George Sawtelle Posted April 19, 2017 Share Posted April 19, 2017 David VP Thanks Dave. I don't think anyone lied about the mauser. A mistake was made by the officers because the rifle found was an Italian Carcano. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted April 19, 2017 Share Posted April 19, 2017 (edited) "The AssassinationsRecord Review Board (ARRB) in 1995 uncovered an FBI Field Office Dallas (89-43-1A-122) envelope. It was dated 12/2/63 and detailed the contents (since missing) of a 7.65mm shell found in Dealey Plaza after the assassination. This recovered evidence was unknown until the ARRB uncovered it. Unfortunately, it did not contain the 7.65mm shell and the outside of the envelope listed it as having no value and was destroyed." Strange that a 7.65mm shell was found if the rifle there never was a 7.65mm rifle around. Did Weitzman also mistake the type of scope that was on the rifle. He said at first it was a 2.5 Weaver, which turned out to be a 4x4 Japanese scope? Strange mistake to make. Incidentally, he was never shown the Carcano or asked if it was the rifle he saw. Edited April 19, 2017 by Ray Mitcham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B. A. Copeland Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 (edited) On 4/15/2017 at 0:10 PM, David Von Pein said: Roger Craig was a proven l-i-a-r, as I demonstrate here.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1194.html And the "mysterious second rifle" in Tom Alyea's film is undoubtedly a gun taken up to the sixth floor by the Dallas Police, possibly the same one that we can see being held by a police detective in plain clothes in the Alyea footage (fast-forward to the 1:57 mark in the video below).... https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8UwZ588YcqIdkFIY1dPclZjUjA/view You have not proven anything unfortunately. RC was one of the best witnesses to events on the day in question. Its quite easy today to show where the Government has lied (many times) and covered up (many times) aspects of the case and you don't seem to address those at all which is very odd. So far I have not seen you address Armstrong's direct essay on the possible escape route of the assassins, instead you toss commentary from one of the worst books ever written on the case to discredit JA. Thats fine and all but lets address what JA is stating specifically in this newest essay. What are your thoughts on an escape route of these assassins? What of the possibility of more than one person who participated? Edited May 11, 2017 by B. A. Copeland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now