New Photographic Proof: Todd's Initials on 399!

[Sandy Larsen]

41 minutes ago, Paul Cummings said:

Just what we all wanted another Hijack thread between Larsen and Cohen. You guys need to settle some issues privately. 

 

Tell that to Jonathan. I don't follow him around looking for a chance to pounce.

 

[Pat Speer]

21 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

It will be great when they stop suppressing the photos Hunt took.

Not sure what you mean. There is no "they" here. John had plenty of opportunities to make his entire cache available to everyone. He told me he planned to do so. But he died before he could get around to it. We still have a lot of his images--including the ones posted earlier by Gary Murr. And it shows what looks like the ET just where you would expect it to be. 

[Pat Speer]

21 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

The initials aren't on the Hunt photo. Either he removed them from his photo or someone added them to the bullet before NIST photographed it.

The vertical line on the bullet in the Hunt photo is in the wrong place to be part of the T that is seen in the NIST photo. It is too low.

 

Please demonstrate. The angles of the cameras to the bullet are not identical. But if you compare the ET to the other initials and the gouge, it appears to be in the identical location in all the photos. 

[Sandy Larsen]

18 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Please demonstrate. The angles of the cameras to the bullet are not identical. But if you compare the ET to the other initials and the gouge, it appears to be in the identical location in all the photos. 

 

The vertical line in the Hunt photo that is supposedly part of the T in the NIST photo is too far down (i.e. away from the bullet tip). I did the following to determine this:

In both photos you can see some initials that look a bit like the person scratched in an asterisk. I drew a horizontal line from an unambiguous point on the asterisk to see where it lands on the vertical line of the T.  It lands higher on the vertical line in the Hunt photo. This indicates that the line is too low in the Hunt photo to be part of the T we see in the NIST photo.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

 

Can somebody tell me how that big gouge on the tip of the NIST bullet got there? I don't see it at all in the Hunt photo, even though it should be directly facing me.

In fact, I don't even see that gouge in another NIST photo that is rotated the same as the Hunt photo bullet. I see it only in the above NIST photo.

This is most perplexing.

 

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Can somebody tell me how that big gouge on the tip of the NIST bullet got there? I don't see it at all in the Hunt photo, even though it should be directly facing me.

In fact, I don't even see that gouge in another NIST photo that is rotated the same as the Hunt photo bullet. I see it only in the above NIST photo.

This is most perplexing.

 

The John Hunt photos posted by Gary Murr were FBI photos taken before the FBI took a gouge from the tip for spectrographic testing. Apparently, the photo at left above was taken with the bullet titled slightly away from the camera, so as to accentuate the gouge, which is apparent in the photo at right, just below the crest of the bullet. The key to orienting these photos is the nick to the right of the ovals. In one this nick is near the middle of the bullet. In the other it is on the right. When one cross references the ET in the photos to the nick on the right and the gouge above the E, it seems apparent that the ETs are in the same location. 

[Sandy Larsen]

10 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

The John Hunt photos posted by Gary Murr were FBI photos taken before the FBI took a gouge from the tip for spectrographic testing. Apparently, the photo at left above was taken with the bullet titled slightly away from the camera, so as to accentuate the gouge, which is apparent in the photo at right, just below the crest of the bullet. The key to orienting these photos is the nick to the right of the ovals. In one this nick is near the middle of the bullet. In the other it is on the right. When one cross references the ET in the photos to the nick on the right and the gouge above the E, it seems apparent that the ETs are in the same location. 

 

Thanks Pat!

Is that supposed to be the same gouge as the one we see here?

 

 

[David Von Pein]

I created this additional comparison "montage" showing the NARA and NIST versions of CE399, with this montage including a clearer version of the NARA photo. I can't really see the "T" (or the "E") in the NARA picture. It's just too indistinct to make out in the NARA version, IMO....

Edited June 29, 2022 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Is that supposed to be the same gouge as the one we see here?

I think I can see what you're getting at, Sandy. But, again, I think it's just a case of being at the mercy of the NARA photos, which just are not nearly as good and clear as the new NIST images.

In the NARA photo you posted above, the gouge at the top of the bullet seems to have a different appearance than it has in the NIST picture with the "ET" initials. But here's another NIST image (below) posted by Steve Roe in his June 11th Washington Decoded article. Take note of the "scraped" area just to the left of the gouge itself. That scraped area (for lack of a better term) kind of looks like an extension of the gouge, and is probably what we're seeing (in a blurrier form) in the NARA photo.

 

 

Edited June 29, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Micah Mileto]

4 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

 

Lol, I remember you saying "The Elmer Todd initials MUST be on the bullet somewhere" and everybody was saying you're in denial

[David Von Pein]

25 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Lol, I remember you saying "The Elmer Todd initials MUST be on the bullet somewhere" and everybody was saying you're in denial

Indeed, Micah. It was that way for years. Here's just one example:

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

ROBERT HARRIS -- "Those initials [of FBI agent Elmer Todd] are not on CE399."

DAVID VON PEIN -- "Yes, they are. You just can't see them in the NARA photos."

JAMES DiEUGENIO -- "This has now gone beyond absurdity. Davey Boy, everyone here is still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is. Something you never ever do. In other words...go to Travelocity, book a flight and a hotel room, and go ahead and do what you have been saying you would do for ages: Prove John Hunt is a l-i-a-r."

DAVID VON PEIN -- "Yeah, right, Jimbo. Like the NARA is going to allow me to just waltz right in and examine CE399. Get real. Fact is: John Hunt DID NOT examine the bullet itself. He examined the same photos that have been posted in this very thread. And those photos (as good as they might be) are not definitive proof that Todd did not mark CE399. Plus: There are TWO separate (and corroborating) official FBI documents that tell us that Elmer Todd DID mark the bullet (CD7 and CE2011). And CD7 confirms that Todd marked the bullet on the day of the assassination itself. Spit on those records if you want to; call them fake if you want to (and you do want to, naturally). But I'm not willing to do so. Period."

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

[The above discussion is from October 2012. The original EF Forum link is HERE.]

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

Edited June 29, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Indeed, Micah. It was that way for years. Here's just one example:

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

ROBERT HARRIS -- "Those initials [of FBI agent Elmer Todd] are not on CE399."

DAVID VON PEIN -- "Yes, they are. You just can't see them in the NARA photos."

JAMES DiEUGENIO -- "This has now gone beyond absurdity. Davey Boy, everyone here is still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is. Something you never ever do. In other words...go to Travelocity, book a flight and a hotel room, and go ahead and do what you have been saying you would do for ages: Prove John Hunt is a l-i-a-r."

DAVID VON PEIN -- "Yeah, right, Jimbo. Like the NARA is going to allow me to just waltz right in and examine CE399. Get real. Fact is: John Hunt DID NOT examine the bullet itself. He examined the same photos that have been posted in this very thread. And those photos (as good as they might be) are not definitive proof that Todd did not mark CE399. Plus: There are TWO separate (and corroborating) official FBI documents that tell us that Elmer Todd DID mark the bullet (CD7 and CE2011). And CD7 confirms that Todd marked the bullet on the day of the assassination itself. Spit on those records if you want to; call them fake if you want to (and you do want to, naturally). But I'm not willing to do so. Period."

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

[The above discussion is from October 2012. The original EF Forum link is HERE.]

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

I'm new here, been lurking for some time now, but pretty soon it became clear to me that "some people" should have learned by now to keep an open mind about all of these matters... nope...   they are still reacting the same way they did years ago.    Why ???   I feel really sorry for that, as I know most of them did a lot of work on the case.    But how one treats another person - that just might have some different ideas - says a lot to me,  it's just about being respectfull, nothing more....    And no such thing as "a 100% closed case" to me, there is always something we do not know for sure.   Anyway, I also wanted to thank ALL of you for your contributions, something can be learned from ALL of them.

History doesn't change, it's our knowledge about it that does... 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

'm new here, been lurking for some time now, but pretty soon it became clear to me that "some people" should have learned by now to keep an open mind about all of these matters... nope...   they are still reacting the same way they did years ago.    Why ???   I feel really sorry for that, as I know most of them did a lot of work on the case.

Welcome to the forum. You have hit on one of the main reasons that certain individuals (who shall remain nameless) will never quit. They simply have invested too much in the old canards to give up now.

[David Von Pein]

2 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

In the NARA photo you posted above, the gouge at the top of the bullet seems to have a different appearance than it has in the NIST picture with the "ET" initials. .... That scraped area (for lack of a better term) kind of looks like an extension of the gouge, and is probably what we're seeing (in a blurrier form) in the NARA photo.

As an addendum to my thoughts about the "gouge" and the "scraped" area which appears to be an extension to the left of that gouge, I created another comparison montage, using the two NARA photos below.

When viewing these non-hi-def NARA pictures, so much depends on the angle and the light which is falling on certain parts of the bullet when the photos were taken. Here we can see the "gouge" at the top of the bullet, but because of the way the light from the flashbulb strikes part of the gouge, that gouge has a totally different appearance in each photograph.

Such differences might cause some CTers to shout "Something's wrong here", but IMO the differences in appearance can easily (and properly) be explained in ways that are far from conspiratorial in nature.

[David Von Pein]

FYI / FWIW....

Here's yet another "montage" photo that I just now created---this time depicting a different NARA photo of CE399 from the ones presented earlier.

And this is quite frustrating, because the area of the bullet which most definitely does contain the "ET" initials of FBI agent Elmer Todd is most certainly shown in this NARA image below---just to the right of the "K" in Charles Killion's initials. And Killion's "K" is easily discernible in both photos, indicating that Killion dug deeper into the bullet's surface with his marking than did Todd, because I can't see a trace of Todd's "E" or "T".

This only tends to emphasize the point I have made many times over the last 10 or more years --- i.e., that Todd's initials are most certainly on the bullet, but the NARA photos just aren't clear or pristine enough to capture those initials.

I enlarged the NARA pic in this montage below. To see the same photo in its original (non-enlarged) condition, go here --- https://www.maryferrell.org/photos.html?set=NARA-CE399

Edited June 29, 2022 by David Von Pein