The 3 Carcanos

[David G. Healy]

6 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

As has been covered on this forum over and over again, the Moorman photos were never altered. Just for fun, I'd love for you to explain to us how and when the evil plotters painted trees onto a Polaroid a few inches in size -- an alteration that apparently went undetected until you discovered it?

Moorman photos have never, NEVER been verified as authentic on this or any other internet USENET forum that I'm aware of. Are you silly or what? 

Film/photo alterations are so easy... So easy in fact, you can't verify the authenticity of one, image discussed during the past 4 weeks of photo manipulation discussions on this forum.

If you are declaring fact of which you have proof, post the proof or a link. Otherwise you are just making more noise.

Are you speaking from ignorance again, making claims you can certify as authentic, or, pretending to be an expert? Speak up, Lad.

[James DiEugenio]

2 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

Jim, wasn't there a military intelligence guy, I think his name was James Powell, who was trapped in the building when the Dallas Police sealed it off ? Seems to me he would be a stranger, wouldn't he ?

Yes there was.

And personally, I do not trust Truly at all.

If there was an inside man, I am beginning to think it was him.

Edited June 24, 2021 by James DiEugenio

[Benjamin Cole]

10 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

Wouldn't believing that the rifle first found and mistakenly identified not just as a German Mauser but one of a specific caliber also mean believing that the Dallas Police couldn't read?

 

Danny Z-

You raise interesting points. 

There is the possibility that Weitzman and others did not want to handle the weapon, and so could not hold it in their hands and read the small print on the barrel. So Weitzman identified the rifle by its general look, and others deferred. 

However, Craig always insisted he saw the word "Mauser" stamped on the barrel. 

For me, Weitzman's most important testimony is that the final two shots were fired "simultaneously." Obviously, two shots fired simultaneously are heard as one, so Weitzman meant "nearly simultaneously." 

And how does one fire nearly simultaneous shots with a single-shot bolt-action rifle? 

Well, that and the "Secret Service man" Weitzman (and DPD'er Joe Smith) ran across near the Grassy Knoll...

 

[John Butler]

3 hours ago, David G. Healy said:

Moorman photos have never, NEVER been verified as authentic on this or any other internet USENET forum that I'm aware of. Are you silly or what? 

Film/photo alterations are so easy... So easy in fact, you can't verify the authenticity of one, image discussed during the past 4 weeks of photo manipulation discussions on this forum.

If you are declaring fact of which you have proof, post the proof or a link. Otherwise you are just making more noise.

Are you speaking from ignorance again, making claims you can certify as authentic, or, pretending to be an expert? Speak up, Lad.

Well said Mr. Healey.  I wish I had to brains to say the same thing.  I've been a fan since the days when you did work with Jack White, John Costella, and James Fetzner.  

[Tony Krome]

47 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

And personally, I do not trust Truly at all.

If there was an inside man, I am beginning to think it was him.

Which would then call into question everything Truly stated.

Baker's original Friday affidavit precedes and contrasts with Truly's Saturday affidavit. If Truly was the inside man, favour swings to Baker's 3rd or 4th floor encounter, which negates Truly's 2nd floor lunchroom story. It also means that Baker later conformed to Truly's scenario.

Further, it was Truly that spoke to Ruth Paine, and later agreed to hire Oswald. By implication, the "inside man" was complicit in positioning the patsy over the motorcade route. Baker stated in testimony that he recognised Oswald, after he was arrested, as the same man he encountered in the TSBD. Therefore, if we believe Baker, it was Oswald on the 3rd or 4th floor, just over a minute after the shooting. Unless of course Baker later conformed to Truly's Oswald ID on the way up the stairs.

I'm not convinced ... interesting though

[Ron Bulman]

37 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Which would then call into question everything Truly stated.

Baker's original Friday affidavit precedes and contrasts with Truly's Saturday affidavit. If Truly was the inside man, favour swings to Baker's 3rd or 4th floor encounter, which negates Truly's 2nd floor lunchroom story. It also means that Baker later conformed to Truly's scenario.

Further, it was Truly that spoke to Ruth Paine, and later agreed to hire Oswald. By implication, the "inside man" was complicit in positioning the patsy over the motorcade route. Baker stated in testimony that he recognised Oswald, after he was arrested, as the same man he encountered in the TSBD. Therefore, if we believe Baker, it was Oswald on the 3rd or 4th floor, just over a minute after the shooting. Unless of course Baker later conformed to Truly's Oswald ID on the way up the stairs.

I'm not convinced ... interesting though

I don't trust Truly or Baker.  Both were likely compromised.  Truly refused to talk about it afterwards, "it was in the past", even according to his family.  His wife commented about him fearing repercussions regarding his family later in life if he commented.  Or words to this effect if I recall correctly. 

[Tony Krome]

36 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I don't trust Truly or Baker.  Both were likely compromised.  Truly refused to talk about it afterwards, "it was in the past", even according to his family.  His wife commented about him fearing repercussions regarding his family later in life if he commented.  Or words to this effect if I recall correctly. 

Yes, but there is a big difference in compromising or conforming after the fact, as opposed to being an inside man or complicit in the lead up to the assassination.

[John Butler]

9 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Which would then call into question everything Truly stated.

Baker's original Friday affidavit precedes and contrasts with Truly's Saturday affidavit. If Truly was the inside man, favour swings to Baker's 3rd or 4th floor encounter, which negates Truly's 2nd floor lunchroom story. It also means that Baker later conformed to Truly's scenario.

Further, it was Truly that spoke to Ruth Paine, and later agreed to hire Oswald. By implication, the "inside man" was complicit in positioning the patsy over the motorcade route. Baker stated in testimony that he recognised Oswald, after he was arrested, as the same man he encountered in the TSBD. Therefore, if we believe Baker, it was Oswald on the 3rd or 4th floor, just over a minute after the shooting. Unless of course Baker later conformed to Truly's Oswald ID on the way up the stairs.

I'm not convinced ... interesting though

Tony,

From your explanation, I think I am convinced.  I was convinced years ago when I first read Baker's statements and Roy Truly's statement.  The man on the 3rd or 4th floor could very well have been Oswald.  But, which one?  I have the one known as Harvey out on Elm Street and then later in the doorway as Prayer Man.  Could Roger Craig have identified one Oswald from the other?  The one he saw running down the hill was the one he identified as Oswald.  This was Harvey at the DPD station.  

[Jonathan Cohen]

57 minutes ago, John Butler said:

The man on the 3rd or 4th floor could very well have been Oswald.  But, which one?  I have the one known as Harvey out on Elm Street and then later in the doorway as Prayer Man.  Could Roger Craig have identified one Oswald from the other?  The one he saw running down the hill was the one he identified as Oswald.  This was Harvey at the DPD station.  

John, stop for a second and think about what you're saying. Are you suggesting that during the assassination, one "Oswald" was inside the Texas School Book Depository, and the other "Oswald" was standing in the doorway of the building? If so, what measures were in place to make sure the two "Oswalds" didn't accidentally run right smack into one another, thus foiling the entire decades-long doppelganger project? Why on earth would the conspirators risk that happening at the absolute most important moment of the conspiracy?

Considering that "Harvey and Lee" theorists still can't get their stories straight on which "Oswald" was which some 57 years after the crime, the rhetorical question of whether Roger Craig could "have identified one Oswald from the other" seems particularly moot...

[John Butler]

Jonathan,

I recognize you don't care much for the Harvey and Lee story.  But, there was enough contradictory evidence on how "Oswald" left the TSBD.  One by vehicle and one by bus.  The two Oswalds had many years to perfect their game of switch-em.  Most folks are not very good at facial recognition or comparing two objects.  There is a thread, Oswald's Shirt currently up.  Photos of Oswald's shirt were being compared.  I looked at those years ago and didn't notice that they were different.  One shirt had a hole in the sleeve and the other didn't.  

I thought about that and couldn't believe that people for 57 years didn't notice that in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 24, I hope I got that number right.  I saw it immediately this time around.  As I said I hope someone would have noticed that before.  Surely, there is some one out there who has. 

[Gil Jesus]

22 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Yes there was.

And personally, I do not trust Truly at all.

If there was an inside man, I am beginning to think it was him.

I agree. And Truly took a lot of secrets with him to the grave. And another one I don't trust is the Postal Inspector, Harry Holmes. It seems to me that these people had an agenda.

[James DiEugenio]

I thought Baker did not recognize Oswald when he was sitting right across from him that afternoon.

[Tony Krome]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

I thought Baker did not recognize Oswald when he was sitting right across from him that afternoon.

Mr. BAKER - I didn't get anything out of him. Mr. Truly had come up to my side here, and I turned to Mr. Truly and I says, "Do you know this man, does he work here?" And he said yes, and I turned immediately and went on out up the stairs.
Mr. BELIN - Then you continued up the stairway?
Representative BOGGS -Let me ask one other question. You later, when you recognized this man as Lee Oswald, is that right, saw pictures of him?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. I had occasion to see him in the homicide office later that evening after we got through with Parkland Hospital and then Love Field and we went back to the City Hall and I went up there and made this affidavit.
Representative BOGGS -After he had been arrested?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.

[Ron Bulman]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I thought Baker did not recognize Oswald when he was sitting right across from him that afternoon.

I thought so too.  But I can't find Baker's statement/report for the evening of 11/22/63 just googling it.  I didn't think he mentioned recognizing Oswald then.  But he does remember such for the Warren Commission six months later.  Interesting given the Secret Service turned Dr. Perry on the throat wound within a week or two. 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

didnt weitzman refer to the rifle as having a mauser "action"? that term usually means a bolt-action rifle. my recollection was that it was not uncommon to call bolt-action rifles as having a mauser action. so it is possible he was generically referring to the rifle?