Jump to content
The Education Forum

10 Reasons why I believe that the Depository Rifle isn't Oswald's


Recommended Posts

10 Reasons Why I Believe That The Depository Rifle Isn't Oswald's
By Gil Jesus ( 2010 )


Reason #1: MORE THAN ONE MANNLICHER-CARCANO RIFLE EXISTED WITH THE SERIAL NUMBER C2766

The 40" rifle currently in evidence is not the only Mannlicher-Carcano with the serial number of C2766. On page 250 of his book, Kennedy and Lincoln, the late Dr. John K. Lattimer said the following:

"In 1974 and 1975, my sons and I had conducted a series of experiments using a 6.5 mm Mannlicher-Carcano carbine, model 91-38, serial number C2766, equipped with an Ordinance Optics Company four power telescope exactly like Oswald's."

Lattim1.jpg.ba90845a03bc5315fadf58e9e7c66a1d.jpg

But Lattimer's wasn't the only 6.5 Mannlicher Carcano with serial number C2766.

Reason #2. KLEIN'S SPORTING GOODS BOUGHT MORE THAN ONE MANNLICHER-CARCANO WITH THE SERIAL NUMBER C2766

In volume 11, page 205 of the Warren Commission Hearings, Louis Feldsott, president of Crescent Firearms, in a sworn affidavit to the Commission, claimed that he was contacted by the FBI on the evening of November 22, 1963. They requested that he check his files to see if he had any records concerning the sale of an Italian-made 6.5 mm. rifle with the serial number C2766. When he checked, he found that he had records indicating the rifle was sold to Klein's Sporting Goods on June 18, 1962. This information of the 6.5 rifle with the serial number C2766, he said, was conveyed to the FBI on the evening of November 22, 1963 and all records of the purchase, sale and transportation of the weapon were given to the FBI.

www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh11/html/WC_Vol11_0108a.htm

In their tracing of the shipping records of the C 2766 rifle, however, the FBI makes no mention of the June 1962 sale. They cite, instead, the February, 1963 sale of 100 rifles from the same dealer, Crescent Firearms, to Klein's. In that shipment is a list of the rifles' serial numbers. Included in the list is a 6.5 rifle serial number C2766.


www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0361b.htm

But thanks to the affidavit of Louis Feldsott, we have evidence that Klein's bought two C 2766 rifles from Crescent Firearms: one in June 1962 and the other in February 1963.

I'll get back to the June 1962 rifle later. Right now I'd like to concentrate on the February, 1963 rifle.

Reason #3. THE SHIPPING RECORDS IN EVIDENCE ARE NOT THE SHIPPING RECORDS FOR THE DEPOSITORY RIFLE

The FBI traced the sale of the 40" C2766 rifle found in the TSBD backward and claimed that it was a part of a shipment of 100 rifles weighing 750 lbs. that was sent to Klein's from Crescent Firearms in February, 1963.

But that shipment was for 36" rifles.

How do we know ? Because Fred Rupp said so.

Fred Rupp was a Federally licensed gun dealer who had a contract with Crescent Firearms to pick up guns from the Harborside Terminal and inspect, test-fire, repack and ship them to Crescent's retail customers ( i.e. Klein's).

The delivery receipt from Lifschultz Fast Freight listed the freight as 10 crates/cartons of guns/rifles and listed the weight at 750 lbs.

www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0359a.htm

Had the shipment been of the 40" rifles, at 7 lbs. each, the total weight including 160-200 lbs. for the crates would have been in the 860-900 lb. range.

Instead, the 750 lbs. gross weight is entirely consistent of shipment of 10 crates at 20 lbs each ( 200 ) and 100 rifles at 5.5 lbs. each ( 550 )

In other words, the shipment received by Klein's in February, 1963 was indeed a shipment of 36-inch weapons.

www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf

Reason #4. THE RIFLE "HIDELL ORDERED" WAS THE 36" RIFLE

Waldman Exhibit 8 is a copy of the order blank used by "A.Hidell " to order the rifle from Klein's. On that order form, taken from the February, 1963 edition of American Rifleman, one can see that Oswald ordered catalog # C20-T750, which is the catalog number in the advertisement of the 36" rifle.

www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364b.htm

One can also see from the advertisement of the 40" rifle that that rifle had a different catalog number, C20-750.

All models of the Mannlicher-Carcano in Klein's ads with the letter"T" in the catalog number, were 36" rifles.

Reason #5. THE SHIPPING MANIFEST INDICATED THAT THE RIFLE THAT WAS SHIPPED TO "HIDELL" WAS THE SAME RIFLE AS THE RIFLE ORDERED

Waldman Exhibit 7 is the copy of the shipping manifest that accompanied the rifle when shipped. It clearly states that the catalog number of the shipped item is C20-T750 and not C20-750.

www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.htm

The ONLY difference in the catalog numbers is the difference between the 36" rifle and the 40" rifle.

How important was the catalog number to the folks doing the shipping ? William Waldman, VP of Klein's Sporting Goods, told the WC that the catalog numbers for rifles ordered with scopes were different than for the same rifle without a scope and that the different number described "the rifle, scope and mount". ( 7 H 362-363 )

Reason #6. THE SHIPPING MANIFEST INDICATED THAT THE COST FOR SHIPPING WAS FOR THE 36" RIFLE.

The shipping cost is noted in two places, where it says "PP=1.50" for the cost of Parcel Post, and again in the handwritten column where it says 150. This is exactly the amount sent by "Hidell" to ship the 36 " rifle.

www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.hTM

Reason #7. KLEIN'S DIDN'T RUN OUT OF THE 36" RIFLE UNTIL NOVEMBER, 1963

Klein's 36-inch Italian "carbine" was advertised in Field and Stream from January, 1962 through November, 1963.

www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf

Which means, folks, that Klein's hadn't run out of them at the time of the "Hidell" order.

Reason # 8. No 40" Italian rifle was advertised by Klein's in The American Rifleman magazine from October 1962 through February 1963

According to assassination researcher/author and former detective Ian Griggs, the 40" "carbine" began to be advertised in The American Rifleman in April, 1963. Field and Stream did not begin advertising the 40-inch Italian weapon until September, 1963. It was from the November issue that Dallas Postal Inspector Harry Holmes submitted his exhibit # 2 as a "duplicate" to the ad "Hidell" ordered from . ( 20 H 174 )

Many of the Warren Commission apologists contend that Klein's shipped a 40" rifle in lieu of the advertised rifle because they had run out of the 36's. But the evidence so far indicates otherwise. In order to believe that the 40" rifle was shipped to "A. Hidell" in place of the 36" rifle, you must believe ALL of the following:

a.) That Klein's shipped a different rifle without notifying the customer that the rifle he ordered was out of stock.

b.) That Klein's shipped a different rifle than ordered without giving the customer the option of a refund.

c.) That Klein's shipped a different rifle than ordered and used the wrong item number on the manifest.

d.) That Klein's shipped a rifle that had not been advertised for sale and continued to advertise a rifle that they no longer had.

In my opinion, not only is that quite a stretch, but there's no evidence to support it.


Reason #9. KLEIN'S NEVER MOUNTED SCOPES ON THE 40 " RIFLE

The Klein's employee who originated the idea of mounting a scope on the rifle was Mitchell Westra. He told the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) that Klein's only mounted the scope on the 36 inch MC. (HSCA interview of Westra 2/20/78)

The man who actually mounted the scopes for Klein's was William Sharp, their in-house gunsmith. He confirmed what Westra testified to: the package deal with the scope and MC rifle was used by Klein's to market the 36 inch MC. (HSCA interview of Sharp, 2/21/78)

In addition, FBI expert Robert Frazier testified to the WC that in order to ascertain whether or not Klein's mounted the scope on the rifle, the FBI asked them to supply a duplicate rifle with a scope and then had to tell Klein's where on the frame to mount the scope.

Mr. FRAZIER. We contacted the firm, Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago, and asked them concerning this matter to provide us with a similar rifle mounted in the way in which they normally mount scopes of this type on these rifles, and forward the rifle to us for examination. In this connection, WE DID INFORM THEM THAT THE SCOPE SHOULD BE IN APPROXIMATELY THIS POSITION ON THE FRAME OF THE WEAPON.

Mr. EISENBERG. Pardon me, Mr. Frazier. When you say "this position," so that the record is clear could you--

Mr. FRAZIER. Oh, yes; in the position in which it now is, approximately three-eighths of an inch to the rear of the receiver ring. ( 3 H 396 )



So the FBI told Klein's what "position on the frame" "the scope should be in". Information that Klein's would not have needed had they normally mounted "scopes of this type on these rifles".

It's clear from their ads that Klein's was offering the 40" rifle with a scope. But the evidence indicates that the scopes were not mounted "in-house".

Reason # 10: THE SLING MOUNTS ON THE "BACKYARD" RIFLE ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE SLING MOUNTS ON THE DEPOSITORY RIFLE

If the rifle depicted in the famous "backyard photographs" is the rifle that "A.Hidell" ordered, then the rifle removed from the Texas School Book Depository is not. The reason is that the rifle in CE 134 ( an enlargement of CE 133-A ) shows a rifle with a front bottom sling mount, whereas the rifle removed from the Depository is a rifle with side sling mounts.

jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html

The subject is covered on my youtube channel in a video entitled, "One Rifle or Two ?"



CONCLUSIONS:

There was more than one Mannlicher-Carcano with serial number C2766. Besides John Lattimer's rifle, there's evidence that Klein's bought two C2766's from Crescent Firearms, one in June 1962 and the other in February, 1963.

I've discussed fully the February 1963 rifle. It is my conclusion that the February 1963 shipment of rifles to Klein's was of the 36" rifle and that one of those, serial number C2766 was shipped to "A.Hidell". I base this on the evidence of the weight of the rifles and their crates and the list of the serial numbers in the shipment. I also conclude that "A.Hidell" ordered a 36" rifle and that he was shipped a 36" rifle. I base that conclusion on the fact that the catalog number "Hidell" ordered was the same as the catalog number of the 36" rifle with the scope, that the shipping manifest indicated that the catalog number shipped was the same as the 36" rifle with the scope, and that the cost of the shipping was the same as the 36" rifle.

I have found no evidence in the shipping documentation or in the testimony that would lead me to conclude that "Hidell" was ever shipped a 40" rifle or a rifle that weighed 7 lbs, 11 1/4 oz. In fact, I have found no evidence that any other rifle was shipped to "Hidell" than the rifle he ordered.

And now for the June 1962 C2766. What follows next is my own opinion, it is speculative because the evidence that would prove or disprove what I have to say no longer exists.

I believe that the 40" 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano now in evidence is a stage prop. I believe that this is the C2766 rifle that was sold to Klein's in June, 1962, the rifle whose records were turned over to the FBI on November 22, 1963, only to disappear (like much of the evidence that didn't support the official version disappeared ) into thin air.


I believe that the records of this weapon would have indicated who purchased it and as such, would have revealed the identity of the person or persons who framed Oswald. And because of this, these records would never see the light of day.

In my opinion, the person or persons who were responsible for framing Oswald would have had to know where he was living, his political views, his weapons purchases and other pertinent information.

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

Who could have framed Oswald?

What happened to the 36" rifle? There is no evidence that "A. Hidell" ever received it. There's no documentation to show that the rifle ever got past the Dallas Post Office.


Which brings us to Postal Inspector Harry Holmes.

Holmes presented an ad to the WC for the 40" rifle as a "duplicate ad" when in fact it was not.

The Dallas Post office destroyed the record of who was authorized to receive mail at Oswald's Post Office Box, in violation of Postal Regulations.

Holmes was eager to present the "Hidell" purchase as a purchase for a 40" rifle.

Holmes told the WC that when he spoke with the SS on the evening of the 23rd, he was told that the name on the money order was "A.J.Hidell" and he knew that that was the right money order.

www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0168b.htm

He gave two reasons why he knew it was the right name.

Mr. HOLMES. When the box was opened in the name of Lee H. Oswald......when he rented the post office box in New Orleans, he used the name of A. J. Hidell as one of the persons entitled to receive mail in that box.

Mr. BELIN. At that time did you know about that?

Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. All right, what else?

Mr. HOLMES. In his billfold the police had found a draft registration card in the name of A. J. Hidell on his person at the time of his arrest, and I had seen it.
 (7 H 296)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...