In
September, 1963, Buell
Frazier began
work at the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas. The following
month, Ruth
Paine,
a neighbour of Linnie Mae Randle, told her that Lee
Harvey Oswald was
going to work at the same building. The two men became friends and
Frazier agreed to give Oswald a lift to work when he was staying at
Paine's house in Irving.
On
22nd November, 1963, Buell
Frazier gave
Oswald a lift to the Texas Book Depository. He told the Warren
Commission that
Oswald took a package into work that day that he claimed contained
curtain rods. In
his book The Kennedy Conspiracy,
Anthony
Summers, points
out: "Ironically, it was Frazier and his sister who created a
slight doubt that Oswald had, in fact, been carrying the murder weapon
rather than his "curtain rods." Both insisted Oswald's parcel
was a good eight inches shorter than the disassembled Mannlicher-Carcano.
Frazier demonstrated this by showing that Oswald could not physically
have carried a 35-inch rifle tucked into his armpit with the base
cupped in his hand, as Frazier remembered."
A
group of Dallas Police Department detectives, including Will
Fritz,
Seymour
Weitzman,
Roger
Craig,
Eugene Boone and Luke Mooney searched
the Texas School Book Depository soon after the assassination of John
F. Kennedy.
On the sixth floor they discovered a rifle hidden beneath some boxes.
The
detectives identified it as a 7.65 Mauser. District
Attorney Henry M. Wade, in a television interview, told the nation
that the rifle was a Mauser. It was the FBI
who announced that the officers had been mistaken. According to them
it was a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano, an Italian bolt-action rifle used
in the Second
World War.
All the detectives agreed to change their mind about the rifle except
Roger Craig.
The
FBI discovered that the rifle had been purchased
from Klein's sporting goods in Chicago
on 12th March, 1963, by a man using the name, A. J. Hiddell. When
Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested he was
carrying a forged identity card bearing the name Alek J. Hiddell.
A palm print taken from the barrel of the rifle was identified as
belonging to Oswald.
Photograph
of Lee
Harvey Oswald
taken on 31st March, 1963.
Open
Debate on the Kennedy Assassination
(E1)
Matthew
Smith, JFK: The Second
Plot (1992)
It was during
the month of March 1963 that Oswald obtained a rifle and a handgun,
if we can rely on Marina's testimony. Not that it is greatly to be
relied upon, as we saw earlier in discussion relating to an incriminating
photograph in which both weapons were flaunted. Curiously, the weapons
were bought, separately, under the name of A. J. Hidell, an alias
which counted for
little with Oswald other than in connection with the orders for the
firearms. There was no reason whatever why Oswald should not have
simply walked into a shop and bought what he wanted, obtaining the
advantage and satisfaction of seeing what he was buying. Texas law
imposed no control over the purchase of such weapons. There would
have been very little - in fact virtually no - chance of Oswald being
identified as the purchaser of the firearms had he bought them over
the counter. So why did he buy them by mail order under this assumed
name? There is strong evidence that the name was meaningful to those
involved in intelligence. Army Intelligence, for instance, was known
to have had a file on A. J. Hidell, the contents of which, significantly,
were destroyed before it could be acquired by investigators. A. J.
Hidell may not have been the only name on intelligence files which
stood for Lee Harvey Oswald, either. Harvey Lee Oswald as Oswald Lee
Harvey are but two other possibilities which would have allowed the
CIA and FBI, when asked, to say they had no such person as Lee Harvey
Oswald working for them. If Oswald bought the rifle and handgun, there
is every reason to believe he would buy them at the behest of his
CIA masters and was told to buy those specific weapons, told to buy
them by mail order, and told to buy them under the name A. J. Hidell.
Why
is Matthew Smith surprised that Lee Harvey Oswald apparently purchased
the Mannlicher-Carcano
by mail order?
(E2)
Jack Minnis and Staughton Lynd, The New Republic (December,
1963)
First press accounts quoted various members of the Dallas
police force as saying the assassin's weapon was a .30-caliber Enfield
and a 7.65mm Mauser. One Secret Service man said he thought the weapon
was an "Army or Japanese rifle" of .25 caliber. The same
accounts reported that the rifle was found on the second floor of
the building by a window, in the fifth-floor staircase, by an open
sixth-floor window, and hidden behind boxes and cases on the second
or sixth floors.
It
was not until the FBI said it had discovered that Oswald had purchased
an Italian-made 6.5mm rifle from a Chicago mail-order house that the
confusion was dispelled. Then all accounts and all sources agreed:
The former .30 caliber-Enfield-7.65 Mauser was now a 6.5mm Italian-made
rifle with telescopic sight. It was also at this time that all sources
began agreeing that the gun had been found on the sixth floor - though
some still held out for the open-window location, while others argued
for the buried-behind-the-boxes theory.
We did not at that time
have a very clear idea of the precise number of seconds within which
the shots had occurred, but we were uneasy about anyone's having got
off the reported three shots with a bolt-action rifle from that distance
at a target moving 12 yards a second with that accuracy and quickly
enough to have created such confusion about who got hit first, the
President or the Governor.
On November 25 The New
York Times reported that "a group of the nation's most knowledgeable
gun experts, meeting in Maryland at the time of the shooting agreed
that, considering the gun, the distance, the angle and the movement
of the President's car, the assassin was either an exceptional marksman
or fantastically lucky in placing his shots." The Times account
does not indicate whether the experts also considered the extreme
rapidity with which the shots were fired.
Then on November 27 The
New York Times ran another story telling about tests which had
been conducted by a "firearms expert from the National Rifle
Association" in Washington. The expert had used a "Model
1938 6.5mm bolt-action rifle." His target had been so feet away.
He was able to get off three shots in 11 seconds and they struck within
a one-inch circle. On a second try the expert was able to get off
three shots in eight seconds with comparable accuracy. Using this
performance as a basis for speculation, the expert reasoned that a
person well-practiced with the use of the gun could have done as well
or better under the conditions of the assassination in Dallas. (The
story did not indicate whether or not the target used in these tests
was stationary or moving.)
Others did not agree with
this expert. The Italian newspaper Corriere Lombardo of Milan
said, as reported in the same The New York Times story, that
if the Model ' were used and that if more than one shot had ben fired
"there must have been a second attacker." In Vienna, the
Olympics champion shot, Hubert Hammerer, said that the initial shot
could have been made under the conditions in Dallas when Mr. Kennedy
was killed, but he considered it unlikely that one man could have
triggered three shots within five seconds with the weapon used.
All these judgments were
made on the theory that the shots were fired as the Presidential car
sped away from the gunman, with the gunman having to allow only for
the forward movement of the car. This supposition, of course, takes
no account of the marksman himself having to move in order to swing
the gun through an arc of 180 degrees.
What evidence
do these journalists provide that suggests that Lee Harvey Oswald
may not have been the owner of the rifle that was used to kill John
F. Kennedy?
(E3)
Seymour
Weitzman,
interviewed by Joe Ball on behalf of the Warren
Commission on 1st April, 1964.
Joe Ball: What did
you do after that?
Seymour Weitzman: After
that, we entered the building and started to search floor to floor
and we started on the first floor, second floor, third floor and on
up, when we got up to the fifth or sixth floor, I forget, I believe
it was the sixth floor, the chief deputy or whoever was in charge
of the floor, I forget the officer's name, from the sheriff's office,
said he wanted that floor torn apart. He wanted that gun and it was
there somewhere, so myself and another officer from the sheriff's
department, I can't remember his name, he and I proceeded until we...
Joe Ball: Was his name
Boone?
Seymour Weitzman: That
is correct, Boone and I, and as he was looking over the rear section
of the building, I would say the northwest corner, I was on the floor
looking under the flat at the same time he was looking on the top
side and we saw the gun, I would say, simultaneously and I said, "There
it is" and he started hollering, "We got it." It was
covered with boxes. It was well protected as far as the naked eye
because I would venture to say eight or nine of us stumbled over that
gun a couple times before we thoroughly searched the building.
Joe Ball: Did you touch
it?
Seymour Weitzman: No, sir;
we made a man-tight barricade until the crime lab came up and removed
the gun itself.
Joe Ball: The crime lab
from the Dallas Police Department?
Seymour Weitzman: Yes,
sir...
Joe Ball: In the statement
that you made to the Dallas Police Department that afternoon, you
referred to the rifle as a 7.65 Mauser bolt action?
Seymour Weitzman: In a
glance, that's what it looked like.
Joe Ball: That's what it
looked like did you say that or someone else say that?
Seymour Weitzman: No; I
said that. I thought it was one.
Joe Ball: Are you fairly
familiar with rifles?
Seymour Weitzman: Fairly
familiar because I was in the sporting goods business awhile....
Joe Ball: Now, in your
statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, you gave a description
of the rifle, how it looked.
Seymour Weitzman: I said
it was a Mauser-type action, didn't I?
Joe Ball: Mauser bolt action.
Seymour Weitzman: And at
the time I looked at it, I believe I said it was 2.5 scope on it and
I believe I said it was a Weaver but it wasn't; it turned out to be
anything but a Weaver, but that was at a glance.
Joe Ball: You also said
it was a gun metal color?
Seymour Weitzman: Yes.
Joe Ball: Gray or blue?
Seymour Weitzman: Blue
metal.
What
evidence is there that Seymour Weitzman changed his mind about the
rifle he found in the Texas Book Depository?
(E4)
Matthew
Smith,
JFK: The Second Plot (1992)
During a thorough search
of the sixth floor of the School Book Depository a rifle was found.
Unhappily for the Warren Commissioners, the four police officers present
at the time it was discovered, unanimously identified it as a German
7.65 Mauser. Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone found the rifle following
the movement of book boxes by Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney and called
Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman to witness his discovery. Another
Deputy Sheriff, Roger Craig, was thereabouts and he saw the gun and
heard the conversations of the others. The officers had no doubts
about their identification and affidavits were drawn up by Boone and
Weitzman, who described the weapon in detail, noting the colour of
the sling and the scope. Police Captain Will Fritz was also present
at the scene and he, also, is claimed to have agreed that the rifle
was a 7.65 Mauser. District Attorney Henry M. Wade, in a television
interview, referred to the sixth-floor discovery and quoted the weapon
as a Mauser, a statement picked up by the press and reported widely.
Following the finding of the gun, however, it was collected by Lieutenant.
C. Day and taken to Police Headquarters, where it was logged as a
6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano, an Italian carbine, bearing the serial number
C2766. Mannlicher-Carcano Italian carbine No. C2766, it was claimed,
belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald.
Those concerned with the
finding of the rifle at the Book Depository and who had written affidavits,
Boone and Weitzman, were pressed, under questioning by the Commission,
to review their identification of it. The Mannlicher-Carcano, at first
glance, looked very much like 7.65 Mauser, it is true. How would they
account, though, for a situation in which they had been close enough
to describe the colour of the sling and yet had made an error in identifying
the rifle itself? After all, the Mannlicher-Carcano bears the legend
'Made in Italy' on the butt, whereas the German gun has the name 'Mauser'
stamped on the barrel! Were these officers unable to read? In spite
of any argument which might be brought to bear, they both, nonetheless,
changed their testimony and conceded they had made a mistake.
Young Roger Craig, who
saw and heard all that had gone on in the Book Depository, refused
to concede that he had been mistaken, or even that he might have been.
Who found
the rifle in the Texas Book Depository? Did they all agree that it
was a 7.65 Mauser? How many changed their minds about the make of
the rifle?
(E5)
The Warren Commission Report (September,
1964)
(1) The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor
Connally were fired from the sixth floor window at the southeast corner
of the Texas School Book Depository. This determination is based upon
the following:
Witnesses
at the scene of the assassination saw a rifle being fired from the
sixth-floor window of the Depository Building, and some witnesses
saw a rifle in the window immediately after the shots were fired.
The
nearly whole bullet found on Governor Connally's stretcher at Parkland
Memorial Hospital and the two bullet fragments found in the front
seat of the Presidential limousine were fired from the 6.5-millimeter
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle found on the sixth floor of the Depository
Building to the exclusion of all other weapons.
The
three used cartridge cases found near the window on the sixth floor
at the southeast corner of the building were fired from the same rifle
which fired the above - described bullet and fragments, to the exclusion
of all other weapons.
The
windshield in the Presidential limousine was struck by a bullet fragment
on the inside surface of the glass, but was not penetrated.
The
nature of the bullet wounds suffered by President Kennedy and Governor
Connally and the location of the car at the time of the shots establish
that the bullets were fired from above and behind the Presidential
limousine, striking the President and the Governor as follows:
President
Kennedy was first struck by a bullet which entered at the back of
his neck and exited through the lower front portion of his neck, causing
a wound which would not necessarily have been lethal. The President
was struck a second time by a bullet which entered the right-rear
portion of his head, causing a massive and fatal wound.
Governor
Connally was struck by a bullet which entered on the right side of
his back and traveled downward through the right side of his chest,
exiting below his right nipple. This bullet then passed through his
right wrist and entered his left thigh where it caused a superficial
wound.
There
is no credible evidence that the shots were fired from the Triple
Underpass, ahead of the motorcade, or from any other location.
(2)
The weight of the evidence indicates that there were three shots fired.
(3)
Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission
to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very
persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet
which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's
wounds. However, Governor Connally's testimony and certain other factors
have given rise to some difference of opinion as to this probability
but there is no question in the mind of any member of the Commission
that all the shots which caused the President's and Governor Connally's
wounds were fired from the sixth floor window of the Texas School
Book Depository.
(4)
The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally
were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald. This conclusion is based upon the
following:
The
Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 - millimeter Italian rifle from which the shots
were fired was owned by and in the possession of Oswald.
Oswald
carried this rifle into the Depository Building on the morning of
November 22, 1963.
Oswald,
at the time of the assassination, was present at the window from which
the shots were fired.
Shortly
after the assassination, the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle belonging to
Oswald was found partially hidden between some cartons on the sixth
floor and the improvised paper bag in which Oswald brought the rifle
to the Depository was found close by the window from which the shots
were fired.
Based
on testimony of the experts and their analysis of films of the assassination,
the Commission has concluded that a rifleman of Lee Harvey Oswald's
capabilities could have fired the shots from the rifle used in the
assassination within the elapsed time of the shooting. The Commission
has concluded further that Oswald possessed the capability with a
rifle which enabled him to commit the assassination.
What
evidence does the Warren Commission Report provide to support the
theory that Lee Harvey Oswald used a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle to kill
President Kennedy?
(E6)
Review
by James
H. Fetzer of Thomas Mallon's book, Mrs. Paine's Garage
(2002)
Interest in Paine's garage,
for example, derives from Oswald having stored his Mannlicher-Carcano,
wrapped in a blanket, in that place. But no remnants of having been
wrapped in a blanket were ever discovered on the alleged assassination
weapon - not the least hairs or fibers - which is very curious, indeed,
had the weapon actually been stored there.
The alleged instrument,
a cheap, mass-produced World War II Italian carbine, has a muzzle
velocity of around 2,000 fps, which means that it is not a high-velocity
weapon. Since the President's death certificates (1963), The Warren
Report (1964), and even more recent articles in The Journal of the
American Medical Association (1992) report that JFK was killed by
high velocity bullets, it follows that he was not killed by Oswald's
weapon, thereby greatly reducing interest in Mrs. Paine's garage.
Why does
James H. Fetzer believe that Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was not used
to kill John F. Kennedy?
(E7)
Craig Stevens, WSVN, Secrets
Of An Assassin (18th November, 2003)
Ruth Paine was at
home when it happened... a mother of two living in suburbia.
"It's very hard for
me to talk about," she says.
Her role in history completely
by accident.
She would later become
one of the key witnesses for the Warren Commission, a panel assigned
to investigate the President's assassination.
"I met Lee and Marina
at a party in Dallas," Ruth says.
Lee Harvey Oswald and his
wife Marina were moving to Texas.
Ruth agreed to let Marina
- a Russian immigrant - live with her while Lee stayed in a separate
apartment... only coming by on the weekends.
"I did not know he
had a gun, although Marina did," Ruth says, "and, in fact,
it was stored in my closet. On the afternoon of the assassination,
six Dallas officers appeared at the door and asked if he has a gun
and I said, no.'"
The only time Lee ever
came by during the week - the day before the assassination.
What Ruth didn't know was
the gun allegedly used to kill the president was stored inside her
garage.
Where,
according to Ruth Paine, did Lee Harvey Oswald hide his Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle.
(E8)
Walter
Cronkite,
The Warren Report:
Part 1, CBS Television (25th June, 1967)
It seemed evident that we should try to establish the
ease or difficulty of that rapid-fire performance. Hence, our next
question: How fast could that rifle be fired? Oswald's rifle was test-fired
for the Warren Commission by FBI and military marksmen. The rate of
fire for this bolt-action rifle and its accuracy against a moving
target were critical to the Commission's case against Oswald. And
yet, incredibly, all tests for the Commission were fired at stationary
targets. The FBI won't comment on why.
Based more on testimony
than on firing tests, the Commission concluded it was an easy shot
for Oswald to hit the President at that range. From its tests the
main conclusion drawn was that this Mannlicher-Carcano could not be
fired three times in a span of less than 4.6 seconds, because it took
about 2.3 seconds to operate the bolt mechanism between shots...
Did Oswald own a rifle?
He did.
Did Oswald take a rifle
to the Book Depository building? He did.
Where was Oswald when
the shots were fired? In the building, on the sixth floor.
Was Oswald's rifle fired
from the building? It was.
How many shots were fired?
Three.
How fast could Oswald's
rifle be fired? Fast enough.
What was the time span
of the shots? Seven or eight seconds.
Did Lee Harvey Oswald
shoot President Kennedy? CBS News concludes that he did.
Does Walter
Cronkite believe that Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was used to kill John
F. Kennedy?
(E9)
Michael
Kurtz, Crime of the Century: The Kennedy Assassination From
a Historians Perspective (1982)
We have already
noted the mysterious circumstances surrounding the alleged discovery
of Bullet 399 on Governor Connally's stretcher. We shall now examine
the medical and ballistics evidence to see if this bullet could have
caused the governor's wounds.
Bullet 399 is a copper-jacketed
Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 mm. bullet. The copper jacketing is completely
intact. Only the very base of the bullet contains any deformities.
The base is slightly squeezed and flattened. About 1.5 to 2.5 grains
of lead are missing from the lead core at the bottom of the missile.
The bullet was ballistically traced to Oswald's rifle. The grooves
and lines on the copper jacketing, caused by the interior of the rifle
barrel, are completely intact, even under microscopic examination.
The Warren Commission's
claim that Bullet 399 caused seven different wounds on President Kennedy
and Governor
Connally, severely damaged two bones, and emerged virtually intact,
losing only 1.5 to 2.5 grains of its original weight, has led numerous
critics to dispute the claim. The critics contend that no bullet could
possibly have caused such damage and emerge intact.
Why
does Michael Kurtz doubt that Bullet 399 wounded President
Kennedy and Governor Connally?
(E10)
Ronald F. White,
Apologists and Critics of the Lone Gunman Theory, included
in Assassination Science (1998)
Based on their
examination of the bolt-action, clip-fed, Mannlicher-Carcano rifle,
firearms experts for the Warren Commission established that at least
2.3 seconds per shot would be required for Oswald to execute the assassination.
The shutter speed of Abraham Zapruder's Bell and Howell movie camera
operated at about 18.3 frames per second. After numbering each individual
frame, tracing the movement of the vehicle, and taking into account
other factors, the Commission hypothesized that since the view from
the snipers nest would have been obscured by the foliage of an oak
tree between frames Z-167 and Z-210, the earliest the president could
have been shot was Z-210. Zapruder's view of the motorcade was blocked
by a road sign between frames Z-207 and Z-225, but when Kennedy appears
from behind the sign he is beginning to react to the throat wound.
The commission therefore reasoned that the President was shot in the
neck between frames Z-210 and Z-225. Based on Connally's reactions
in the Zapruder film, he was apparently struck between Z-236 and Z-238.
These observations, however, were puzzling. If Kennedy was struck
in the back at Z-225 and Connally at Z-238, that would entail a 13-frame
time span or 0.71 seconds. But that would have been impossible since
Oswald would have needed at least 2.3 seconds to fire two shots. Even
if Kennedy was shot as early as Z-210, that would still be only a
28 frame time span, or 1.53 seconds. Therefore, Oswald apparently
could not have shot both Kennedy and Connally. Logically this left
the Warren Commission four options: abandon the lone gunman theory,
assume that Oswald somehow managed to hit the President while shooting
through the tree, lower the 2.3 second estimate of the time required
to operate the rifle mechanism, or assume that a single bullet struck
both Kennedy and Connally. The Commission took the fourth option,
known as the "single bullet hypothesis," and concluded that
three shots were fired within a 4.8 to 7 second time lapse, and that
at least one of the three probably missed the target, although they
could not determine with certainty which of the three missed....
Since the
Warren Commission elected not to extend the time frame in this way,
they concluded that the entire assassination took place between frames
Z-210 and Z-313, or a time span of 5.62 seconds, just enough time
to get off three shots. Any competent gunman would have had the rifle
already cocked for the first shot, in which case the bolt would have
been operated only twice and the absolute minimum time expended operating
the bolt would have been 4.6 seconds. But if four shots were fired,
the rifle would have been cocked three times requiring 6.9 seconds.
So, if four shots were fired there must have been more than one gunman
at Dealey Plaza. Of course, if the Commission had accepted the possibility
that the first shot was fired through the tree at Z-166, then their
estimate of 5.62 seconds could be extended by 2.4 seconds to about
8 seconds, more than enough time for a lone gunman to get off even
four shots.
What
evidence does Ronald F. White provide to suggest that the Warren Commission
Report was wrong to suggest that Lee Harvey Oswald was the only gunman
involved in the killing of President Kennedy?
(E11)
Robert
Livingston,
letter to Maynard
Parker, editor of Newsweek (10th September, 1993)
A further
issue concerns reports of the appearance of cerebellar tissue in the
occipital wound. This was first reported "live" as observations
by an orderly, and by a nurse, both of whom were in the surgery where
attempts to resuscitate the president were conducted prior to his
death. I didn't give any credibility to those stories and dismissed
them from my focus at the time, attributing what I thought must be
mistaken identification of cerebellum to a likely lack of familiarity
with neuroanatomy by two non-medically trained individuals. It would
be easy to assume cerebellum in looking at macerated cerebral tissue
protruding from a bloody wound. But since then, around six reputable
physicians who saw the president at that time have testified that
cerebellum was extruding from the wound at the back of his head. That
is an important clue, indicating that something must have burst into
the posterior fossa with sufficient force to uproot the cerebellum
and blow a substantial hole through the heavy, covering, well-anchored,
tentorium, which separates cerebellum from the main chamber of the
skull.
Dr.
Robert Livingston does not believe that President John Kennedy was
killed by a bullet from the Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle? Why?
(E12)
Henry
Hurt, Reasonable
Doubt: An Investigation into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy
(1986).
One of the enduring
oddities of the evidence found in the assassin's lair is the discovery
of the three cartridge shells ballistically linked to the Oswald rifle.
Those shells were not scattered widely as one would expect them to
be if ejected from a rifle in the normal fashion.
Moreover, two of them
were only inches apart. Another curious point is the failure by investigators
to find a single Mannlicher-Carcano cartridge other than those, including
a live round still in the rifle, discovered at the scene. No extra
cartridge was ever found on Oswald or in his possessions. No evidence
was found that he ever purchased ammunition at all. If he was the
assassin, his only ammunition was at the scene - the cartridge shells
lined up as evidence in the assassin's lair. There is no official
explanation as to where Oswald supposedly got his four cartridges.
As for the Mannlicher-Carcano
that was officially established as the Oswald assassination rifle,
the ancient, bolt-action weapon was one
of the worst possible selections for such skilled shooting. There
is no indication that Oswald knew much about guns, and he was never
regarded as a superlative marksman while he was in the Marine Corps.
Yet he is credited with a combination of shooting skills on November
22 that has never been matched in repeated government tests by the
most proficient riflemen in the United States. Moreover,
there is no evidence that the Mannlicher-Carcano was even fired on
the day of the assassination.
Why does
Henry Hunt have doubts about whether the Mannlicher-Carcano was used
to kill President Kennedy?
(E13)
Buell
Frazier, interviewed by Joseph Ball
before the Warren Commission (24th
July, 1964)
Joseph Ball:
When you got in the car
did you say anything to him or did he say anything to you?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: Let's see, when I got in the car I have a kind of habit of
glancing over my shoulder and so at that time I noticed there was
a package laying on the back seat, I didn't pay too much attention
and I said, "What's the package, Lee?" And he said, "Curtain
rods," and I said, "Oh, yes, you told me you was going to
bring some today." That is the reason, the main reason he was
going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back
some curtain rods, so I didn't think any more about it when he told
me that.
Joseph Ball:
What did the package look like?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: Well, I will be frank with you, I would just, it is right
as you get out of the grocery store, just more or less out of a package,
you have seen some of these brown paper sacks you can obtain from
any, most of the stores, some varieties, but it was a package just
roughly about two feet long.
Joseph Ball:
It was, what part of the back seat was it in?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: It was in his side over on his side in the far back.
Joseph Ball:
How much of that back seat, how much space did it take up?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: I would say roughly around 2 feet of the seat.
Joseph Ball:
From the side of the seat over to the center, is that the way you
would measure it?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: If, if
you were going to measure it that way from the end of the seat over
toward the center, right. But I say like I said I just roughly estimate
and that would be around two feet, give and take a few inches.
Joseph Ball:
How wide was the package.
Buell Wesley
Frazier: Well, I would say the package was about that wide.
Joseph Ball:
How wide would you say that would be?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: Oh, say, around 5 inches, something like that. 5, 6 inches
or there. I don't.
Joseph Ball:
The paper, was the color of the paper, that you would get in a grocery
store, is that it, a bag in a grocery store?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: Right. You have seen, not a real light color but you know
normally, the normal color about the same color, you have seen these
kinds of heavy duty bags you know like you obtain from the grocery
store, something like that, about the same color of that, paper sack
you get there...
Joseph Ball:
What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out
of the car?
Buell Wesley
Frazier: Like I say, I was watching the gages and watched the car
for a few minutes before I cut it off.
Joseph Ball:
Yes.
Buell Wesley
Frazier: He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that
has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you
know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know,
and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the
end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and
so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut
the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car,
he started walking off and so I followed him in.
According
to Buell Wesley Frazier, what did Lee Harvey Oswald say was in the
brown package?
(E14)
Anthony
Summers, The
Kennedy Conspiracy (2002)
The Warren
Commission would dismiss the curtain rods factor as a fabrication,
quoting Oswald's landlady as saying his apartment needed neither curtains
nor rods and saying that no rods had been found at the Depository.
Yet photographs of curtain rods have turned up in the Dallas police
files on the assassination. And a press photographer. Gene Daniels
of the Black Star
agency, has recalled how Oswald's landlady asked him not
to take photos in Oswald's room until she had "the curtains back
up." In fact,
he took pictures as curtain rods were hammered into position
over the uncurtained windows. This was less than twenty-four hours
of the assassination.
The curtain
rods story, then, may not have been a total fiction. In custody, however,
Oswald denied having told Frazier he intended fetching rods for his
rented room - and even insisted that he had not carried a long package,
or placed it on the back seat of Frazier's car, on the morning of
the murder. Both denials are implausible, because there is no reason
to doubt the word of either Frazier or that of his sister, who also
saw Oswald with the long package. Ironically, it was Frazier and his
sister who created a slight doubt that Oswald had, in fact, been carrying
the murder weapon rather than his "curtain rods." Both insisted
Oswald's parcel was a good eight inches shorter than the disassembled
Mannlicher-Carcano. Frazier demonstrated this by showing that Oswald
could not physically have carried a 35-inch rifle tucked into his
armpit with the base cupped in his hand, as Frazier remembered. He
could have done so only if the package was shorter. Yet the Commission
felt Frazier and his sister were mistaken, and to bolster their theory
that Oswald did carry the rifle to the Depository, they had the 38-inch
paper bag which had been found by the window on the sixth floor. The
bag was firmly linked to Oswald by a fingerprint and a palm print,
although it was free from any scratches or oil from the metal parts
of a rifle. This is rather strange, because the Mannlicher-Carcano
was oiled when found. The Warren Commission - and the Assassinations
Committee in 1979 - concluded
that Oswald did carry the rifle to work. Certainly, he carried something
to work and was evasive about it when questioned.
Why
does Anthony Summers doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald took a Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle into the Texas Book Depository on 22nd November, 1963?
(E15)
David Von Palin, JFK
Lancer (20th January, 2003)
When one
piece of evidence that favors Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt is piled atop
another, and another, and another.... I just was curious as to how
many pieces of individual evidence that show Oswald killed JFK in
1963 it takes to sway a person away from the notion of conspiracy?
Or, if nothing else, sway that person away from the "Oswald is
completely innocent" claims?
From everything I can see,
it's a veritable mountain of "Oswald Is Guilty" evidence
(both circumstantial and physical). And not a single speck of it has
been shown to be refutable with 100% absolute certainty.
Does the average researcher
just simply ignore all of the evidence that supports Oswald's lone
guilt (and every bit of hard evidence supports it), or is the idea
of "it must have been a conspiracy" so ingrained into subsequent
generations of people since the event took place that they feel they
have no choice BUT to go with the flow and believe the CTers?
For I ask you HOW could
ALL of the following evidence against Oswald have been either fabricated,
planted, distorted, or in some manner faked?! There's just TOO MUCH
stuff here on the "Oswald Did It" table to ignore! Granted,
I'd agree that perhaps one or two of these things could have been
manufactured to set up a patsy. But ALL of these items?! And complete
silence be maintained by the many, many operatives who must certainly
have been involved in the acts themselves and ensuing 40-year cover-up?!!
Common sense (to me) dictates otherwise. And the "otherwise"
leads anybody who isn't prone to cry "Conspiracy!" at every
turn in the road to finally envision the fact that LHO was a lone
nut who DID indeed pull off what the majority of people say couldn't
happen in a million years.....He murdered John F. Kennedy without
the assistance of others in late 1963 in Dallas, Texas.
The evidence against Oswald
includes these subtle tidbits...........
1.) Oswald definitely owned
the rifle found on the 6th floor of the TSBD on 11/22.
2.) He also definitely
owned the handgun that was shown to have been used in the Tippit killing.
3.) Marina admits to having
taken pictures of Lee with these weapons on his person.
4.) Wesley Frazier observed
Oswald take a package into the Depository on the morning of November
22nd, 1963.
5.) Oswald's claim of "curtain
rods" within the package cannot be supported at all. His room
needed no curtains, nor rods, and NO such rods were ever found in
the TSBD or at 1026 N. Beckley. Nor was LHO seen carrying any type
of package (rods or otherwise) out of the building after leaving work
(unannounced to anyone) after the assassination. It can therefore
be reasonably assumed that no rods ever existed.
6.) Oswald was seen working
on the sixth floor that morning. Co-workers sent the elevator back
up to Oswald on the 6th floor shortly before the assassination.
7.) Oswald's palmprint
found on Carcano rifle. .... But, of course, this print is really
just a "bonus" for the DPD in linking LHO to the weapon.
For even without it, it's glaringly obvious that the weapon was Oswald's.
It was proved the alias, Alek/Alex Hidell, was actually Oswald himself;
and the order form from Klein's to purchase the mail-order rifle was
positively proven to have been in Oswald's handwriting, and sent to
a Dallas P.O. Box that was used by him. Obviously, just LHO's owning
the rifle doesn't prove he pulled the trigger. But doesn't just plain
ordinary garden-variety logic dictate (with a pretty good percentage
of probability) that it was the owner of said weapon, a Mr. Lee H.
Oswald, that fired the shots on 11/22. The alternative is to believe
that Oswald, for some unknown reason, handed over his Carcano to someone
else for the purpose of using it. Why would he knowingly have done
this idiotic act, knowing full well what might be the implications
of doing so?!
8.) Not ONE SPECK of any
bullets/bullet fragments/bullet shells OTHER THAN OSWALD'S 6.5 MM
MANNLICHER-CARCANO were discovered anywhere in Dealey Plaza, the limousine,
the TSBD, Parkland Hospital, or in the victims. This one, to me, is
simply impossible for conspiracy advocates to overcome, IF there had
been (as some claim) up to 3 firing teams and 6 shots fired in DP
on Nov. 22nd. HOW could every single scrap of ballistics evidence
be completely eradicated from the 2 (or more) non-Oswald weapons almost
immediately after the event?! Couldn't have been accomplished by even
Kreskin!! .... Plus: This massive task of removing all non-Oswald
wounds & bullets would most certainly have had to include the
many doctors who worked on BOTH the President and Gov. Connally at
Parkland. PLUS it would include the multitude of people who observed
the body at Bethesda (unless you subscribe to the totally-implausible
accounts of body-altering and all that business aboard AF1, or elsewhere
before the body got to Washington. Again, even Kreskin would be amazed
by such incredible sleight-of-hand). .... ALL ballistic evidence was
traced back to being consistent with the weapon owned by Lee H. Oswald.
The probability of this occurring IF there were multiple guns firing
at the motorcade is probably so low to be considered virtually impossible.
9.) Over 90% of the Dealey
witnesses said shots came from behind the President, in the direction
of the School Book Depository building. NINETY per cent plus! Now,
HOW could THAT MANY people all be mistaken. Are we to actually believe
the much-fewer number of 9%-10% of ear/eyewitnesses that claimed to
hear shots from the front? That is illogical on its face. If 9 out
of 10 people say it happened a certain way....WHY would the claims
of the minority 10% be taken as gospel? Makes no sense! .... In addition,
over 95% of this 90%+ claim there were EXACTLY three shots. No more,
no less. And three spent shells (co-incidentally?) were found in the
"sniper's nest" on the sixth floor. Now, do we ignore the
overwhelming 95% of earwitnesses on this crucial point? Or do we stretch
the imagination and for some reason trust the lowly number of 5% of
the people who claim 4 or more shots?
10.) Oswald only ONCE made
a weeknight visit to Irving. That just happened to be on Thursday,
November 21, 1963. His rifle is found missing the following day.
11.) Oswald left behind,
presumably for wife Marina, his wedding ring and just about every
dime he had to his name ($100+), on the morning of 11/22. Logic dictates
that he felt he may not return.
12.) Oswald was the only
Depository employee to leave work prematurely on 11/22. Why do you
suppose this was? The day was only half over.
13.) Oswald, in flight,
shoots & kills DPD Office J.D. Tippit (multiple witnesses confirm
it was Oswald, with very few variations of description). Once more,
are we to accept the minority of people who state: "It was a
larger man" or "There were two people", rather than
believe the majority of people who claim, uncategorically, that OSWALD
SHOT TIPPIT?! Why does the minority get such a benefit of the doubt
in so many aspects of this case....while the huge, eye-popping majority
(which favor the Oswald-Did-It stance) is subject to such scrutiny.
By sheer numbers, wouldn't the lowly 5% or 10% on this & that
be scrutinized with a far more wary eye? I certainly would think so.
14.) WHY does Oswald kill
Officer Tippit IF he's innocent of another crime just minutes earlier
in Dealey Plaza? Answer: He would have no such reason to do so. If
the Tippit shooting isn't one of the biggest reasons to shout from
the rooftops "Oswald did it!!", then I don't know what would
be.
15.) Oswald, just days
after acquiring his Carcano weapon, attempts to murder retired General
Edwin Walker in Dallas, in April of '63, barely missing out on killing
his third victim during the year 1963. Marina Oswald herself testifies
that "Lee told me...he just shot Walker." The Walker bullet
is proven to have come from the Oswald rifle (consistent with being
fired from a 6.5 MM Carcano). ..... Another KEY fact is the Walker
attempt, as I think any reasonable person looking at the case objectively
would concur. For, it displays in Oswald a definite tendency toward
violent action on his part during the months leading up to November
22nd. To me, it's not a wild stretch of one's imagination to think
that if this guy is willing to bump off Walker, then he might just
set his sights a little higher when the perfect opportunity presents
itself 7 months later. The fact that Oswald was a kind of loner, oddball,
and rejected authority at just about every turn in life cannot be
underestimated when talking of motive. He probably hated America (in
general terms) for not being able to just come and go as he pleased
to Russia and Cuba whenever it pleased his self-serving self in the
months just prior to November 22. As a former Marine acquaintance
of Oswald's once said: "He always thought he was a little better
than everyone else." This statement speaks volumes, in my opinion,
when gazing into Oswald's background and possible motive in the JFK
murder.
16.) It was PROVEN, no
matter what anybody WANTS to believe to the contrary, that three shots
COULD be fired in the allotted timeframe from the Oswald rifle. The
probability that Oswald had, in fact, 8.1 to 8.2 seconds to accomplish
the shooting further increases the likelihood that Lee could have
performed the deed. IF you believe the first (missed) shot hit a tree
branch and ricocheted to strike James Tague by the underpass at approx.
Frame 160 of the Zapruder film (as I, of course, do), then the total
time between shots #1 and #3 increases to more than eight seconds,
much more than the minimum required of 2.3 seconds (times two) to
get off the three shots.
17.) Try as the CTers might,
the Single Bullet Theory has still not been proven to be an impossibility.
The Zapruder film shows that the SBT is more-than-likely the correct
scenario of events that day. Kennedy & Connally are reacting to
their initial wounds at virtually an identical time, at Z-Frame 224.
Unfortunately, that damn Stemmons sign is blocking our view during
what might be a critical point on the film. It can therefore NEVER
be determined by anybody whether JFK was reacting to his throat/neck
wound at a frame earlier than Z224. But, based on the available evidence,
the SBT (judging by the reactions of the two victims in the limo)
most certainly cannot be said to be false.
18.) While viewing the
Zapruder film, I cannot see how anybody can say that the BACK of President
Kennedy's head is blown away as a result of the head shot. It seems
quite obvious while watching and freezing the film at various post-Z313
frames, that the entire rear portion of JFK's head remains intact
throughout the shooting. The RIGHT-FRONT portion of his head is blown
apart. Isn't it obvious that it's the FRONTAL portion of his skull
that is being displaced by the swiftly-moving projectile? And if so,
doesn't this demonstrate the actions of an object that's just been
struck from BEHIND, not from the front? For, if shot from the grassy
knoll (front right), WHY isn't there evidence on the Z-Film of massive
head damage on the President's LEFT-REAR side of the head? Bullets
explode out the EXIT wounds, don't they?
19.) It was also proven
that Oswald could have indeed trekked, in 90 seconds, the distance
across the sixth floor and descended the 4 stories in time to have
been seen on the building's second floor. Oswald was a thin, lean-enough
sort of 24-year-old lad (who had by November 22nd become used to lifting
heavy objects around all day long on a two-wheeled cart at his job
at the Depository). To me, it doesn't seem like a fairy tale to say
that he would have been able to hide the weapon quickly and then negotiate
the fours flights of stairs within a 90-second timeframe and NOT be
out of breath, so he could encounter Officer Marrion Baker and Roy
Truly on the second floor in a relatively composed and unrattled state
at 12:31-12:32 PM (CST) on November 22nd. I wonder, too, considering
what had just happened outside on Elm Street, just exactly how much
detailed attention Mr. Baker or Mr. Truly might have been paying to
Lee Oswald's "breathing" during that very brief meeting
in the 2nd-floor lunchroom. I'd be willing to bet neither paid an
ounce of attention to a detail like that at that exact stressful moment.
Lee was just another employee in the lunchroom for all those two knew
at 12:32 PM.
Do you
agree with David Von Palin that: "From everything I can see,
it's a veritable mountain of "Oswald Is Guilty" evidence
(both circumstantial and physical). And not a single speck of it has
been shown to be refutable with 100% absolute certainty."?
(E16)
Al Carrier, JFK
Lancer (20th January, 2003)
David, I
take it that since you have listed your irrifutable evidence, you
are welcoming challenge? Let me travel to the darkside (to the defense
table) for a moment and see what we come up with.
1.) Oswald
definitely owned the rifle found on the 6th floor of the TSBD on 11/22.
I would not challenge this,
but I do question why someone who is not suffering from retardation
would choose such a rifle at this price through mail order when they
could pick up a Mauser lets say over the counter in Texas without
paperwork for a similar price.
2.) He
also definitely owned the handgun that was shown to have been used
in the Tippit killing.
I will not challenge him
owning the .38 he was picked up with but be careful on stating it
was shown to be linked to the Tippit Killing. Take another look at
the ballistics.
3.) Marina
admits to having taken pictures of Lee with these weapons on his person.
Marina did not know a rifle
from a shotgun and the photos she admitted taking were from a different
angle in the backyard photos.
4.) Wesley
Frazier observed Oswald take a package into the Depository on the
morning of November 22nd, 1963.
Not a problem here.
5.) Oswald's
claim of "curtain rods" within the package cannot be supported
at all. His room needed no curtains, nor rods, and NO such rods were
ever found in the TSBD or at 1026 N. Beckley. Nor was LHO seen carrying
any type of package (rods or otherwise) out of the building after
leaving work (unannounced to anyone) after the assassination. It can
therefore be reasonably assumed that no rods ever existed.
So it must have been the
Carcano he was carrying, eh. And who exactly saw Oswald leave the
building empty handed?
6.) Oswald
was seen working on the sixth floor that morning. Co-workers sent
the elevator back up to Oswald on the 6th floor shortly before the
assassination.
Careful with the term "shortly
before the assassination. Vague and challenging as I will address
below.
7.) Oswald's
palmprint found on Carcano rifle. .... But, of course, this print
is really just a "bonus" for the DPD in linking LHO to the
weapon. For even without it, it's glaringly obvious that the weapon
was Oswald's. It was proved the alias, Alek/Alex Hidell, was actually
Oswald himself; and the order form from Klein's to purchase the mail-order
rifle was positively proven to have been in Oswald's handwriting,
and sent to a Dallas P.O. Box that was used by him. Obviously, just
LHO's owning the rifle doesn't prove he pulled the trigger. But doesn't
just plain ordinary garden-variety logic dictate (with a pretty good
percentage of probability) that it was the owner of said weapon, a
Mr. Lee H. Oswald, that fired the shots on 11/22. The alternative
is to believe that Oswald, for some unknown reason, handed over his
Carcano to someone else for the purpose of using it. Why would he
knowingly have done this idiotic act, knowing full well what might
be the implications of doing so?!
In regards to the palmprint,
it was found on the underside of the barrel that was covered by the
wood forend that is only exposed after the forend/stock group is removed.
I will not refute that Oswald ordered the rifle or even possessed
it at one time so having his partial palm print in this location simply
shows that he had taken the rifle down at one time, and obviously
not on the sixth floor of the TSBD on 11/22/63. Why were no other
identifiable prints found on the weapon. The excuse given was the
wood would not hold prints but we are led to accept that the gunsteele
would. Placed immediately into a controlled environment, these prints
would last less than 24 hours with the methods they used for lifting
in 1963. This rifle was kept on the 6th floor of the TSBD for over
an hour and then paraded through the halls and at press conference
at DPD before the print was lifted. You state it would be idiotic
for him to loan the rifle out, but accept it normal that he would
leave it behind on the sixth floor after the shooting?
8.) Not
ONE SPECK of any bullets/bullet fragments/bullet shells OTHER THAN
OSWALD'S 6.5 MM MANNLICHER-CARCANO were discovered anywhere in Dealey
Plaza, the limousine, the TSBD, Parkland Hospital, or in the victims.
This one, to me, is simply impossible for conspiracy advocates to
overcome, IF there had been (as some claim) up to 3 firing teams and
6 shots fired in DP on Nov. 22nd. HOW could every single scrap of
ballistics evidence be completely eradicated from the 2 (or more)
non-Oswald weapons almost immediately after the event?! Couldn't have
been accomplished by even Kreskin!! .... Plus: This massive task of
removing all non-Oswald wounds & bullets would most certainly
have had to include the many doctors who worked on BOTH the President
and Gov. Connally at Parkland. PLUS it would include the multitude
of people who observed the body at Bethesda (unless you subscribe
to the totally-implausible accounts of body-altering and all that
business aboard AF1, or elsewhere before the body got to Washington.
Again, even Kreskin would be amazed by such incredible sleight-of-hand).
.... ALL ballistic evidence was traced back to being consistent with
the weapon owned by Lee H. Oswald. The probability of this occurring
IF there were multiple guns firing at the motorcade is probably so
low to be considered virtually impossible.
There is an issue called
crime scene preservation in regards to the plaza and the limo. Neither
was followed. The plaza was immediately opened up after the assassination
and there is no record of any ballistic material located, not even
the governments errant round that struck the curb and wounded Tague.
There are photos of the limo being washed out with a sponge and bucket
at Parkland. The Parkland Doctors do not do any procedure that would
allow discovery of such material. There are reports from witnesses
at Bethesda of a bullet being located and also FBI Agent O'neil taking
possession of a missle from the body of the president. Where is either
of those. I move to strike this entire issue of ballistic evidence.
9.) Over
90% of the Dealey witnesses said shots came from behind the President,
in the direction of the School Book Depository building. NINETY per
cent plus! Now, HOW could THAT MANY people all be mistaken. Are we
to actually believe the much-fewer number of 9%-10% of ear/eyewitnesses
that claimed to hear shots from the front? That is illogical on its
face. If 9 out of 10 people say it happened a certain way....WHY would
the claims of the minority 10% be taken as gospel? Makes no sense!
.... In addition, over 95% of this 90%+ claim there were EXACTLY three
shots. No more, no less. And three spent shells (co-incidentally?)
were found in the "sniper's nest" on the sixth floor. Now,
do we ignore the overwhelming 95% of earwitnesses on this crucial
point? Or do we stretch the imagination and for some reason trust
the lowly number of 5% of the people who claim 4 or more shots?
Please cite your source
on this. Stewart Galanor in his book Cover-Up cites 216 witnesses
where of the 216, 212 are documented in the WC hearings and evidence
while another four are from Mark Lane's interviews. Of those 216,
they break down the shot origin as follows: TSBD=47, Knoll=53, TSBD&Knoll=6,
Elsewhere=5, Not asked=70, Could not determine location=35. Now how
are you getting 90+%?
10.) Oswald
only ONCE made a weeknight visit to Irving. That just happened to
be on Thursday, November 21, 1963. His rifle is found missing the
following day.
Careful here. How long
had he worked at the TSBD before the assassination? Does that lighten
the blow here. Just because the rifle was found missing the following
day, doesn't mean it was there on the 21st even the previous week.
Can you give me a timeline on when it was last seen in the Payne garage?
11.) Oswald left behind, presumably for wife
Marina, his wedding ring and just about every dime he had to his name
($100+), on the morning of 11/22. Logic dictates that he felt he may
not return.
And this is the same man
who walked away from the shooting and would have to survive on nothing
after the shooting. If you were going to take on this task, wouldn't
you have some finances with you for a getaway for a period? Now what
you are reporting sounds stranger than ever.
12.) Oswald
was the only Depository employee to leave work prematurely on 11/22.
Why do you suppose this was? The day was only half over.
Actually there were seven
not accounted for and four were found to be off work that day. Still
leaves us three, but Oswald became the immediate suspect anyway.
13.) Oswald,
in flight, shoots & kills DPD Office J.D. Tippit (multiple witnesses
confirm it was Oswald, with very few variations of description). Once
more, are we to accept the minority of people who state: "It
was a larger man" or "There were two people", rather
than believe the majority of people who claim, uncategorically, that
OSWALD SHOT TIPPIT?! Why does the minority get such a benefit of the
doubt in so many aspects of this case....while the huge, eye-popping
majority (which favor the Oswald-Did-It stance) is subject to such
scrutiny. By sheer numbers, wouldn't the lowly 5% or 10% on this &
that be scrutinized with a far more wary eye? I certainly would think
so.
Dissenting witnesses leave
reasonable doubt and then we add the rediculous line-up he was in,
which wouldn't get into a court of law.
14.) WHY
does Oswald kill Officer Tippit IF he's innocent of another crime
just minutes earlier in Dealey Plaza? Answer: He would have no such
reason to do so. If the Tippit shooting isn't one of the biggest reasons
to shout from the rooftops "Oswald did it!!", then I don't
know what would be.
Still haven't proven by
any stretch, let alone a reasonable doubt that he killed Tippet.
15.) Oswald,
just days after acquiring his Carcano weapon, attempts to murder retired
General Edwin Walker in Dallas, in April of '63, barely missing out
on killing his third victim during the year 1963. Marina Oswald herself
testifies that "Lee told me...he just shot Walker." The
Walker bullet is proven to have come from the Oswald rifle (consistent
with being fired from a 6.5 MM Carcano). ..... Another KEY fact is
the Walker attempt, as I think any reasonable person looking at the
case objectively would concur. For, it displays in Oswald a definite
tendency toward violent action on his part during the months leading
up to November 22nd. To me, it's not a wild stretch of one's imagination
to think that if this guy is willing to bump off Walker, then he might
just set his sights a little higher when the perfect opportunity presents
itself 7 months later. The fact that Oswald was a kind of loner, oddball,
and rejected authority at just about every turn in life cannot be
underestimated when talking of motive. He probably hated America (in
general terms) for not being able to just come and go as he pleased
to Russia and Cuba whenever it pleased his self-serving self in the
months just prior to November 22. As a former Marine acquaintance
of Oswald's once said: "He always thought he was a little better
than everyone else." This statement speaks volumes, in my opinion,
when gazing into Oswald's background and possible motive in the JFK
murder.
Take another look at the
Walker shooting and see how it compares on degree of difficulty with
the Kennedy Assassination. It still amazes me that people are accepting
this.
16.) It
was PROVEN, no matter what anybody WANTS to believe to the contrary,
that three shots COULD be fired in the allotted timeframe from the
Oswald rifle. The probability that Oswald had, in fact, 8.1 to 8.2
seconds to accomplish the shooting further increases the likelihood
that Lee could have performed the deed. IF you believe the first (missed)
shot hit a tree branch and ricocheted to strike James Tague by the
underpass at approx. Frame 160 of the Zapruder film (as I, of course,
do), then the total time between shots #1 and #3 increases to more
than eight seconds, much more than the minimum required of 2.3 seconds
(times two) to get off the three shots.
Who couldn't fire three
shots in 5.4 seconds with a bolt action rifle. The problem is, doing
so with accuracy. Hathcock and his crew couldn't, nor could anyone
else with the same degrees of difficulty of moving target, elevation,
etc.. When researchers show that this could not be done, the LNers
suddenly come up with another 3 seconds to see if it will fly.
17.) Try
as the CTers might, the Single Bullet Theory has still not been proven
to be an impossibility. The Zapruder film shows that the SBT is more-than-likely
the correct scenario of events that day. Kennedy & Connally are
reacting to their initial wounds at virtually an identical time, at
Z-Frame 224. Unfortunately, that damn Stemmons sign is blocking our
view during what might be a critical point on the film. It can therefore
NEVER be determined by anybody whether JFK was reacting to his throat/neck
wound at a frame earlier than Z224. But, based on the available evidence,
the SBT (judging by the reactions of the two victims in the limo)
most certainly cannot be said to be false.
But has it been proven
to work? Has it ever been duplicated? The proof lies in the prosecution,
and it is a joke.
18.) While
viewing the Zapruder film, I cannot see how anybody can say that the
BACK of President Kennedy's head is blown away as a result of the
head shot. It seems quite obvious while watching and freezing the
film at various post-Z313 frames, that the entire rear portion of
JFK's head remains intact throughout the shooting. The RIGHT-FRONT
portion of his head is blown apart. Isn't it obvious that it's the
FRONTAL portion of his skull that is being displaced by the swiftly-moving
projectile? And if so, doesn't this demonstrate the actions of an
object that's just been struck from BEHIND, not from the front? For,
if shot from the grassy knoll (front right), WHY isn't there evidence
on the Z-Film of massive head damage on the President's LEFT-REAR
side of the head? Bullets explode out the EXIT wounds, don't they?
Take another look at the
breakdown GIFs of Zapruder Film and other films on the forum and the
back of the head blowout is visible. I do agree that the knoll shot
would result in damage to the left rear, but who says the shot from
the front came from the knoll? Others do, I don't and I have explained
my shot origin. In #9, I refer to Stewart Galanor's collection of
witness material on shot origin. What needs to be considered is that
many of the witnesses that are put into the Knoll catagory actually
say the area of the knoll and overpass. Before you accept a shot from
the rear, take a look at the test skulls of CE861 and CE862. These
are the best of six that were shot. Note the frontal lobe damage that
is inconsistent with Kennedy. Also take a look at Dr. Latimer's skull
that he felt was consistent.
19.) It
was also proven that Oswald could have indeed trekked, in 90 seconds,
the distance across the sixth floor and descended the 4 stories in
time to have been seen on the building's second floor. Oswald was
a thin, lean-enough sort of 24-year-old lad (who had by November 22nd
become used to lifting heavy objects around all day long on a two-wheeled
cart at his job at the Depository). To me, it doesn't seem like a
fairy tale to say that he would have been able to hide the weapon
quickly and then negotiate the fours flights of stairs within a 90-second
timeframe and NOT be out of breath, so he could encounter Officer
Marrion Baker and Roy Truly on the second floor in a relatively composed
and unrattled state at 12:31-12:32 PM (CST) on November 22nd. I wonder,
too, considering what had just happened outside on Elm Street, just
exactly how much detailed attention Mr. Baker or Mr. Truly might have
been paying to Lee Oswald's "breathing" during that very
brief meeting in the 2nd-floor lunchroom. I'd be willing to bet neither
paid an ounce of attention to a detail like that at that exact stressful
moment. Lee was just another employee in the lunchroom for all those
two knew at 12:32 PM.
And how did Oswald make
it down to the 2nd floor lunchroom. The elevators were on the fifth
floor when Baker got to the elevator bank. There were SF employees
on the stairs that did not see Oswald or anyone else descend them.
I hope you understand
that if you are going to prosecute this man, you need to prove beyond
a reasonable doubt. Haven't even come close here. And I haven't mention
the GSR tests on his cheek that were negative. Kind of tough to fire
a rifle with a cheek weld and not get a positive test. That alone
says enough.
Who
is the most convincing: David
Von Palin or Al Carrier?
Available from Amazon
Books (order below)
