Basic facts that seem like conspiracy-killers to me

[Greg Doudna]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

It's more likely by far that someone had taken it before the evening of the 21st, and was hoping Oswald wouldn't notice its absence. 

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Pat, you already know I don't buy that someone broke into Ruth Paine's garage and took Oswald's rifle. I found this to be an extremely far-fetched theory. 

My recently posted paper on the Furniture Mart (https://www.scrollery.com/?p=1450) establishes to the level of fact that Lee Oswald was in the Furniture Mart on Nov 11, 1963 asking for a gunsmith and being directed to the Irving Sports Shop down the street, last seen leaving appearing intending to go there.

A followup paper by me on the Irving Sports Shop, which I should have up within a few days, takes up the authenticated job ticket for a scope installation for "Oswald" which turned up at the Irving Sports Shop, the location where Oswald seeking a gunsmith was directed by Mrs. Whitworth of the Furniture Mart and where Oswald did then go next. I take up the earliest account of the employee at the Sports Shop who did that Oswald scope installation of that job ticket telling the FBI, on Mon Nov 25, in his earliest account, that he associated a photo of Oswald with a customer he remembered about two weeks earlier before Nov 25, who had the same kind of work done as the Oswald job ticket (scope installation) and that he remembered the rifle of that customer (whom he associated with a photo of Oswald, whose scope installation agreed in kind and date range with the Oswald work order done for an individual named "Oswald") was "Argentine made", that is, a Mauser, the same original mistake in identification of the same Mannlicher-Carcano rifle made by four law enforcement officers on Nov 22, TSBD. I will show that the employee, Dial Ryder, was working the front counter of the Sports Shop alone in the store that day, Nov 11 Veterans Day, because the owner, Greener, was on vacation, and the only other employee, a woman who usually worked the front counter, was not there that day for the holiday. Ryder did the job for Oswald on the spot while Oswald waited, Oswald paid cash, and the cash went into Ryder's pocket as a cash job without being run through the cash register or store paperwork as was supposed to have been done. The three holes versus two of the drill-and-taps on the job ticket writeup is only an illusory, not real, objection to the rifle having been the Mannlicher-Carcano, and all of Ryder's subsequent claims (and of Greener who wasn't even there at the time Oswald had the scope reinstalled) that the Oswald rifle Ryder had worked on had not been the Mannlicher-Carcano are simple motivated distancing or, at best, mistaken memory, in short, not credible and not true: it was definitely Oswald and definitely was the only rifle ever associated with Oswald, the Mannlicher-Carcano, on which Oswald had the original scope that had been shipped with the rifle from Klein's reinstalled at the Irving Sports Shop, on Nov 11.

There is no need for speculation whether the rifle was or was not removed from the Ruth Paine garage prior to the 21st. It was removed, on Nov 11, removed by Oswald. I establish that as a fact in new ways in the two papers, the one already up, that have not been shown before.

What happened with the rifle and its whereabouts, after it was removed from the garage the morning of Nov 11 by Oswald, whether it was put back into the garage again or was not put back into the garage again, is unknown on the basis of known evidence. Let that be emphasized: there is no evidence that the rifle was in the garage after its removal from the garage by Oswald on Nov 11. The rifle's whereabouts after it is last known out of the garage, but still in Irving in Oswald's possession, on Nov 11, until that rifle was then found on the 6th floor of TSBD on Nov 22--are unknown, a black hole of information where it was during the next 11 days, with no information stronger than conjecture concerning its whereabouts in that 11-day period prior to the assassination. 

There was no theft of the rifle, no breaking into Ruth's garage, necessary to explain an hypothesized removal of the rifle before Nov 22. Oswald removed it on Nov 11, and that is not hypothetical or conjecture but I move the needle in my two papers to establishing, by argument, that as a fact "beyond reasonable doubt".   

 

[Ron Ege]

On 1/22/2023 at 1:58 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks Ron.

Here is probably the best summary of the North Carolina call.

When Robert Blakey says something is deeply disturbing, then it likely is.

http://www.groverproctor.us/jfk/jfk80.html

In Proctor's fine article, it appears that after the SS rejected the call, they were looking for the subject.  And man, did the Hurts scramble around doing all they could to avoid being the subject of it.  That excuse they gave Henry Hurt is a doozy.

 

Jim, thanks for the reminder of the link; had read it before, certainly a great refresher.

Always amazes me, regardless of the myriad of puzzle pieces that have been laid out the past near 60 years, indicating that the JFA was a conspiracy, that all somehow get waved off as just so much balderdash.

In just your link alone, there's Oswald (pretty obvious false defector (FD)), linked to the Nag's Head training facility for FD's, Marchetti, Hurt (intelligence background), Blakely "throttling back" on the "Mafia Did It" refrain, Schweiker's statement, the SS interested in a "Heard/Hurt", and on and on.

Instead, Oswald was just some mixed-up young guy who just decided to buy an antiquated rifle, mysteriously acquiring a few bullets for it, and miraculously pulled off a shooting feat, that has never yet, been EXACTLY equaled.  IOW no variables in the recreations - an inexperienced shooter (not experts/snipers) from the same location, in the same amount of time, shooting at same target, at the same speed, using the same rifle in the same exact condition as it was found that day, i. e., not repaired/adjusted/conditioned, and on and on.

Are we to believe that none of the those referenced pieces in the link, not to mention gosh knows how many others (100s and 100s, 1000s?) that have been offered over six decades have absolutely no connection to a conspiracy. 

What would be the probability of that?  

I would proffer - beyond, astronomical.

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks Ron, to this day I think that is the best summary of the whole North Carolina call.

As per Oswald, those observations by you are accurate.

No one has ever duplicated that feat without cheating.  The military guys with the stationary target and the height factor, and according to the late Roger Feinman, CBS enlarged the target.

Finally, how could Oswald obtain only four bullets?  No gun shop I ever knew sold bullets as singles.

[David Von Pein]

Important Paper Bag Addendum....

On October 22, 2019, Patrick Jackson (in this post at Duncan MacRae's JFK Assassination Forum), noticed something in one of the original DPD photographs taken on the sixth floor of the Book Depository on 11/22/63 that apparently nobody else had ever noticed prior to that time in 2019. Jackson noticed that the empty paper bag (which became Commission Exhibit No. 142) was actually visible in this picture (also seen below) which shows the boxes around the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest.

The paper bag, with its creases and folds plainly visible, is sitting on top of some of the Sniper's Nest boxes. I've drawn a blue box around the paper bag, which has been, quite literally, hiding in plain sight for over 50 years:

And here's an extra-large zoomed-in version of the photo, produced in 2019 by Patrick Jackson, highlighting the paper bag on top of the boxes (click to enlarge):



The Warren Commission utilized the above photograph showing the outside of the Sniper's Nest as Commission Exhibit No. 508. And the back side of the original photograph taken by the Dallas Police Department indicates that that photo was taken on "11-22-63" on "6th floor, 411 Elm, SE Corner where shots fired from window".

And here's another high-quality version of the very same photo (from the Dallas Municipal Archives). Click for a bigger view:



So, the above 11/22/63 photo showing an empty paper bag sitting atop boxes which are bordering the Sniper's Nest (which is a location just a few feet from where the police originally discovered the folded-up paper sack) is providing pretty good evidence for CE142 being a legitimate and valid piece of evidence in the JFK murder case.

Because if there was never any paper bag found near the Sniper's Nest at all on November 22nd, as many CTers claim, then how can they explain the presence of what certainly looks like the CE142 bag sitting on top of those SN boxes on November 22?

After looking at the above picture, will conspiracists now contend that the evil DPD cops decided to haul their "fake" paper bag back up to the sixth floor and place it atop the Sniper's Nest boxes?

But if the evil Dallas cops did something like that, why in the world wouldn't they have wanted to take a photograph of the fake bag in the place where they say it was originally discovered (the far southeast corner, on the floor)?

In my opinion, the above photo of the bag creates quite a problem for the many conspiracy theorists who currently reside in the "There Was Never Any Paper Bag Found On The Sixth Floor On November 22nd" club.

Lots More "Paper Bag" Discussion:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#The-Paper-Bag

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

Important Paper Bag Addendum....

On October 22, 2019, Patrick Jackson (in this post at Duncan MacRae's JFK Assassination Forum), noticed something in one of the original DPD photographs taken on the sixth floor of the Book Depository on 11/22/63 that apparently nobody else had ever noticed prior to that time in 2019. Jackson noticed that the empty paper bag (which became Commission Exhibit No. 142) was actually visible in this picture (also seen below) which shows the boxes around the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest.

The paper bag, with its creases and folds plainly visible, is sitting on top of some of the Sniper's Nest boxes. I've drawn a blue box around the paper bag, which has been, quite literally, hiding in plain sight for over 50 years:

And here's an extra-large zoomed-in version of the photo, produced in 2019 by Patrick Jackson, highlighting the paper bag on top of the boxes (click to enlarge):



The Warren Commission utilized the above photograph showing the outside of the Sniper's Nest as Commission Exhibit No. 508. And the back side of the original photograph taken by the Dallas Police Department indicates that that photo was taken on "11-22-63" on "6th floor, 411 Elm, SE Corner where shots fired from window".

And here's another high-quality version of the very same photo (from the Dallas Municipal Archives). Click for a bigger view:



So, the above 11/22/63 photo showing an empty paper bag sitting atop boxes which are bordering the Sniper's Nest (which is a location just a few feet from where the police originally discovered the folded-up paper sack) is providing pretty good evidence for CE142 being a legitimate and valid piece of evidence in the JFK murder case.

Because if there was never any paper bag found near the Sniper's Nest at all on November 22nd, as many CTers claim, then how can they explain the presence of what certainly looks like the CE142 bag sitting on top of those SN boxes on November 22?

After looking at the above picture, will conspiracists now contend that the evil DPD cops decided to haul their "fake" paper bag back up to the sixth floor and place it atop the Sniper's Nest boxes?

But if the evil Dallas cops did something like that, why in the world wouldn't they have wanted to take a photograph of the fake bag in the place where they say it was originally discovered (the far southeast corner, on the floor)?

In my opinion, the above photo of the bag creates quite a problem for the many conspiracy theorists who currently reside in the "There Was Never Any Paper Bag Found On The Sixth Floor On November 22nd" club.

Lots More "Paper Bag" Discussion:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#The-Paper-Bag

 

Really? You don't think that could be any sort of paper lying there? 

I mean, wrapping paper in the TSBD was like cow pies on the King Cattle Ranch in Texas.  

 

[Tom Gram]

2 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Important Paper Bag Addendum....

On October 22, 2019, Patrick Jackson (in this post at Duncan MacRae's JFK Assassination Forum), noticed something in one of the original DPD photographs taken on the sixth floor of the Book Depository on 11/22/63 that apparently nobody else had ever noticed prior to that time in 2019. Jackson noticed that the empty paper bag (which became Commission Exhibit No. 142) was actually visible in this picture (also seen below) which shows the boxes around the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest.

The paper bag, with its creases and folds plainly visible, is sitting on top of some of the Sniper's Nest boxes. I've drawn a blue box around the paper bag, which has been, quite literally, hiding in plain sight for over 50 years:

And here's an extra-large zoomed-in version of the photo, produced in 2019 by Patrick Jackson, highlighting the paper bag on top of the boxes (click to enlarge):



The Warren Commission utilized the above photograph showing the outside of the Sniper's Nest as Commission Exhibit No. 508. And the back side of the original photograph taken by the Dallas Police Department indicates that that photo was taken on "11-22-63" on "6th floor, 411 Elm, SE Corner where shots fired from window".

And here's another high-quality version of the very same photo (from the Dallas Municipal Archives). Click for a bigger view:



So, the above 11/22/63 photo showing an empty paper bag sitting atop boxes which are bordering the Sniper's Nest (which is a location just a few feet from where the police originally discovered the folded-up paper sack) is providing pretty good evidence for CE142 being a legitimate and valid piece of evidence in the JFK murder case.

Because if there was never any paper bag found near the Sniper's Nest at all on November 22nd, as many CTers claim, then how can they explain the presence of what certainly looks like the CE142 bag sitting on top of those SN boxes on November 22?

After looking at the above picture, will conspiracists now contend that the evil DPD cops decided to haul their "fake" paper bag back up to the sixth floor and place it atop the Sniper's Nest boxes?

But if the evil Dallas cops did something like that, why in the world wouldn't they have wanted to take a photograph of the fake bag in the place where they say it was originally discovered (the far southeast corner, on the floor)?

In my opinion, the above photo of the bag creates quite a problem for the many conspiracy theorists who currently reside in the "There Was Never Any Paper Bag Found On The Sixth Floor On November 22nd" club.

Lots More "Paper Bag" Discussion:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#The-Paper-Bag

 

If the bag was sitting on those boxes the whole time and not discovered until later that would explain a lot - but why would the DPD make up some elaborate story about it being found in the corner? There are plenty of examples of law enforcement covering up their own incompetence in this case, but this just seems a bit excessive.

What I’d like to know is if that stack of boxes is visible in any other photographs or films from that day. Also do we have any idea what time that photo was taken? 

[Denny Zartman]

10 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Finally, how could Oswald obtain only four bullets?  No gun shop I ever knew sold bullets as singles.

I've told this story before and I'm going to tell it again.

When I've been on other online public discussion groups and the topic of the JFK assassination has come up, there are always gun enthusiasts who know nothing about the assassination but never fail to chime in and show off their vast knowledge of all things firearm.

But, whenever I ask them how much ammo they have on hand at that particular moment, and if it wasn't unusual that LHO (a person allegedly owning and regularly practicing with a rifle) had no ammunition at any of his residences, their response is... silence. I've never once had a reply.

[Charles Blackmon]

I don't know what that is circled in yellow in the commission exhibit photo. It obviously is paper of some kind, but it looks way bigger in length than the bag Frazier and Randall claimed they saw Oswald carrying that morning. 

[Michael Griffith]

3 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Important Paper Bag Addendum....

On October 22, 2019, Patrick Jackson (in this post at Duncan MacRae's JFK Assassination Forum), noticed something in one of the original DPD photographs taken on the sixth floor of the Book Depository on 11/22/63 that apparently nobody else had ever noticed prior to that time in 2019. Jackson noticed that the empty paper bag (which became Commission Exhibit No. 142) was actually visible in this picture (also seen below) which shows the boxes around the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest.

The paper bag, with its creases and folds plainly visible, is sitting on top of some of the Sniper's Nest boxes. I've drawn a blue box around the paper bag, which has been, quite literally, hiding in plain sight for over 50 years:

And here's an extra-large zoomed-in version of the photo, produced in 2019 by Patrick Jackson, highlighting the paper bag on top of the boxes (click to enlarge):



The Warren Commission utilized the above photograph showing the outside of the Sniper's Nest as Commission Exhibit No. 508. And the back side of the original photograph taken by the Dallas Police Department indicates that that photo was taken on "11-22-63" on "6th floor, 411 Elm, SE Corner where shots fired from window".

And here's another high-quality version of the very same photo (from the Dallas Municipal Archives). Click for a bigger view:



So, the above 11/22/63 photo showing an empty paper bag sitting atop boxes which are bordering the Sniper's Nest (which is a location just a few feet from where the police originally discovered the folded-up paper sack) is providing pretty good evidence for CE142 being a legitimate and valid piece of evidence in the JFK murder case.

Because if there was never any paper bag found near the Sniper's Nest at all on November 22nd, as many CTers claim, then how can they explain the presence of what certainly looks like the CE142 bag sitting on top of those SN boxes on November 22?

After looking at the above picture, will conspiracists now contend that the evil DPD cops decided to haul their "fake" paper bag back up to the sixth floor and place it atop the Sniper's Nest boxes?

But if the evil Dallas cops did something like that, why in the world wouldn't they have wanted to take a photograph of the fake bag in the place where they say it was originally discovered (the far southeast corner, on the floor)?

In my opinion, the above photo of the bag creates quite a problem for the many conspiracy theorists who currently reside in the "There Was Never Any Paper Bag Found On The Sixth Floor On November 22nd" club.

Lots More "Paper Bag" Discussion:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#The-Paper-Bag

And what evidence do you have that the bag lying on top of those boxes was the same bag that was allegedly used to transport the rifle into the building? One would imagine that paper bags were rather plentiful in a book depository, right? One also wonders why the DPD did not take an evidence photograph of that bag, i.e., a photo that was taken specifically of the bag and not a photo taken of an area and that just happened to include a bag.

Finally, would you venture a guess as to why not a trace of oil was reported as being found on the bag that was allegedly used to transport the rifle, given the fact that the rifle was well-oiled? 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Really? You don't think that could be any sort of paper lying there? 

I mean, wrapping paper in the TSBD was like cow pies on the King Cattle Ranch in Texas.  

Nonsense. It's the SIZE and the SHAPE of the paper bag that's the key (of course). How many hunks of TSBD wrapping paper shaped like the one on top of those boxes do you think were in the building at that moment on 11/22?

The likely answer to that question is: 1 (which is the same one Lee Oswald brought to work in Buell Frazier's car that morning).

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

If the bag was sitting on those boxes the whole time and not discovered until later that would explain a lot - but why would the DPD make up some elaborate story about it being found in the corner? There are plenty of examples of law enforcement covering up their own incompetence in this case, but this just seems a bit excessive.

The DPD didn't "make up" anything. The bag was first found folded up and on the floor near the pipes in the far southeast corner of the sixth floor. It was then picked up and unfolded and placed on the boxes surrounding the Sniper's Nest. It was then photographed by the DPD (with that photo later becoming CE508).

But, of course, the purpose of the CE508 photograph was most certainly not an effort to document the paper bag. (That's fairly obvious, seeing as how nobody on Earth even noticed that the bag was sitting on top of those boxes until 56 years later.) The bag just happened to show up (just barely) in one of the crime scene photos.

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Charles Blackmon said:

I don't know what that is circled in yellow in the commission exhibit photo. It obviously is paper of some kind, but it looks way bigger in length than the bag Frazier and Randall [sic] claimed they saw Oswald carrying that morning. 

Of course it looks bigger that the estimates provided by Frazier and Randle. That's because it IS bigger than those incorrect 24-to-27-inch estimates.* It's really a 38-inch bag (when unfolded and fully extended).

* Linnie Mae Randle, however, did provide this "36-inch" estimate to the FBI on the very same day of the assassination [also available to view in Commission Document No. 5]. She apparently revised that "3 feet" estimate later on and decided the bag was only about 27 inches in length.

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Charles Blackmon]

2 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Of course it looks bigger that the estimates provided by Frazier and Randle. That's because it IS bigger than those incorrect 24-to-27-inch estimates.* It's really a 38-inch bag (when unfolded and fully extended).

* Linnie Randle, however, did provide an early "36-inch" estimate to the FBI. She apparently revised that 3-foot estimate later on and decided the bag was only about 27 inches in length.

 

That paper "bag" looks to be more than 38" long in the fully extended position, just eyeballing it against the box in the foreground that is surely at least 24" wide.

I am sure this has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum, but there is no way a person can hold a 36" bag under their arm and cup it underneath, which is another of the amazing feats being attributed to Oswald. Looking forward to the resulting firestorm lol.

 

 

[David Von Pein]

26 minutes ago, Charles Blackmon said:

There is no way a person can hold a 36" bag [sic] under their arm and cup it underneath, which is another of the amazing feats being attributed to Oswald.

 

 

VINCENT BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Frazier, is it true that you paid hardly any attention to this bag?"

BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- "That is true."

BUGLIOSI -- "So the bag could have been protruding out in front of his [Oswald's] body, and you wouldn't have been able to see it, is that correct?"

FRAZIER -- "That is true."

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Charles Blackmon]

It says "Video unavailable" so I will look to someone else to kindly prove to me little Lee could carry a 36" bag the way the WC describes while not stumbling.

Buell wasn't the only witness. Linnie was as well. No idea why he would say anything that stupid unless pressure got to him (very likely).