How Many Shells were found at the Scene?

[James DiEugenio]

Davey:

 

Did you read Reclaiming Parkland, which is about to be reissued as The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today?

See, I read  Reclaiming History.  And I summarized this evidence about the shells, which Barry Krusch did a nice job on, and I stated how Bugliosi replied to it.

I noted that VB said that a shell was kept in Dallas for comparison tests.  But comparison to what, if the other two were at the FBI lab.

The other problem is that if Fritz wanted to check to see who sold the ammo, why would you need a sample?  You just call the gun shops and ask them about the type of ammo. (DiEugenio, p. 213)

The other point which I think is relevant is this:  If you buy the Fritz story, is it just a coincidence that the one shell that was left behind is the tell tale one, CE 543?

[David Von Pein]

16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Davey:

Did you read Reclaiming Parkland...?

No, of course I haven't. I wouldn't bring that thing into my house if you paid me.

 

Quote

If you buy the Fritz story, is it just a coincidence that the one shell that was left behind is the tell tale one, CE 543?

You're wrong, Jimmy. The one shell left behind was CE545 --- not CE543. See Lt. Day's 6/23/64 affidavit below....

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--Q6RSXAuTJ0/Tvx0e2wwpvI/AAAAAAAABz8/oD6-XmFWkhE/s1500-h/J-C-Day-Affidavits.png

 

Edited March 24, 2018 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

This is what I mean abut DVP not reading my book or any other one that disagrees with him or the DPD or the FBI.

As Barry Krusch showed, the shells were not initialed at the scene. And the envelope was not sealed when it was returned to Day that evening at about 10 PM.

On April 23, 1964 Day wrote that one of the shells, CE 543, had only the initials GD on it.  Yet when George Doughty was interviewed by Day, he did not recall handling  that exhibit. This is an important point.

Where Davey picks up the story is in the rehab mode. On June 23, 1964 Day reversed himself.  He said he had initialed CE 543 with Doughty.  In Day's original story, that particular shell was not sent to Washington with the others.  It was kept by Fritz in his desk drawer.  But as Krusch shows, with this new affidavit, the story changed. (DiEugenio, Reclaiming Parkland, p. 94)

 

Edited March 24, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

Can anyone download CE 510 and CE 512?

John Armstrong says some interesting things about these two pics in his book.

 

[Michael Clark]

Duplicate deleted

****edit. Actually, I might as well put this post to a good use.

David, Jim. Could you guys show each other some respect and address each other as each of you would like to be addressed, please? This kind of nonsense infects and spreads throughout the forum.

Edited March 24, 2018 by Michael Clark

[Michael Clark]

CE512

[Michael Clark]

16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Can anyone download CE 510 and CE 512?

John Armstrong says some interesting things about these two pics in his book.

 

CE510

[Steve Thomas]

49 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Can anyone download CE 510 and CE 512?

John Armstrong says some interesting things about these two pics in his book.

 

The shells have been moved, haven't they?

 

Steve Thomas

[David Von Pein]

No, Steve, the shells have not been moved. In the poor-quality photo we see in CE512, we can barely see two of the shells, and the thing you might be thinking is a "shell" (closest to the cameraman) in CE512 is actually not a shell. It's a piece of paper or debris of some kind.

Here's a higher-quality picture of the three bullet shells from the Dallas Municipal Archives....

Edited March 24, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Tom Hume]

The top photo is a close-up of shell "A" from the Dallas Municipal Archives (provided by Gary Murr yesterday and David Von Pein today). The lower photo is a close-up of shell "A" from photo CE 510 (provided by Michael Clark today):

 

 

 

Edited March 24, 2018 by Tom Hume

[David Von Pein]

Thanks, Tom Hume. They look identical to me.

Edited March 24, 2018 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

On April 23, 1964 Day wrote that one of the shells, CE 543, had only the initials GD on it.  Yet when George Doughty was interviewed by Day, he did not recall handling  that exhibit. This is an important point.

Where Davey picks up the story is in the rehab mode. On June 23, 1964 Day reversed himself.  He said he had initialed CE 543 with Doughty.  In Day's original story, that particular shell was not sent to Washington with the others.  It was kept by Fritz in his desk drawer.  But as Krusch shows, with this new affidavit, the story changed. (DiEugenio, Reclaiming Parkland, p. 94)

That mix-up/discrepancy is fully (and reasonably) explained by Lieutenant J.C. (Carl) Day in his 6/23/64 affidavit. But if you want to think this is all a great-big lie, go ahead. ....

--Quote On:--

"The third hull, commission number 545, was later released directly to the FBI by the Dallas Police Department Homicide Division. At 10:00 P.M. November 22, 1963, Detective C. N. Dhority brought the three hulls in the marked envelope back to Lieutenant Day in the Identification Bureau office to recheck for prints. Dhority retained one hull, commission number 545 and left the other two, commission numbers 543, 544 along with the envelope with me to be sent to the FBI. Vince Drain, FBI agent, took custody at 11:45 A.M. the same day. When I appeared before the commission April 22, 1964, I could not find my name on one of the hulls, identified as commission number 543, and thought this was the hull that had been retained by Dhority. On June 8, 1964, the three hulls, commission numbers 543, 544, and 545, were back in Dallas and were examined by Captain G. M. Doughty and myself at the local FBI office. Close examination with a magnifying glass under a good light disclosed that my name "Day" was on all three hulls, at the small end. Also GD for Captain George Doughty was on two of them. Commission numbers 543 and 544 were the first two sent to Washington on November 22, 1963. They have Doughty's initials where he marked the hulls as they were released to Vince Drain at 11:45 P.M. on November 22, 1963 by Doughty and Day. The third hull, commission number 545, does not have Doughty's mark, but is plainly marked "Day". In Washington, I had numbers 543 and 545 switched because I didn't find my name on number 543. I can identify commission numbers 543, 544, and 545 from my name on them, as the three hulls found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963. As to the time I scratched my name on the hulls, I do not remember whether it was at the window when picked up or at 10:00 P.M. November 22, 1963, when they were returned to me by Dhority in the marked envelope. It had to be one or the other, because this is the only time I had all three hulls in my possession."

--End Lt. Day Quote.--
 

Edited March 24, 2018 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

In my opinion, there is a discrepancy between 510 and 512.

 Look at whatever is in the A position on Steve's post above.

 

Can someone magnify those two images?

[Tom Hume]

I'll give it a go: The top photo is a close-up of Shell "A" from CE510, and the bottom photo is a close-up of Shell "A" from CE512. I used the CE510 and CE512 photo-versions  that were posted on this thread. Looking closely,  this version of CE510 appears to have a whole lot more pixels than its pixel-poor neighbor, CE512 (How come? Are there higher resolution photos out there for us to look at? Is there anything to be learned here?).

CE510 (shell "A" close-up)

CE512 (shell "A" close-up)

Jim D, you wrote that in his book, John Armstrong had some interesting things to say about CE510 and CE512. Anything worth sharing?

Steve Thomas asked, “The shells have been moved, haven’t they?”

I'll say that shell “A” appears to be in a different spot. And I wonder if there is something fishy about CE512. Notice that the black circles are perfect, and that before the perfect black circles were added to the photo, some lighter circles had been drawn in by hand. Notice the lighter hand-drawn circle around shell “A” in CE 512. If that thing that looks more like cigarette butt than a shell casing is the reason for that circle, it’s not in the middle of the circle where it should be, but on the edge. Who would circle something and not place the object of interest in the middle?

                                                   CE510                                                                    CE512                                                                               

 

 

Edited March 25, 2018 by Tom Hume

[Ron Bulman]

9 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

"Goofy" or not, Captain Fritz did retain one of the 3 shells in his office at the DPD.

Here's exactly what Captain Fritz said in an affidavit dated June 9, 1964:

--Quote On:--

"Three spent rifle hulls were found under the window in the southeast corner of the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, Dallas, Texas, on the afternoon of November 22, 1963. When the officers called me to this window, I asked them not to move the shells nor touch them until Lt. Day of the Dallas Police Department could make pictures of the hulls showing where they fell after being ejected from the rifle. After the pictures were made, Detective R. M. Sims of the Homicide Bureau, who was assisting in the search of building, brought the three empty hulls to my office. These were delivered to me in my office at the police headquarters. I kept the hulls in an envelope in my possession and later turned them over to C. N. Dhority of the Homicide Bureau and instructed him to take them to Lt. Day of the Identification Bureau. I told Detective Dhority that after these hulls were checked for prints to leave two of them to be delivered to the FBI and to bring one of them to my office to be used for comparison tests here in the office, as we were trying to find where the cartridges had been bought. When Detective Dhority returned from the Identification Bureau, he returned the one empty hull which I kept in my possession. Several days later, I believe on the night of November 27, Vince Drain of the FBI called me at home about one o'clock in the morning and said that the Commission wanted the other empty hull and a notebook that belonged to Oswald [sic; this is an error on Fritz' part, because the "Commission" didn't even exist as of 11/27; Fritz probably meant to say "the FBI" instead of "the Commission"]. I came to the office and delivered these things to the FBI. We have Mr. James P. Hosty's receipt for these items in our report." -- J.W. Fritz; 6/9/64

--End Quote.--

So, Jim, is it your opinion that the above affidavit, which is completely reasonable and sensible in every respect, is nothing but a pack of lies?

Fritz made errors?