More Phoney Rifle Documents--Proof!

[Michael Walton]

I really like the way David Josephs talks about real-world stuff in his post. I know we sometimes get bogged down with quotes, counter-quotes, facts and figures and so on. But some of his good stuff is:

From Magazine Marina and baby go with Ruth on Sept 23, Ozzie and 2 small suitcases are seen leaving Magazine - these were described as small, 18" suitcases which are supposed to fit a 32" piece of a rifle?

Ruth and Micheal testify to NEVER SEEING A RIFLE in their home, in fact never seeing a rifle until Nov 22.

Ozzie calls from Dallas on the 4th of October asking that Marina ask Ruth to come get him... Marina basically hangs up o him and he supposedly hitchhikes to Irving. Does he have the rifle with him now Dave? If so, where is it?

He hitchhikes to the Paine's (according to the story) and there is no mention of a rifle or pistol from then on until Nov 22 and the ridiculous garage story Ruth concocts.

I mean if this whole case wasn't so tragically sad, you could make a great tongue in cheek comedy bit out of it - imagine Lee hitch hiking, getting hung up on, and going around lunging his rifle and pistol. Just like, too, he's at work all day but some how sneaks out and mails his gun MO several miles away. At least for me, there has to be some common sense and plausibility in the narrative and Josephs points out some great implausible ones in the narrative.

[Jim Hargrove]

DJ also has a VERY detailed article over at CTKA detailing much of what's wrong with the saga of the Magic Carcano. Part 1 is here:

http://ctka.net/2015/JosephsRiflePart1.pdf

Give the big pdf file a few seconds to download. It's chock full of EVIDENCE.

[Stu Wexler]

Jim.

I am very interested in that Cadigan material you posted. Where does one find these kind of original, unedited versions of WC testimony? Are there specific boxes that have this? Any kind of index to specific witnesses?

Regards,

Stu Wexler

[Jim Hargrove]

Stu,

I'm pretty sure John Armstrong found the alteration of Cadigan's testimony during one of his many visits to NARA in the 1990s, but I'm not sure of the specifics. He thinks, btw, the handwriting is Allen Dulles's. I'll try to remember to ask him about it, but it will be a week or so before I can.

[Gary Murr]

Jim.

I am very interested in that Cadigan material you posted. Where does one find these kind of original, unedited versions of WC testimony? Are there specific boxes that have this? Any kind of index to specific witnesses?

Regards,

Stu Wexler

Hi Stu:

I believe I can give you some help with these materials. I will not be home until later this evening but I will take a look in my files when I return. As I recall these "unedited" transcripts were produced by Ward & Paul, given to the Warren Commission for destruction at the end of the Commissions tenure but this did not occur. I do know that members of the FBI who testified were given access to these same unedited transcripts and allowed to make changes to the documents before being returned to members of the Commission staff for "publication." I also recall that there are unedited transcripts of all of the deposition sessions that occurred during the lifetime of the Commission.

Again, as soon as I return home and can [hopefully] find the specific file locations, I will contact you.

Look forward to seeing you in Dallas for the Lancer Conference!

Gary

[James DiEugenio]

FYI:

John printed those Cadigan documents in an article for Probe Magazine about 20 years ago.

Which is why I always say, most of what you don't know about this case is on the Probe disc.

[David Josephs]

I can only answer with Sucher's statement.

The weapons dealer who said that many factories produced the same weapons and there were many repeating serial numbers.

From Vincent Bugliosi's book:

"William Suchur [sic], the owner of International Firearms Company of Montreal, informed the FBI on March 12, 1964, per a letter from J. Edgar Hoover to the Warren Commission of April 22, 1964, that “in the 1930’s Mussolini ordered all arms factories to manufacture the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. Since many concerns were manufacturing the same weapon, the same serial number appears on weapons manufactured by more than one concern. Some bear a letter prefix and some do not” (CE 2562, 25 H 808). However, no other Mannlicher-Carcano with a serial number of C2766 has ever surfaced, although one with a serial number of 2766 without any prefix did. .... However, even if another Mannlicher-Carcano did surface with the same serial number as Oswald’s, C2766, it would be irrelevant since we know one with that serial number was sold and sent to Oswald, was found in the sniper’s nest*, and was proved to be the murder weapon." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 340 of Endnotes in "Reclaiming History"

* Slight error on Bugliosi's part here. Vince, of course, knew full well that the rifle was not found "in the sniper's nest" itself. He obviously meant to say "on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building" instead of "in the sniper's nest".

But it seems to me that a reasonable interpretation of what William Sucher told the FBI in March 1964 would be that only the four numerals that appear after the letter prefix in a serial number are repeated when stamping the serial numbers on Mannlicher-Carcano rifles. Hence, he said "some bear a letter prefix and some do not".

Therefore, when the four digits in a given serial number are identical to the numbers stamped on a previously manufactured gun, a letter prefix is added to the number to set it apart from all other Carcano serial numbers. I certainly think that's one way to interpret Sucher's remarks at any rate. Although apparently Vince Bugliosi did not interpret Sucher's statement in such a manner. Otherwise, I think he would have mentioned such an interpretation in his book, which he did not do.

RELATED FLASHBACK....

GIL JESUS SAID (ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2008):

[Quoting from Commission Exhibit No. 2562, p.15:] "Since many concerns were manufacturing the same weapon, THE SAME SERIAL NUMBER APPEARS ON WEAPONS MANUFACTURED BY MORE THAN ONE CONCERN. Some bear a letter prefix and some do not." .... Now, where did he say that no two weapons bore the same letter prefix?

DAVID VON PEIN SAID (ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2008):

Yes, you're correct here (in a way), Gil. I'll admit that.

I.E.,

The above passage which you quoted from CE2562 can, indeed, be interpreted this way:

The exact same 5-character serial number can appear on multiple Mannlicher-Carcano Model 91/38 rifles that were manufactured at different plants, which would include the same prefix letter as well as the same four numbers that follow the prefix letter.

But I also think the above quote from CE2562 can be interpreted another way, which is probably the correct way of interpreting it, especially when factoring in these two things as a prerequisite:

1.) J. Edgar Hoover's comments to J. Lee Rankin on Page 1 of that 20-page document that makes up Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2562, wherein Hoover is telling Rankin about two specific rifles of interest to the Commission, rifles which bear similar serial numbers, but not serial numbers that are exactly the same, because one of them doesn't bear the "C" letter prefix.

And:

2.) The fact that nobody, to date, has produced a single example of another Model #91/38 Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that bears the exact same 5-character serial number as the one that was shipped by Klein's to Hidell/Oswald in March 1963. And, as far as I am aware, nobody has ever come up with ANY two separate MC 91/38 rifles that bear the exact same 5-character serial number, regardless of whether the number is "C2766" or some other number.

Given the above two facts, I believe that the above quote that you cited from CE2562 could reasonably be interpreted in the following manner:

The exact same 4-digit serial NUMBER (i.e., the numerals 0 through 9) can appear on multiple Mannlicher-Carcano Model 91/38 rifles that were manufactured at different plants, but if the very same 4-digit number does appear on any two rifles, then one of these rifles will include a letter prefix in front of the 4-digit number, while the other rifle will not have this prefix.

In my opinion, the above explanation is a reasonable one, given the comments by J. Edgar Hoover on Page #1 of CE2562. And it's also a very reasonable explanation when factoring in the following comments regarding this topic of serial numbers that were made by the FBI's Robert A. Frazier to the Warren Commission in 1964:

MR. EISENBERG -- "Based on your experience with firearms, is the placement of a specific serial number on a weapon generally confined to one weapon of a given type?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it is. Particularly--may I refer to foreign weapons particularly? The serial number consists of a series of numbers which normally will be repeated. However, a prefix is placed before the number, which actually must be part of the serial number, consisting of a letter."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Have you been able to confirm that the serial number on this weapon is the only such number on such a weapon?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it is."

Thanks for the shout out Jim H... and Jim D here is my reply to him... you too Michael.. thanks.

Okay Dave - in your opinion then 2766 does not equal C2766 - and I agree with you.

CE2562 is a letter to Rankin explaining the existence of a Rifle with "2766" on it - no "C"... so that order was tracked down and what do we find?

No prefix on any of these rifles? I can understand some rifles don't have the prefix... but ALL of them Dave?

. you suppose all these rifles without a prefix is possible given what we've seen of serial numbers on Carcanos?

This is the Century Arms listing of rifles sold to Vermont in June 1962, which includes "2766" and is the only # with a notation on it.

I guess it's possible - so all you need do is get the rifle - in a 5 foot carton - to the PO BOX (or at least a notice to pick up said package since the BOX was too small... (We have a copy of that notice for pick-up Dave?)

So let me ask again... but first preface with an agreement.. The FBI was keeping tabs on Oswald... there are reports on his activities from March 1 1963 on thru until Nov - right? (just look at the WCD's)

How come not a single word is mentioned about this Commie ordering a rifle in March and a Pistol in Jan from the very places the Congress is watching?

https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/057/57690/images/img_57690_111_300.png is a FBI report from March 25, 1963 talking about his receiving THE WORKER... so someone at the USPS is keeping tabs on what Oswald is getting in the mail whether it be sinister or not - but we must agree they were watching and reporting

How does the FBI miss Oswald - and all the paperwork related to it - ordering and being shipped a 5' rifle in a carton which requires special documentation and a physical interaction with the Dallas Post Office in order to retrieve, yet there is no evidence for this...

One more request... PROVE the rifle was removed from Harborside's original inventory of 520 cartons of these "38 E" rifles... that you cannot shows your connecting the dots from Italy to TSBD is fraught with problems

Edited August 22, 2016 by David Josephs

[David Von Pein]

Davey: Please show us where in VB's 2646-page opus [sic; Bugliosi's book is actually 2,824 pages long, including all endnotes and source notes] he tells the reader that the rifle the Dallas Police offered into evidence is not the same rifle that Oswald allegedly ordered?

Okay. Gladly. Here you go....

---Quote On:---

"The Warren Commission overlooked putting the American Rifleman advertisement in its volumes. But conspiracy theorist Sylvia Meagher points out that the advertisement was for a $12.88 Carcano ($19.95 with scope) that was 36 inches long, weighed 5 1⁄2 pounds, and had a catalog number of C20-T750, though we know the $19.95 Carcano that was sent to Oswald was 40 1⁄5 inches long and weighed 8 pounds, which was closer to the 40-inch Carcano weighing 7 pounds advertised in the November 1963 ad in a different magazine, Field and Stream. But Meagher fails to state the significance of this discrepancy. (Meagher, 'Accessories after the Fact', p.48 footnote; fact that Oswald ordered his Carcano from a February 1963 Klein’s advertisement in the American Rifleman magazine: Waldman Exhibit No. 8, 21 H 704; CE 773, 17 H 635; WR, p.119; 7 H 366, WCT William J. Waldman; advertisement reprinted in “In the Works: Tighter Laws on Gun Sales,” p.4; see also the August 27, 1965, edition of Life magazine [pages 62-65]; Field and Stream ad where yet a different catalog number, C20-750, is used for the Carcano: Holmes Exhibit No. 2, 20 H 174, viii; 7 H 294, WCT Harry D. Holmes; length and weight of Oswald’s Carcano: 3 H 395, WCT Robert A. Frazier)

In other words, so what? We know Oswald was shipped his Carcano, serial number C2766 (whether or not it was the same weapon he had ordered, and whether or not he was even aware he received a Carcano a little over 4 inches longer and 3 1⁄2 pounds heavier [sic] than he had ordered), we know it was found in the sniper’s nest [sic], and we know it was the murder weapon." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 392-393 of Endnotes in "Reclaiming History"

~~~~~~~~~~

The LIFE Magazine article linked below, which is referred to by Vince Bugliosi as a source note in the book excerpt I quoted above, could be of some interest to people who are fascinated with the subject of Oswald's C2766 Carcano rifle. I'm sure some conspiracists can find something in this article to complain about:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited August 22, 2016 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

No prefix on any of these rifles? I can understand some rifles don't have the prefix... but ALL of them Dave? You suppose all these rifles without a prefix is possible given what we've seen of serial numbers on Carcanos?

I think Bud gave a plausible explanation for that eight years ago.....

BUD SAID (ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2008):

You are talking Powerball odds that Crescent firearms or Klein's would have two Carcano rifles with the same serial number. A person spending his whole life might find two Carcanos with the same serial number. Note that when Klein's inventoried the boxes of Carcanos [Click Here], they didn't even bother with the letter prefix in front of the serial number, knowing full well how unlikely it would be to get two rifles with just the same numbers.

Edited August 22, 2016 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

In other words, so what? We know Oswald was shipped his Carcano, serial number C2766 (whether or not it was the same weapon he had ordered, and whether or not he was even aware he received a Carcano a little over 4 inches longer and 3 1⁄2 pounds heavier [sic] than he had ordered), we know it was found in the sniper’s nest [sic], and we know it was the murder weapon." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 392-393 of Endnotes in "Reclaiming History"

~~~~~~~~~~

​This is the way Vince treats these kinds of subjects that go to the heart of the case. He puts them in his End Notes, on the CD, where he knows very few people will read them. And then, in a display of pure magic, he just says, well that does not matter. Why? Because it was found in the sniper's nest and we know it was the murder weapon!

LOL HA HA HA!

​Oh Vince, you mean because of CE 399?

​And it was not found in the so called sniper's nest anyway.

In other words, this is Fetzering in reverse. Like Jim F., Vince says, I know it, so you better believe it. Which is pretty consistent with his whole inflated, agenda driven book.

​Vince never bothers to go into the problems this creates for the official story. How on earth did Klein's send the wrong rifle? And why did David Belin never ask about this discrepancy? If for no other reason than to clarify it. It sure seems that Belin wanted to obscure the whole problem. Again, why?

BTW, is Bud saying what I think he is saying? That Klein's dropped the letter prefix to save time since they thought there would be no repeats anyway?

Edited August 23, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Stu Wexler]

Thanks Gary,

I look forward to it. I am very interested, specifically, in the unedited testimony of Joseph Nicol, the independent firearms/ballistics expert. It relates to my last Lancer conference talk.

I very much look forward to hearing you present.

-Stu

Edited August 23, 2016 by Stu Wexler

[Robert Prudhomme]

According the Wikipedia article linked below, there were somewhere between 2,063,750, and, 3,000,000 Carcano rifles of all variants produced between 1890 and 1945.

The maximum number of unique serial numbers using four numbers only, would be 9,999, and adding just one letter would bring the possibilities up to 259,974 - about a quarter of a million. Adding a second letter would allow for nearly seven million unique serial numbers.

I too would be interested in an informed answer to Sandy’s question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcano

What's really interesting is that none of these Carcanos sold off by the Italian Government were supposed to have a serial number or any other identifying mark on them, outside of "Made Italy" and CAL 6,5".

Despite claims to the contrary on this thread, virtually all Carcano serial numbers consisted of a single letter followed by four numbers. If two identical serial numbers were stamped on a Carcano, the name of the factory (Terni, Brescia, etc.) was the final determination.

The REALLY odd thing about C2766 is it seems to be the only Carcano ever manufactured after 1922 with a single date on it; that being "1940". Below is an example of a more typical Carcano made around that time.

As can be seen, the date is written as "1940 XIX". Mussolini's "March on Rome", in which the dictator came to power in Italy, took place from October 22-29, 1922. It was Mussolini's decree that all dates from that time on be also measured in the "Fascist Date". If this rifle had been made before October, 1940, it would have been stamped with "1940 XVIII" signifying it was made eighteen years after the March on Rome. The XIX, however, indicates this rifle was made after the anniversary date of the March on Rome, nineteen years later.

Why is C2766 the only Carcano made after 1922 that does not have the Fascist Date? Why does the date on C2766 look painted on, while other rifles have their dates stamped into the metal?

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTIPoO8wA_NeWffH4DkPYwxjwvBr7Wl83iRzL6CkgDG_-61fxaj

Edited August 23, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme

[Tom Hume]

Robert asked:

“Why is C2766 the only Carcano made after 1922 that does not have the Fascist Date? Why does the date on C2766 look painted on, while other rifles have their dates stamped into the metal?”

I don’t know if my hypothetical answer will be satisfying to anyone, but I do have one to offer. It will involve a short puzzle, however, and I’ll be brief:

My hypothesis in a nutshell is that Richard Case Nagell reworked a Carcano and "ETCHED" in his own specific serial number to screw up Hoover’s carefully laid paper-trail designed to frame Oswald. "C-2766" was not the Klein's Carcano supposedly shipped to A Hidell. I offer a more complete explanation in my thread linked below:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22752

Using the universal letter/number translation device at the bottom of the post, “C-2766” translates to “CCHGG”, and “1940” translates to “TEA”. This gives us eight letters:

“CCHGG TEA”

This anagrams to:

“C ETCH GAG”

“C” stands for “CASE”

I’m sure there’s a lot more to this. My guess is that every number, letter, and symbol on that rifle had been put there by Nagell to potentially reveal meaning for us to ponder.

What else is etched on C-2766, Robert?

Tom

(A=0)(B=1)(C=2)(D=3)(E=4)(F=5)(G=6)(H=7)(I=8)(J=9)(K=10)(L=11)(M=12)(N=13)(O=14)(P=15)(Q=16)(R=17)(S=18)(T=19)(U=20)(V=21)(W=22)(X=23)(Y=24)(Z=25)

Edited August 23, 2016 by Tom Hume

[Tom Hume]

Hi Jim Hargrove,

In post #47 you supplied the following link:

http://ctka.net/2015/JosephsRiflePart1.pdf

Near the bottom of page #61 is a photostat of an FBI doc. It reads in part:

“The order showed the remitter as A. Hidell, P. O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas. This box was rented in the name of J. H. Oswald on a draft registration card which he had in his pocket, and his name was also shown on his box application card in New Orleans as being entitled to receive mail in the box.”

While it’s reasonable to assume that “J. H. Oswald” is a typo in this doc, with the “J” substitution, this combination of letters can be turned into an anagram puzzle, albeit a very small one. If this “J” in “J H Oswald” has shown up elsewhere, it might be meaningful. So my question is, is there Post Office paper-work showing the name, “J H Oswald” associated with P.O Box 2915?

Tom

Edited August 28, 2016 by Tom Hume