious doubt on 399 having even caused one of the governors wounds. 
 

Arlen Specter “And could it [CE399] have been the bullet which inflicted the wound on Governor Connally's right wrist?”

Pierre Finck. “No; for the reason that there are too many fragments described in that wrist.” (Volume II; p. 382)

Arlen Specter. “Dr. Humes, under your opinion which you have just given us, what effect, if any, would that have on whether this bullet, 399, could have been the one to lodge in Governor Connally's thigh?”

Commander James Humes. “I think that extremely unlikely. The reports, again Exhibit 392 from Parkland, tell of an entrance wound on the lower midthigh of the Governor, and X-rays taken there are described as showing metallic fragments in the bone, which apparently by this report were not removed and are still present in Governor Connally's thigh. I can't conceive of where they came from this missile.” (Volume II; p 375-376)

Arlen Specter. “What opinion, if any, do you have as to whether that bullet could have produced the wound on the Governor's right wrist and remained as intact as it is at the present time?”

Dr Charles Gregory. “In examining this bullet, I find a small flake has been either knocked off or removed from the rounded end of the missile. I was told that this was removed for the purpose of analysis. The only other deformity which I find is at the base of the missile at the point where it Joined the cartridge carrying the powder, I presume, and this is somewhat flattened and deflected, distorted. There is some irregularity of the darker metal within which I presume to represent lead. The only way that this missile could have produced this wound in my view, was to have entered the wrist backward.” (Volume IV; P. 121)

Arlen Specter. What is your opinion as to whether bullet 399 could have inflicted all of the wounds on the Governor, then, without respect at this point to the wound of the President’s neck?

Dr Robert Shaw. I feel that there would be some difficulty in explaining all of the wounds as being inflicted by bullet Exhibit 399 without causing more in the way of loss of substance to the bullet or deformation of the bullet. (Discussion off the record.)

So just to sum up. 
1. Serious chain of possession issues. 
2. Serious Identification issues. 
3. Serious problems with the condition of 399. 
4. Ambiguous origins, as evidence strongly suggestions that bullet was found not on Connolly stretcher but of the stretcher of Ronald Fuller. 
5. Experiments conducted by the Warren Commission, couldn’t replicate condition of 399. 

You said getting 399 into a court of law would be a piece of cake? I don’t think so… 

 

Edited June 14 by Johnny Cairns

[David Von Pein]

5 minutes ago, Johnny Cairns said:

You said getting 399 into a court of law would be a piece of cake? I don’t think so… 

[David Von Pein]

More CE399 Banter.....

In addition to this envelope, there is also an often-overlooked document pertaining to the chain of custody of the Parkland stretcher bullet that appears on Page 800 of Warren Commission Volume 18. It's a copy of a typewritten note from Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen. In the note, Johnsen says the following:

"The attached expended bullet was received by me about 5 min. prior to Mrs. Kennedy's departure from the hospital. It was found on one of the stretchers located in the emergency ward of the hospital."

The note is not signed with a handwritten signature, but is "signed" in typewritten form in this manner:

"Richard E. Johnsen
Special Agent
7:30 p.m.
Nov. 22, 1963"

The original note, typed on White House stationery, was photographed at the National Archives by John Hunt in 2004 (pictured below).



Logic and common sense would therefore indicate that the note written by Agent Johnsen concerning the Parkland bullet was physically attached to the previously discussed envelope which contained stretcher bullet CE399. Hence the words "the attached expended bullet" at the beginning of the note. And take note of the staple hole at the top of Johnsen's original note, which would indicate it was stapled to something when it left the White House on 11/22/63, which fits in nicely with the staple holes (or possibly the staples themselves) which are seen in the envelope as photographed by John Hunt in 2004.

And since that very same envelope is telling us, via the handwritten words of FBI agent Elmer Todd, that James Rowley was most certainly in possession of that envelope (with or without Rowley's own initials being present on the envelope), it would indicate that there is documentation in the official records of this case that shows a complete chain of custody of the stretcher bullet -- from Tomlinson/Wright....to Johnsen....to Rowley....to Todd....to Frazier.

Conspiracy theorists will, of course, argue that my "chain" shown above is still extremely weak and that it doesn't constitute a "chain" of custody at all--particularly since the Johnsen typewritten note is not signed with his handwritten signature or initials and is not still physically attached to the envelope that contains Todd's remarks about receiving the bullet from Rowley.

So, yes, maybe this issue about the chain of possession of the bullet will always provide fertile ground for continued debate and argument. It seems quite obvious that it will. (No issue in this case seems to ever go unchallenged by conspiracists, even the ones that have been thoroughly debunked by lone-assassin proponents over the years.)

But if a person digs into the records deep enough, that person can and will find documentation to support the idea, which is totally foreign to most conspiracy theorists, that Bullet CE399 was the bullet that made its way from Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas to the FBI laboratory in Washington on November 22, 1963.

David Von Pein
September 28, 2012

More:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-secret-service-and-ce399.html

 

Edited June 14 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

Also see:

[Denise Hazelwood]

10 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

The bullet hole in the shirt is 4" below the bottom of the collar, the hole in the jacket is 4.125" below the bottom of the collar.

The Croft photo shows a similar fraction of an inch ride up of the coat -- "a little bit."

 

The difference between your 4" (shirt) and 4.125" (jacket) vs. the 5 3/4" (shirt) and 5 3/8" (jacket) that I quote Frazier as giving appears to be a difference based on whether the measurement is made from the bottom of the collar (your measurement) or the top of the collar (the Frazier measurement). Either way, the hole is too low for the Single Bullet Theory to work, as the bullet would have to track upward in order to exit at the front of Connally's throat (possibly after deflecting off the spine, which would likely have caused damage to the bullet), and that upward track would have been problematic for the Connally wounding.

A "fraction of an inch" isn't what the Croft photo appears to show at the top back of Kennedy's coat collar (which looks to be tightly bunched by several inches). However, "a fraction of an inch" is something I won't argue over. Still too low for the SBT to work, however. 

[Johnny Cairns]

2 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

More CE399 Banter.....

In addition to this envelope, there is also an often-overlooked document pertaining to the chain of custody of the Parkland stretcher bullet that appears on Page 800 of Warren Commission Volume 18. It's a copy of a typewritten note from Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen. In the note, Johnsen says the following:

"The attached expended bullet was received by me about 5 min. prior to Mrs. Kennedy's departure from the hospital. It was found on one of the stretchers located in the emergency ward of the hospital."

The note is not signed with a handwritten signature, but is "signed" in typewritten form in this manner:

"Richard E. Johnsen
Special Agent
7:30 p.m.
Nov. 22, 1963"

The original note, typed on White House stationery, was photographed at the National Archives by John Hunt in 2004 (pictured below).



Logic and common sense would therefore indicate that the note written by Agent Johnsen concerning the Parkland bullet was physically attached to the previously discussed envelope which contained stretcher bullet CE399. Hence the words "the attached expended bullet" at the beginning of the note. And take note of the staple hole at the top of Johnsen's original note, which would indicate it was stapled to something when it left the White House on 11/22/63, which fits in nicely with the staple holes (or possibly the staples themselves) which are seen in the envelope as photographed by John Hunt in 2004.

And since that very same envelope is telling us, via the handwritten words of FBI agent Elmer Todd, that James Rowley was most certainly in possession of that envelope (with or without Rowley's own initials being present on the envelope), it would indicate that there is documentation in the official records of this case that shows a complete chain of custody of the stretcher bullet -- from Tomlinson/Wright....to Johnsen....to Rowley....to Todd....to Frazier.

Conspiracy theorists will, of course, argue that my "chain" shown above is still extremely weak and that it doesn't constitute a "chain" of custody at all--particularly since the Johnsen typewritten note is not signed with his handwritten signature or initials and is not still physically attached to the envelope that contains Todd's remarks about receiving the bullet from Rowley.

So, yes, maybe this issue about the chain of possession of the bullet will always provide fertile ground for continued debate and argument. It seems quite obvious that it will. (No issue in this case seems to ever go unchallenged by conspiracists, even the ones that have been thoroughly debunked by lone-assassin proponents over the years.)

But if a person digs into the records deep enough, that person can and will find documentation to support the idea, which is totally foreign to most conspiracy theorists, that Bullet CE399 was the bullet that made its way from Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas to the FBI laboratory in Washington on November 22, 1963.

David Von Pein
September 28, 2012

More:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-secret-service-and-ce399.html

 

Mark Twain once said; Who so clinging from a rope by his hands severith it above his hands must fall. It being no defense to claim that the rest of the rope is sound.

As for Mr Bugliosis statement if Jim Marrs, “would want to know if Oswald had killed Kennedy, not whether he would get off on a legal technicality”

Question, if the state cannot vouch for the veracity of its evidence then how do they

A. Know that the accused is guilty?
B.  Prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt?
 

Why is chain of custody important?
Chain of custody is a crucial concept in legal proceedings that refers to the process of maintaining and documenting the handling of evidence. This starts at the moment the evidence is collected at the crime scene and continues through to its presentation in court. The purpose of this process is to protect the evidence from tampering, contamination, or mishandling, and to provide a documented history of its management and control.

As for the letter enclosed above, how does that prove that the bullet Johnsen and Rowley had is the bullet designated as CE399? 

Also according to this very letter the stretcher the bullet came from had rubber gloves, a stethoscope and other doctors’ paraphernalia, which is consistent with whose stretcher? Ronald Fuller. 
 

Fullers’ stretcher was described as having sheets which were soiled in blood. Rosa Majors told Tink Thompson that she and Era Lumpkin had used gauze pads to clean the child, that either she or Era had been wearing rubber gloves, and that Era had a stethoscope. She cannot remember what happened to this equipment... but it was possible that it was left behind on the stretcher when the two aides carried Ronald Fuller into Major Medicine.” (Six Seconds In Dallas; p. 161/164.)

 

Again I will re-affirm for the benefit of the thread. 

Tomlinson, couldn't ID bullet. Stated that he wasn’t sure which stretcher the bullet came from. 
 

Wright, Flat out rejected CE399 as the bullet he held in his possession that day. Personal friend of Bardwell Odum. 
 

Johnsen, couldn’t ID the bullet when shown to him by Todd. 
 

Rowley, couldn’t ID the bullet when shown to him by Todd. 
 

Odum, claims never to have had in his possession, let although take to Parkland Hospital, CE399. 
 

This is not a chain of custody. This is a complete deterioration of the credibility of the evidence. 
 

Again why would you want these men testifying at trial about these points? 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

7 hours ago, Denise Hazelwood said:

The difference between your 4" (shirt) and 4.125" (jacket) vs. the 5 3/4" (shirt) and 5 3/8" (jacket) that I quote Frazier as giving appears to be a difference based on whether the measurement is made from the bottom of the collar (your measurement) or the top of the collar (the Frazier measurement). Either way, the hole is too low for the Single Bullet Theory to work, as the bullet would have to track upward in order to exit at the front of Connally's throat (possibly after deflecting off the spine, which would likely have caused damage to the bullet), and that upward track would have been problematic for the Connally wounding.

It destroys the Lone Nut theory, indeed.

7 hours ago, Denise Hazelwood said:

A "fraction of an inch" isn't what the Croft photo appears to show at the top back of Kennedy's coat collar (which looks to be tightly bunched by several inches). However, "a fraction of an inch" is something I won't argue over. Still too low for the SBT to work, however. 

The key detail in Croft is the normal amount of visible shirt collar, which indicates the jacket collar was in a normal position.  Normally, the lower margin of clothing collars are at the base of the neck, or slightly above.  The SBT requires several inches of shirt and jacket to elevate above the top of the back without pushing up the jacket collar at the base of the neck.

This scenario is contrary to the nature of reality.

 

Edited June 14 by Cliff Varnell

[Bill Brown]

15 hours ago, Johnny Cairns said:

So let me get this straight. According to your theory on motive, Oswald kills President Kennedy, a man he liked and admired, for Fidel Castro? Yet when confronted with the accusation of murder during his detention at the hands of the Dallas Police what does he do? Does Oswald proudly proclaim his act of violence as a political act, condemning the US policy towards Cuba? This is his moment to do so, the spotlight is on him, glory and infamy awaits! He can become a socialist hero! But no… Oswald vehemently denies killing President Kennedy. Strange, very strange behaviour for this would be political, presidential assassin huh? 

 

 

You're making the common mistake of trying to rationalize the acts and thoughts of a very irrational man.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

19 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

It destroys the Lone Nut theory, indeed.

The key detail in Croft is the normal amount of visible shirt collar, which indicates the jacket collar was in a normal position.  Normally, the lower margin of clothing collars are at the base of the neck, or slightly above.  The SBT requires several inches of shirt and jacket to elevate above the top of the back without pushing up the jacket collar at the base of the neck.

This scenario is contrary to the nature of reality.

 

Please note the inability of Lone Nutters (or T1/CTs) to rebut the above.

[Micah Mileto]

On 6/14/2024 at 6:00 AM, David Von Pein said:

The autopsy photos are worse for custody than CE399.