Was CE 399 fired from the Depository Rifle ?

[Michael Crane]

Both 399 & the bullet Tomlinson found were not fired from the depository.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

Gil- we address the issue of the HSCA experts not being able to match test fires from the rifle with the prior FBI tests. I asked our expert witness Cliff Spiegelman if repeated firings could account for the difference. He said no and provided examples of machine guns being fired over thousand times without changes in toolmarks. LIkewise, corrosion could not account the for the changes.

Of course, we have learned from the Innocence Project and the 2009 NAS study that toolmarks science is nothing more than junk science. It is no longer appropriate for a foresenic expert to testify that a particular bullet can be matched to a particular rifle to the execlusion of all other weapons. Now they have to testify on the likelihood of match along with an error rate. 

The Journal of Toolmark Examiners have tried to resurrect their careers by publishing poorly designed tests. A recent analysis by the  Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence recently determined that toolmark testimony is no more accurate than flipping coins.  

[James DiEugenio]

Jeremy Gunn:  Did you ever use Ansco film yourself in conducting medical photography?

Stringer: Not very often.

Gunn: DId you use Ansco film in the --taking the autopsy--

Stringer (incredulous). Not as far as I know.  (emphasis in original)

Gunn--photographs of President Kennedy?

Stringer: Not as far as I know.  (Shaking his head slowly from side to side.)

Gunn: is there any question in your mind whether you were the photographer of these images before you right now.

Stringer: Yes, it ifs Ansco and if its a film pack.  I have no --I have no recollection of using a film pack. 

 

Later: on the undamaged cerebellum.

 

Gunn: Whether it was damaged, lacerated, cut?

Stringer: yes.

Gunn Was it?

Stringer Yes

Gunn; Do you see any damaged cerebellum in these photographs

Stringer: No. (From Horne, pp. 807-810)

 

Edited June 2, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

To get back to the point Larry is making, that is really interesting.

Spiegelman would be admitted as an expert witness in a court case. And if he testified to that, I mean whew.

Talk about sending a bender into the evidence.

DId  someone switch the bullets later,  or did the WC and FBI just lie the first time around? And the HSCA covered up for them?

Edited June 2, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[Gary Murr]

On 5/27/2022 at 8:30 AM, Gil Jesus said:

why the bullet doesn't have Elmer Todd's mark on it

Because Todd never marked the bullet in the first place. The link below leads to a paper containing my thoughts on this subject matter. FWIW [Hint - press ctrl/enter simultaneously to gain access to this Word doc.]

https://www.transferbigfiles.com/6c3fdb43-683a-4538-8817-fe7013ecf129/smo10vxiHkhJ3vk5x2E3kg2 

[Gary Murr]

Apologies for the broken link initially posted. I am providing a new link below [for anyone interested in this paper concerning Todd and CE 399] via a different file-transfer link. Hopefully this one works.

Download link
https://wetransfer.com/downloads/7e8e3d71055c7289bb94b25c961e38c720220605152752/234fce3ff5501009727378f74518bb4820220605152854/ff3b74 

[Greg Doudna]

On 6/4/2022 at 8:19 AM, Gary Murr said:

Because Todd never marked the bullet in the first place. The link below leads to a paper containing my thoughts on this subject matter. FWIW [Hint - press ctrl/enter simultaneously to gain access to this Word doc.]

https://www.transferbigfiles.com/6c3fdb43-683a-4538-8817-fe7013ecf129/smo10vxiHkhJ3vk5x2E3kg2 

Gary I just finished reading it. What a piece of research. Your argument that Todd never claimed to have market his initials on the bullet he received from Johnsen, and that that idea originated as a mistake on the part of the Dallas FBI office, would be totally convincing if it were not for that document on your p. 12, Fig. 11, CD 7 p. 288, the FBI report dated 11/26/63 by Elmer Todd: "initials of both SA Todd and Frazier were etched on the nose of the bullet". It is hard to read that as other than Todd saying he marked it. However you make an interesting point that the later teletype of 6/24/64 by Todd's boss, Malley--the source for CE2011--has ambiguous wording: "SA Todd identified bullet by inspection this date from initials marked thereon for ident purposes at FBI laboratory upon receipt". As you note, that does not say whose initials Todd saw or that the initials were his. It could be imprecise wording, or it could mean Todd did not see his initials there on that occasion in June 1964, in agreement with no one is able to find his initials on C399 today. Thanks for the research (the original link worked for me, just so you know). 

[Gary Murr]

Hello Greg:

Thanks for taking the time to read my paper - a side-project/distraction I threw together late last year as a breather to take me away from a major manuscript I was working on [and continue to work on as my time allows]. One of the points I was trying to get across is that in truth I would not have expected Todd to have placed his initials on CE 399 for the simple reason that he was not an employee of the FBI lab at the time of the assassination, prior to the assassination event, nor at anytime after the assassination event. On the other hand he did put his "initials", indeed his entire signature, on the envelope given to him by Rowley in the evening of November 22, 1963, in my opinion Todd's [expected] due diligence in indicating his role in the provenance/travels of the item in question. It takes a unique pen to etch one's initials/identifying nomenclature onto a metallic surface, in this instance the copper jacket of the expended 6.5mm WCC cartridge. And though the main FBI lab in Washington undoubtedly had just such an implement, indeed more than one, there is no indication that I have found from any FBI lab employee, including lead on this case, Robert Frazier, that anyone gave Todd the pen in order that he put his initials on CE 399. One conclusion that could be drawn from the surviving documentation is that Todd may have remained in the FBI lab, or was present in the lab, to see Frazier, Cunningham, and Killion put their initials on this piece of evidence, but I have no proof of that. I attempted to talk to Robert Frazier while constructing this paper, but he refused to discuss any aspect of the assassination event when I  phoned him. 

FWIW

[Micah Mileto]

4 hours ago, Gary Murr said:

Hello Greg:

Thanks for taking the time to read my paper - a side-project/distraction I threw together late last year as a breather to take me away from a major manuscript I was working on [and continue to work on as my time allows]. One of the points I was trying to get across is that in truth I would not have expected Todd to have placed his initials on CE 399 for the simple reason that he was not an employee of the FBI lab at the time of the assassination, prior to the assassination event, nor at anytime after the assassination event. On the other hand he did put his "initials", indeed his entire signature, on the envelope given to him by Rowley in the evening of November 22, 1963, in my opinion Todd's [expected] due diligence in indicating his role in the provenance/travels of the item in question. It takes a unique pen to etch one's initials/identifying nomenclature onto a metallic surface, in this instance the copper jacket of the expended 6.5mm WCC cartridge. And though the main FBI lab in Washington undoubtedly had just such an implement, indeed more than one, there is no indication that I have found from any FBI lab employee, including lead on this case, Robert Frazier, that anyone gave Todd the pen in order that he put his initials on CE 399. One conclusion that could be drawn from the surviving documentation is that Todd may have remained in the FBI lab, or was present in the lab, to see Frazier, Cunningham, and Killion put their initials on this piece of evidence, but I have no proof of that. I attempted to talk to Robert Frazier while constructing this paper, but he refused to discuss any aspect of the assassination event when I  phoned him. 

FWIW

Any knowledge of what John Hunt was reportedly told by Robert Frazier?

[Gary Murr]

19 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Any knowledge of what John Hunt was reportedly told by Robert Frazier?

Hello Micah:

Regarding your question above; John Hunt spoke to  Robert Frazier on several occasions and I do have some of the exchanges between the two. Is there anything specific or subject matter that John may have queried Frazier about concerning the FBI lab and their handling of assassination evidence?

Gary Murr

[Micah Mileto]

8 hours ago, Gary Murr said:

Hello Micah:

Regarding your question above; John Hunt spoke to  Robert Frazier on several occasions and I do have some of the exchanges between the two. Is there anything specific or subject matter that John may have queried Frazier about concerning the FBI lab and their handling of assassination evidence?

Gary Murr

Yeah, the "third headshot fragment". From John's essay:

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20190504201256/http://the-puzzle-palace.com/files/JohnHunt.txt

 

I asked Robert Frazier about the headshot fragments and other related issues and what he told me makes the case for tampering even stronger. I wish I'd been able to find him before I went to Pittsburgh for my Wecht Symposium presentation would have been even stronger.

[Micah Mileto]

On 6/5/2022 at 8:40 AM, Gary Murr said:

Apologies for the broken link initially posted. I am providing a new link below [for anyone interested in this paper concerning Todd and CE 399] via a different file-transfer link. Hopefully this one works.

Download link
https://wetransfer.com/downloads/7e8e3d71055c7289bb94b25c961e38c720220605152752/234fce3ff5501009727378f74518bb4820220605152854/ff3b74 

 

EDIT: Got the link to work

Edited June 8, 2022 by Micah Mileto