The "Wound Ballistics Of 6.5-mm. Mannlicher-Carcano Ammunition" Report

[Glenn Nall]

and you ducked another question. I challenged you to POSITIVELY put the assumed errant bullet IN C2766.

You didn't even try. How come?

I can put the third BULLET SHELL CASING in C2766. And THREE shots were fired (based on the preponderance of evidence and the witness accounts). So the math isn't too difficult here.

But, you see Glenn, I'm using some of that "common sense and deductive reasoning" I was talking about before. And THAT is taboo in your world, isn't it?

If you can put the third shell casing in C2766, can you prove what day it was fired on? Anyone can fire a bullet somewhere else and leave the shell casing on the 6th floor as "evidence". Prove it was fired on 22/11/63.

this is exactly the connection he's not willing to make, of course. it's like it doesn't compute to him. and frankly i'm afraid to ask him lest he prove his own density, which i really doubt he has. I believe he's smarter than that, just unwilling to go there.

perhaps he lacks the freedom. (i'm picturing the FBI agents from the autopsy, or their sons, standing over him telling him what to type)

[Glenn Nall]

Obviously, he does not know the difference. I can see DVP as part of a lynch mob.

"Well, he shore looks guilty! String him up!"

I'm fairly "shore" that if all juries consisted of "JFK Internet CTers", all guilty defendants would be set free. You'd find SOME evidence that you could pretend was fake.

Most Internet CTers can't even find it within themselves to string Oswald up for Officer Tippit's murder, let alone JFK's. And the Tippit murder can easily be solved by any first grader with a learning disability. And yet the CTers are stumped by it. Go figure.

yeah, i know, silly us, requiring something so trivial as evidence to decide a man's life.

how dumb and silly.

and dumb.

good thing you aren't the one being accused. with the likes of us as a jury, you'd be - um... well, you know...

[David Von Pein]

Glenn,

And you don't think there's any "evidence" to show that Oswald killed Tippit? Is that what you just implied?

Edited June 27, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

Sure, Glenn, a jury must go by the "evidence". I totally agree (of course). But that doesn't mean they can't ALSO utilize some "common sense and deductive reasoning" in conjunction with the evidence. You seem to want to throw the words "common sense" out the window altogether. And that's crazy. In fact, I'd argue that common sense is an ESSENTIAL tool for juries to use. Because without it, you end up with verdicts like the O.J. verdict.

Common sense is vital in all areas of life. Even in a jury room.

Edited June 27, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

If you can put the third shell casing in C2766, can you prove what day it was fired on? Anyone can fire a bullet somewhere else and leave the shell casing on the 6th floor as "evidence". Prove it was fired on 22/11/63.

Let's see....

We've got THREE shots being fired (per more than 90 percent of the witnesses).

And we've got THREE shells from LHO's gun in the SN.

And we've got TWO bullets from Oswald's rifle (in the car and hospital).

That leaves one more bullet to account for.

Now, since I know there are THREE shells in the Nest and I know that only THREE shots almost certainly were fired as the assassination was happening, should I conclude that the third shell was planted there in the Nest? Why would any sensible person conclude that? Everything fits together perfectly. But I'm supposed to "think outside the box" (and the Nest) and conclude that the third shell must have been planted. Right?

I see now why some CTers have an aversion to those two evil words I've been talking about today -- Common sense.

Geez Louise.

Edited June 27, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Kenneth Drew]

and you ducked another question. I challenged you to POSITIVELY put the assumed errant bullet IN C2766.

You didn't even try. How come?

I can put the third BULLET SHELL CASING in C2766. And THREE shots were fired (based on the preponderance of evidence and the witness accounts). So the math isn't too difficult here.

But, you see Glenn, I'm using some of that "common sense and deductive reasoning" I was talking about before. And THAT is taboo in your world, isn't it?

(based on the preponderance of evidence and the witness accounts). Sorry DVP but preponderance of the evidence is not the standard in criminal cases. While a juror may use any kind of reasoning he might desire, he may not do so in determining guilt, he may only use evidence that shows guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Putting a shell casing in a rifle has nothing to do with the bullet. If you can't prove that a bullet was fired in a rifle, you can't use that evidence. So far, and it's only been 54 1/2 years, no one has put any bullet that had anything to do with the fragments in JC or JFK. Not one single piece, into 2766 that day.

Edited June 27, 2015 by Kenneth Drew

[Robert Prudhomme]

Sorry, you cannot prove when the cartridges were fired from C2766.

[Kenneth Drew]

Obviously, he does not know the difference. I can see DVP as part of a lynch mob.

"Well, he shore looks guilty! String him up!"

I'm fairly "shore" that if all juries consisted of "JFK Internet CTers", all guilty defendants would be set free. You'd find SOME evidence that you could pretend was fake.

Most Internet CTers can't even find it within themselves to string Oswald up for Officer Tippit's murder, let alone JFK's. And the Tippit murder can easily be solved by any first grader with a learning disability. And yet the CTers are stumped by it. Go figure.

Most Internet CTers can't even find it within themselves to string Oswald up for Officer Tippit's murder, let alone JFK's. And the Tippit murder can easily be solved by any first grader with a learning disability. But fortunately they don't let first graders with learning disabilities on juries. They require people with normal brains and reasoning ability. I'll bet you haven't been on any juries lately, have you DVP? There is no more evidence to convict anyone for JDT than for JFK. Exactly none for either. No one has ever put LHO near where JDT was killed at the time of the shooting, LHO was already in the Texas Theatre.

[Glenn Nall]

i asked a simple, relevant question - can DVP define "proof" - with the qualifier that if he doesn't reply then the assumption is that he can't.

he has not replied.

ergo...

(this is an example of logic. it's what we call in my line of work an "If else" statement. IF this, then this, ELSE this. it's the stuff that runs computers and human minds - well, some of them...

assuming a given set of parameters, IF x replies with the correct answer, then he knows the correct answer, ELSE - again, given a set of parameters - he does not know the answer.

it's really that simple. i LOVE this stuff. it works the same way with spent shell casings and nearby rifles, too. neato, huh?)

Edited June 27, 2015 by Glenn Nall

[David Von Pein]

i [sic] asked a simple, relevant question - can DVP define "proof" - with the qualifier that if he doesn't reply then the assumption is that he can't.

[H]e has not replied.

Such a juvenile taunt requires no response, Glenn. You should have realized that.

Edited June 27, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Glenn Nall]

Obviously, he does not know the difference. I can see DVP as part of a lynch mob.

"Well, he shore looks guilty! String him up!"

I'm fairly "shore" that if all juries consisted of "JFK Internet CTers", all guilty defendants would be set free. You'd find SOME evidence that you could pretend was fake.

Most Internet CTers can't even find it within themselves to string Oswald up for Officer Tippit's murder, let alone JFK's. And the Tippit murder can easily be solved by any first grader with a learning disability. And yet the CTers are stumped by it. Go figure.

Most Internet CTers can't even find it within themselves to string Oswald up for Officer Tippit's murder, let alone JFK's. And the Tippit murder can easily be solved by any first grader with a learning disability. But fortunately they don't let first graders with learning disabilities on juries. They require people with normal brains and reasoning ability. I'll bet you haven't been on any juries lately, have you DVP? There is no more evidence to convict anyone for JDT than for JFK. Exactly none for either. No one has ever put LHO near where JDT was killed at the time of the shooting, LHO was already in the Texas Theatre.

And the Tippit murder can easily be solved by

This tells you all you need to know. He's equating murder conviction with basic reasoning ability. The switch isn't making. There's a short.

and i thought he was making such progress earlier. damn.

Edited June 27, 2015 by Glenn Nall

[Glenn Nall]

i [sic] asked a simple, relevant question - can DVP define "proof" - with the qualifier that if he doesn't reply then the assumption is that he can't.

[H]e has not replied.

Such a juvenile taunt requires no response, Glenn. You should have realized that.

so then it's official. you formally refuse to answer, even though your credibility is on the line. what little you have, anyway.

there's nothing taunting about this. I'm dead serious. I do not think you get the idea behind "proof", based on the many things you've said. I really do not think you know the difference between proof and deduction, or opinion.

Edited June 27, 2015 by Glenn Nall

[David Von Pein]

so then it's official. you formally refuse to answer, even though your credibility is on the line.

Oh, brother.

Edited June 27, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

This tells you all you need to know. He's equating murder conviction with basic reasoning ability.

The only possible way to make Oswald innocent of shooting Officer Tippit is to literally ignore all of the evidence.

And why would anyone want to do that?

Care to answer that one, Glenn?

Edited June 27, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Glenn Nall]

Sorry, you cannot prove when the cartridges were fired from C2766.

it cannot even be proven IF those cartridges were fired from that gun, unless they did tests, and they have not published any tests, so DVP or me or anyone else cannot connect those shells with the gun POSITIVELY.

and if we were to assume that they were, the real trick would be proving WHEN it was done, as you said.

there are SO many of these hurdles that the LNers cannot leap and they just don't see it. the entire accusation is based on a string of a thousand assumptions.

Edited June 27, 2015 by Glenn Nall