C399 and Elmer Todd's initials

[Stu Wexler]

Yes. But there is some level of bend on CE399 that suggests it struck *something.* I saw an oak tree branch and some dirt.

[Mark Knight]

If I recall correctly, the late Tom Purvis owned a 6.5 Carcano rifle, and he produced a similar-looking bullet after passing through a branch of a live oak tree. Complete with some of the lead core being extruded from the base, similarly to CE399. But, as I recall, his bullet lacked the bend that CE399 has.

[Stu Wexler]

You are correct Mark. But I had another person fire two bullets off an oak and into dirt. If you could average the two bullets you would have CE399, almost exactly. The bullet also had a more profound deflection than anyone expected.

[Steve Roe]

On 11/14/2021 at 1:41 PM, Stu Wexler said:

Steve you are missing the point so let me clarify it. Elmer Todd initialed *a* bullet recovered from Texas. He later identified his initials on *that same* bullet. If that bullet were CE399 his initials should have been etched in like everyone else who later received it. They are not. What happened to them?  You have to argue that they faded away such that no one who has seen it, both live and in high res photos (that you yourself can look at) can find them. Yet initials for other people at the lab who engraved their initials at the same time as Todd, per FBI procedure, are on CE399 and all the other ballistics material those lab techs engraved. So you would have to believe Todd's initials disappeared while the others' markings somehow stood the test of time.  *Or* you can believe that another bullet came from Dallas, the one Elmer Todd engraved, is not CE399 and was removed from the evidence stream.  Which one is more likely?

Stu, Tammi Long of the ARRB went to the Archives and observed CE399. According to her report, she saw the initials on the bullet.  showDoc.html (maryferrell.org)

[James DiEugenio]

Are you for real? Talk about grasping at straws.  

She does not write anything about seeing Todd's initials on the bullet.

And if she had, it would have been proof of evidence alteration.

Edited November 15, 2021 by James DiEugenio

[W. Tracy Parnell]

18 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Are you for real? Talk about grasping at straws.  

She does not write anything about seeing Todd's initials on the bullet.

And if she had, it would have been proof of evidence alteration.

While she does not specifically mention Todd, she does say "I was able to discern the initials representing the chain of custody of item CE399." That chain would neccessarily include Todd.

[Micah Mileto]

41 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

While she does not specifically mention Todd, she does say "I was able to discern the initials representing the chain of custody of item CE399." That chain would neccessarily include Todd.

We just need more images from NIST's computer model of the bullet.

[Steve Roe]

5 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

While she does not specifically mention Todd, she does say "I was able to discern the initials representing the chain of custody of item CE399." That chain would neccessarily include Todd.

He just won't believe it Tracy. Cover-Up mode in progress. 

[James DiEugenio]

Baloney Tracy.

To establish a chain you would have to go back all the way to when it was transferred to the Secret Service at Parkland.

And then go forward. Step by step.  We know that is all BS from the work that Gary Aguilar did with Thompson and the confession of Bardwell Odum.

None of that happened, and Hoover lied about it. And we can prove it.

The only initials that are on that bullet are those that John said were on it..  It does not matter that Greg admitted he was wrong.  Now Roe comes up with a fig leaf that anyone can see is just more BS. Did she talk to Bardwell Odum?  Did she uncover never before seen photographs of the exhibit taken in Dallas?  Where is the transcript? Where are the pictures?

Todd's initials are not on it.  We have that from both John, through the photos, and Dave Mantik who held the exhibit in his hand.  Plus Dave's  colleague also had it in his hand and inspected it. Plus we have another witness through Stu. 

Greg should have never made that post. Because it would not matter if he was wrong, as I knew he was.  It would be like waving a red cape in a bull ring. Next we will have Paul May jumping on.

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

BTW, one of the parts of the film that I thought was  cogent is where we have two professionals discussing this very issue of chain of custody.

That is Brian Edwards and Henry Lee.

Brian teaches Criminal Justice and was both a police investigator and member of a SWAT Team. Testified in scores of trials.

Henry Lee was a Police Captain in Taiwan, and the Supervisor of Public Safety in Connecticut.  In those two positions he oversaw literally scores of investigations.

Anyone can see from what they say that the chain of custody in this case is a joke. Just about every stricture they discuss was disobeyed. For instance, as Johnny Cairns showed in his fine essay, The Presumption of Innocence, the handling of the shells at the TSBD would have gotten those thrown out of court. The DPD was changing its story on that up until March and the WC went along with it. David Belin actually facilitated it.

Same thing with CE 399. Henry Lee's reaction to this was neat. It will be in the book. 

It would never have been admitted.  

Edited November 16, 2021 by James DiEugenio

[Benjamin Cole]

On 11/14/2021 at 2:52 AM, Micah Mileto said:

Sorry, not true, not Robert Frazier's initials! See how clear the R and the F look when the bullet was digitally recreated in a computer https://www.nist.gov/image/kennedy-stretcher-bullet-digital

Excellent, but there seems mechanism for "Rotating" or spinning the bullet to see all sides and angles.