In this installment of the often excellent “50 Reasons for 50 Years,” Len Osanic says yes. I think the evidence says no. Decide for yourself.
The YouTube episode focuses on the so-called “sniper’s nest,” the area next to the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) from which Lee Oswald allegedly fired a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle wounding Governor John Connally and killing President Kennedy. The piece makes some good and indisputable points — this area was not controlled after the shooting; the photographs that appear in the Warren Commission do not depict the space as it was found after the assassination; the boxes and the bullet shells were rearranged for the purposes of photography.
The most debatable point concerns the alleged discovery of a Mauser rifle in the TSBD. One deputy sheriff, Seymour Weitzman, wrote in his report the next day that he found a 7.65 Mauser and another deputy, Roger Craig, said that is was a Mauser. News footage shows officers handling an Italian-made Mannlicher Carcano rifle and no German-made Mauser was ever introduced as evidence. So the implication is that Dallas law enforcement made the Mauser — and evidence of second gunman — disappear.
But as Osanic’s first day footage makes clear there were a wide variety of TV reports about the type of rifle found. Confusion was obviously the order of the day.
Gary Mack of the 6th Floor Museum, an institution that does not engage the JFK conspiracy debate, says that the Manlicher-Carcano was simply misidentified.
In an email Mack wrote:
“The rifle was misidentified by Sheriff’s deputies as a Mauser while it was still on the floor partly hidden by boxes. One of the two reporters on the floor at the time – Tom Alyea/WFAA-TV and Kent Biffle/Dallas Morning News – and one of them got word out to the newsroom and that’s how the Mauser name first appeared.
“Later, once [another Dallas Police Lieutenant J.C.] Day and then [Dallas Police Captain Will] Fritz got a close look at it, they weren’t sure what it was due to the vague markings which did, however, include the phrase “Made in Italy.: That’s when “Italian weapon” started appearing on the wires.
“After Fritz took it back to the crime lab for further examination, he still wasn’t sure what it was. He was asked to take it to Fritz’ office so, to prevent reporters outside his office from touching it, he held it over his head. Many news people got pictures of that moment including a KRLD-TV camera man. The original video tape is in The Sixth Floor Museum’s collection and the wall clock behind him shows 6:18 as Day told reporters what he knew about the weapon: 6.5mm, made in Italy, 1940. That’s all he said.
“So there were hours of vague information. The important thing to remember is that none of the sheriff’s deputies saw the rifle again and they were not privy to what the Dallas Police were doing. It’s no surprise to me that Weitzman the next day reported it was a Mauser since that is all that he knew, for that is what they thought when he was there.
I asked Osanic, host of Black Op Radio, to respond to the argument that this was a simple case of misidentification. He replied:
“If it was the case of a simple misidentification overheard by a newsman, then one should expect the initial reports to be consistent, much as the erroneous information of discoveries being on the fifth floor was uniformly presented for several hours. Instead, multiple rifles (makes and models) were featured on the airwaves, with the report of a British rifle being just the first of many.
“The Sixth Floor [Musuem] has an agenda to promote the Warren Report. Weitzman was there, he swore an affidavit that it was not only a Mauser, but model 7.65.
David Lifton, author of “Best Evidence,” notes that Seymour Weitzman later said his identification was an honest mistake. You can watch a YouTube of Weitzman’s comments here.
Sorting out the issue
For me, I see no other indication that a Mauser played any other role in the JFK story. For example, the forensic evidence doesn’t indicate a Mauser was used to fire on the presidential motorcade. I know of no other allegation that a Mauser was used on November 22, 1963. Given Weitzman’s explanation, I am inclined to accept this was a case of misidentification, amplified in the chaos of the immediate aftermath of the killing of president.
Watch Osanic’s video here:
364 thoughts on “Fact check: Was a Mauser found in the Texas School Book Depository?”
Both are right in a way the Mannlicher-Carcano has a bolt action that is based on a Mauser 98 action so did a 1903 Springfield U.S. military rifle all kinds of rifles were built on Mauser actions if you look down at a rifle a Mauser gas a destinct look to it if it’s bolt extractor the Mannlicher-Carcano has that same look so if you just glanced at it anyone could have misidentified it as a Mauser ….no big deal
The notion that at least four members of the Dallas Police Dept. with expertise in firearms could have conceivably “misidentified” a 6.5 Mannlicher–Carcano as a 7.65 Mauser is laughable and just absurd. (The known four members included Captain Will Fritz, Seymour Weitzman, E.L. Boone, and Roger Craig. All but Craig yielded to pressure to change their statements about what they actually saw.)
And you didn’t even have to be an expert to know that the weapon found on the 6th Floor of the TSBD was a Mauser because the word “Mauser” was stamped right on the barrel of the rifle. The Mannlicher-Carcano, on the other hand, has no “Mauser” stamp on the barrel. The Mannlicher-Carcano does, however, have a “Made in Italy” stamp on the rifle butt, which did not, of course, appear on the German Mauser rifle.
So, the question that should be asked is: “How did the Mauser morph into a Mannlicher-Carcano?” That was a key question because only a Mannlicher-Carcano could purportedly be linked to Lee Oswald because that was the type of rifle that “AJ Hidell” purchased by mail order. Why Oswald would purportedly buy a weapon with a pseudonym by mail order when he could have bought that weapon in person at a store at the time without any trail whatsoever, is never asked by those who adhere to the official government lies about the JFK assassination.
The answer as to how the Mauser morphed into a Mannlicher-Carcano is that there was no actual chain of command over the evidence whatsoever. This meant that the FBI could easily have switched rifles at any point in time after they took custody of the Mauser. That is why no fibers were found on the Mannlicher-Carcano even though the official lie was that this rifle was wrapped in a blanket at Ruth Paine’s house, which would necessarily result in fibers being present if the claim were true. That is also why no fingerprints or palm prints were found on the Mannlicher-Carcano when originally examined, but later, magically appeared after Oswald was dead.
The lack of any chain of command over the evidence would have been revealed had Lee Oswald been properly protected and had there been a trial. But that was just another of a thousand reasons why the assassination’s planner couldn’t permit Oswald to live through the weekend.
For some genuine analysis of the Mauser found on the 6th Floor of the TSBD, see this link:
Mauser bolt actions were licensed out and other manufacturers made them. Calibers are stamped into the barrels of all rifles. The rifle that killed Kennedy was a Carcano with the slightly longer barrel. The feat has been tested with success often regardless of the “experts” failures. The cycling time is just at 2 seconds and Oswald obviously used the iron sights which were a clear view. His Marine marksmanship was very good. All projectiles and fragments were found and tested positive as the murder weapon to the exclusion of all other rifles. The amalgam in the bullets had unusual characteristics which made them unique and rifling is a fingerprint but better. Believing without any facts or evidence that the killers got away makes you guilty of sheer idiocy. Evidence clearly implicates Oswald and his cool demeanor could easily be that he was a sociopath. His “patsy” remark is not proof of innocence and it had a question that prompted the word. He killed an officer as well and attempted to kill one in the theater after he punched another officer. He hit his wife more than once and was generally rude to all. A violent disgruntled and poorly educated person.
If you think LBJ was behind it then we have full on tyranny. Bugliosi’s book is filled with details and if you wish to discount the entire thing then you will never get an answer. You have a closed mind. If you have wasted your life on conspiracy BS I hope you did not neglect your children and family too often but you probably did and looked foolish to everyone with your droning on and on. Your families did not deserve to have to put up with you and you are a bigger kook than Oswald.
Stop opining the same BS over and over. The case was solved quickly and no more evidence will ever surface because it does not exist. You all made money for a few authors and the whole bit was not worth a plug nickel. And now these websites are akin to old bitties gossiping over the fence. Your government or the mob cannot nor will not rule the country but mayors and governors will.
Wake up fool! Look up Joseph Milteer. He was recorded planning an assassination of JFK in Miami before it happened in Dallas. He was on the street in Dallas watching the assassination on Nov22, 1963. Why did so many people rush up the grassy knoll after the shots were fired? Why did LBJ duck down behind his seat in the motorcade prematurely? Look at Altgens photo. Where is Kennedy’s brain? Why did every doctor say that there was a massive hole in the back of Kennedy’s head? Indicating a shot from the front. Why did the driver of Kennedy’s limo practically stop until the fatal head shot happened? Why did the secret service wipe down the inside of the limo at Parkland? Destroying all evidence? Should I go on you moron?
“All projectiles and fragments were found and tested positive as the murder weapon to the exclusion of all other rifles”. Sadly that is now debunked. The neutron activation test you’re citing has since been dropped by PDs because it’s not considered reliable. There is also the problem of this: https://whowhatwhy.org/politics/government-integrity/navy-doctor-bullet-found-jfks-limousine-never-reported/
Robert your issue is that you are afraid of what it means if you’re wrong and it was a grand conspiracy of the highest magnitude. Trust me, I get it. Bugliosi was paid and paid very well for his ability to discredit anyone who questioned the official narrative. But the simple fact is you’ve only read and listened to his content and others like it that support your “truth” as opposed to the actual truth which might make you uncomfortable.
Your last statement was intriguing ,(and no more evidence will ever surface )
i don’t disaghree with you and all the other people who have commented on this subject ,i truly believe that the witnesses and the police gave a true account of what the saw happen that day ,why would anyone have reason to lie ,they could be in trouble later.
However if you look at the warren comission report and witness statement’s ,it become apparent there’s a problem with the man with the rifle on the sixth floor .even the re-enactments get it wrong ,it’s literally so obivious that i’m sure most don’t even notice it , i urge everyone to watch the re-ebnactments again and look at the photo’s of the snipers nest ,then listen to howards witness statement then read his witness statement , then hopefully somone else might point out what’s wrong .
Don’t get me wrong it’s not earth shattering but it doesn’t make any sense either ,and while it can be probably explained ,the act itself i feel cannot .
Ah, so we’re just all going to ignore what the Army experts concluded about that rifle after they tested it huh? Vol. 3 Warren Commission Report pg 405 -500. About the Carcano being unusable in its original state because of the scope, bolt and trigger defects? That Carcano hadn’t even been fired. Oswald passed 2 gunshot residue tests. And he was cleared by officer Baker, who ran into him on the 2nd floor just after the shots. But why should any of those facts matter, right?
It truly is amazing how many people don’t see anything wrong with those things. But if was them being falsely accused murder, I bet all those things would suddenly matter.
the native text sites that the 6th floor museum doesn’t support conspiracy theories. however Gary Mack, the director of the 6th floor museum, was the original proponent of photographic evidence that a trio of men exist in the moorman photo visible only with “enhanced” computer technology (1983’s). This theory was called badge man, as one man appeared to be a cop with this technique. why did he switch sides? from conspiracy nut to play ball? just to get a job there? he has since passed and i mean no disrespect.
He probably switched sides because badge man was always a bunch of crap. Badge man isn’t real because the figure is smaller than what a human would be at the particular distance. But a lot of people don’t realize is a lot of conspiracy theories regarding JFK are looney, but some are intentionally thrown into the mix by the CIA in order to create confusion and make the truth more difficult to find because they realize that they can’t force the lone gunman narrative anymore, very few believe it. The ones that do believe it, believe it more so because they are afraid of what it means if facets of our government were behind it, and what that chain of power means for us all today.
That’s not where the 3 men were in the Moorman photo. And you don’t need anything special to see them. All you need is to connect your pc to a big screen tv. They’re right behind Zapuder in the pergola. Two of them were Eladio del Valle & Hermanio Diaz. The 3rd looks like Roscoe White.
You can also see them in the Nix & Darnell films. The headshot came from the middle pergola window.
Since there seems to be a lot of people who don’t bother reading. Here’s what the Army experts that tested the 40.02 inch 8lb unusable rifle found in the TBD said about it.
Even though Oswald clearly ordered, and Kleins clearly showed they sent, a 36 inch 5 1/2 lb slightly used rifle.
Quote: “The experts from the US Army and the FBI who had tested the rifle discovered that it was actually not usable in its original state:
1. Shims had to be applied to the telescopic sight before the rifle could be aimed.
2. Even after the telescopic sight had been repaired, it proved unreliable and inaccurate.
3. The condition of both the bolt and the trigger pull meant that the rifle could not be aimed accurately.
The rifle discovered on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository could not have caused any of the wounds to Kennedy, Connally or Tague, except by accident.” End Quote
And here again are their notes..
Quote: ““They [the US Army marksmen] could not sight the weapon in using the telescope, and no attempt was made to sight it in using the iron sight. We did adjust the telescopic sight by the addition of two shims, one which tended to adjust the azimuth, and one which adjusted an elevation”: Warren Commission Hearings, vol.3, p.443.
According to the FBI’s firearms specialist, “Every time we changed the adjusting screws to move the crosshairs in the telescopic sight in one direction it also affected the movement of the impact or the point of impact in the other direction. … We fired several shots and found that the shots were not all landing in the same place, but were gradually moving away from the point of impact.”: Warren Commission Hearings, vol.3, p.405.
Problems with the bolt and the trigger mechanism: “There were several comments made — particularly with respect to the amount of effort required to open the bolt. … There was also comment made about the trigger pull … in the first stage the trigger is relatively free, and it suddenly required a greater pull to actually fire the weapon.”: Warren Commission Hearings, vol.3, p.449.
“The pressure to open the bolt was so great that that we tended to move the rifle off the target.”: ibid., p.451 End Quote
Not only that. The backyard photo rifle & TBD rifle are not the same. Look at the Slings. 1 is light colored Nylon without a pad. The other is dark Leather with a pad.
1 has side sling hooks. The other has under sling hooks.
1 is 36 in. The other is 40.02. NOT THE SAME RIFLES!
Which can only mean one thing. The rifle was planted to frame Oswald. And there was another rifle that police snuck out. A Remington model 8..
Concerning the following sentence in the initial post “For me, I see no other indication that a Mauser played any other role in the JFK story. For example, the forensic evidence doesn’t indicate a Mauser was used to fire on the presidential motorcade.”
First of all, why does anyone take the forensic evidence at face value. We know that the President’s body was severely altered (as documented in Best Evidence by David Lifton), illegally stolen from Parkland by the secret service, material evidence was confiscated by the federal Government, the autopsy location and personnel were carefully chosen, the Warren Commission was a stacked deck, and I could go on and on. If anyone has watched a single episode of Colombo, you know that a planned murder always involves the planting of evidence to point the blame on an innocent person. The idea is give people an easy out, a way to conveniently pin it on someone and walk away. It makes everyone’s job easier, but it doesn’t serve justice. I have a feeling that this country will never be made right until it acknowledges what was done. I sincerely believe Oswald was entirely innocent. The whole “was there a second/third shooter?” thing is just a rabbit hole to keep us from asking the real questions.
Bingo! You are correct. Oswald was innocent. In fact he had stopped an earlier attempt on Kennedy’s life in Chicago.
The real shooters were in the pergola, behind Zapruder. Moorman photo shows them clearly aiming rifles. Nix film shows the muzzle flashes. Darnell film shows them in the pergola. Witnesses saw puffs of smoke in that exact spot. Zapruder said he thought the shooters were behind him.
FBI and CIA covered it up. Period. And it was Ben Gurion who ordered the hit. Straight out of an ex-Mossad agents mouth.
Oswald was just your average high school drop out from the deep south that happened to speak fluent Russian, like they all do.
I have seen Mauser mod. 91 rifles with 7.65mm stamped on the barrel. They look very much like a carcano. The importers stamped the caliber on it because many Mausers were of different calibers ususlly 7X57 or 8X57.
Right, and the man who said it was a Mauser mentioned the steel plate identifying it as such. There was no mistake, just lots of lies.
In regards to the evidence I would say that the most crucial piece of evidence in this case would have been the limo that JFK was riding in. It would have proved without a doubt that there were more than one shooter.
Bullet holes, fragments and blood splatter would have shown where the shots came from and how many. But for some reason someone in the military gave an order to start cleaning and washing down the limo as it sat at Parkland Hospital! One has to wonder why and who gave that order as I’m sure they would have known that would blow the LHO single shooter and 3 shots fired theory to bits.
The Warren Commission is a joke and one big lie and cover up after another
The Warren Commission kept telling witnesses, “No it couldn’t have happened as you say”. How did the WC “know” this? The witnesses “witnessed” the shooting-no one in the WC did.
What I would like to know is why we fall for the “officially identified” in this case when there were tons of people who saw that rifle that day. All that made it official, I guess, is that it was identified in the same location it was found. Big deal. I mean how the heck is it going to be transported from the Book Depository – whatever the hell that is (who’s ever heard of a warehouse that’s more than 1 story tall) – all the way to the police station without everyone catching a glimpse of the Mauser. And then instead of putting it on a table they lock it up. No. Everyone is gonna want to see that gun. And since it would have Mauser stamped on it just about everybody sees this thing. Everyone knows its a Mauser. But since nobody wants to know except from the “official identification” a lot of people are saying, well, I don’t think I should get involved in this at all.
I really don’t know if there was or wasn’t a Mauser but there’s interviews with the people who found the rifle that emphatically say he found a Mauser rifle, saying he read the letters on the rifle identifying it as such.
HOWEVER I’d like to point out a flaw in this article. The author says that the forensic evidence doesn’t point to a Mauser being used on the president… what forensic evidence? No forensic evidence we have from this case would be admisible in a court house. The crime scene was contaminated to hell and the autopsy was done by an incompetent nincompoop.
The actual, skilled doctors of Parkland hospital all said under oath before the Warren Comission that the president had a gaping hole wound in the back of his head. This is in the WCR Appendix VIII. Dr. Charles Crenshaw wrote an entire book about it, and though the other doctors at Parkland later tried to go back on their testimony, the record stands of what they said under oath to the WC.
And yet the autopsy photos reveal no gaping hole in the back of JFK’s head. JFK’s body and his wounds were altered after leaving Parkland but before arriving at Bethesda for the autopsy. We can’t trust in any forensic evidence. No court of law would.
Coming back to the “staging” of the snipers nest: Again, no clip was found for the rifle, meaning that a bullet would have to have been manually placed into the breech after each shot. Also, the ejected shell casings would have been thrown a good distance, so aligning them up the way they were shown would have been impossible within the time constraints. Was the assassination a conspiracy? Duh?
Of course there was a clip:
What do you mean “aligning them in the way they were shown?” They were lying randomly around the Sniper’s Next.
No clip was found in or around the rifle. The clip didn’t show up until the rifle was taken outside. The only you see a clip is when it’s outside. There was no clip when it was found inside. If there had been a clip it would have been in the rifle when it was found. There would be no need for anyone to take the clip out and put it somewhere else. That just doesn’t happen.
Just like someone who uses a revolver doesn’t waste time emptying the shells out at a murder scene. The point of a revolver is so there are no shells. Are we really to believe that Oswald fired all the shots with an unusable rifle that wasn’t even fired? And then took the clip out because, why…etiquette?
Read the Warren Report. Vol.3 Pg. 400 to 412.
If you watch the JFK lost tapes,the first reports states “a man and woman” and mausser.I find it to be total b—-s—!.Something to ponder how could Oswald go to the soviet union come back and not thrown in jail,or anything at the height of the cold war,TOTAL B—S—!I believe the CIA AND HOOVER had a hand in it.Why,you may ask?Well Pres.Kennedy FIRED 2 CIA agents with over 20 years of service and HOOVER may have known he was next.
There are comments by police officals,how else did the reporters get their information ,that fired from 5th floor,and some reports state 4th floor as well.As Ventura points out “how can a person at street level tell how tall a person who is on the 6th floor is?”Oswald was as he says he was a PATSY
The Weitzman affidavit is dated 11/23/63. He states they found the weapon at 1:22 PM on 11/22/63. The affidavit states that Fritz ejected one live round. Anyone familiar with weapons, as in four or five police officers, would have instinctively picked up the live round by the bullet end to read the back end upon which the caliber is printed. Any self respecting deer hunter would do the same. Certainly not touching the bullet itself but with a handkerchief or piece so paper. Then the weapon was taken to Dallas police headquarters where no doubt the FBI and homicide division paid extreme attention to the weapon.
Therefore, If the weapon was correctly identified as a 6.5 Manlicher Carcano, Weitzman had all of the afternoon, all of the evening and all of the night of the 22nd and some part of the next day for someone to tell him the weapon was not a 7.65 Mauser. He signed the affidavit the next day on 11/23/63! He would not have been aollowed to sign the affidavit a day later after the weapon was properly identified. Craig says that he, Weitzman, Boone, and Fritz were no more that 8 inches away from the weapon and that it was stamped 7.65 Mauser. Why wasn’t Weitzman notified of the re-identification of the weapon? Why was he allowed to sign the affidavit a day later?
You are quoting testimony from a 1974 interview.
In 1968, he was saying something radically different:
Weitzman also stated the rifle looked like a 7.65 Mauser in a statement to the FBI on the 24th. http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57697&relPageId=136
District Attorney Henry Wade, on one occasion, told the press that the murder rifle had been a Mauser. http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=259
“’The Sixth Floor [Musuem] has an agenda to promote the Warren Report. Weitzman was there, he swore an affidavit that it was not only a Mauser, but model 7.65.’
David Lifton, author of “Best Evidence,” notes that Seymour Weitzman later said his identification was an honest mistake. You can watch a YouTube of Weitzman’s comments here.”
Citing David Lifton was a weak and BS response in my opinion, if not in fact, and here’s why:
Weitzman said he mistakened the Carcano for a Mauser because he only glanced at it. Let’s think about that for a second so you can see the truth behind what they’re glossing over.
The police start combing the sixth floor and find three 6.5mm hulls. We know that they had 6.5mm stamped on them (which was verified in Vincent Bugliosi’s book). Are you telling me that they found 6.5mm hulls and then glanced at a rifle a few minutes later and assumed it was a 7.65mm when 6.5mm would have made more sense because it matched the caliber of the hulls they just collected? He did more than just assumed. He signed a sworn and notarized affidavit, as did Eugene Boone. How in the world would you find one caliber of hulls and a rifle of a different caliber and not question it? Because that’s what they found, a Mauser chambered in 7.65mm.
Here’s where it gets even better. Weitzman thought it was a German Mauser at a glance. German Mausers were not 7.65mm caliber rifles, they were chambered in 8mm!!! Argentine Mausers (made for the Argentine army and a few others) were 7.65, but the vast majority of Mausers in the United States and abroad were 8mm. In other words, if Weitzman was going to guess at the rifle being a Mauser at a glance, he would have guessed 8mm, and that’s what would have made it on the affidavit.
Weitzman’s account fails on two fronts, but both favor Roger Craig’s account of what happened. He said the read 7.65 Mauser stamped on the barrel. That’s the only way to reconcile two different calibers and guessing a rare one at that.
Maybe if you guys knew guns a little better you could understand the absurdity of it all. Roger Craig is a hero. He stuck to his guns despite the fact he was risking everything, and it turns out that he did.
I agree, Brian. He was someone who excelled at his line of work.
Roger Craig’s “Mauser” account changed radically between 1968 (talking to the Los Angeles Free Press) and the 1974 interview with Lincoln Carle.
Lots of other things show Craig to be unreliable.
And you consider witnesses Brennan and Markham reliable?
I guess a lot of people, aside from Craig, were confused about a Mauser being found in LN lore.
Tom Alyea’s film shows a Mannlicher-Carcano being recovered.
Alyea’s film shows a rifle being found without a clip ….
Great point. Does Alyea’s film actually show the date it was taken? It’s hard to imagine the police would allow 2 reporters to wander an active crime scene.
Also an ATF agent said the Carcano was found on the 4th floor. So that’s weird.
Uh huh. Craig was unreliable… so the other 5 men were then too I guess, right? 6 men all just guessed the exact same thing, right? That’s pretty amazing Mr. McAdams. Amazing indeed.
That’s about as absurd as Baker running into Oswald on the 2nd floor and still accusing him of being the shooter.
Four police officers (including Fritz and Craig) at the scene of the TSBD search, identified the alleged rifle as a Mauser 7.65. Did no one actually look at the alleged rifle closely before (1)looking at the details on the rifle, (2) identifying, and (3) agreeing on what it was?
On the question of the alleged ” … Carcano” rifle, compare the LHO backyard photos to the Warren Commission photo of the ” … Carcano”. The holster strap appears to be attached at different points of each rifle. The Warren Commission exhibit has the strap attached to the swivels at the left hand side of the rifle, whereas the backyard photos have these swivels positioned at the undersides of the rifle. Are these the same rifle?
Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig is the guy giving testimony in the
I think he is telling the truth and was murdered for it.
They found a Mauser that day in the book depository.
silencers used on professional rifles. Witnesses hearing three shots means nothing.
The witnesses would not be able to hear silencers used by professional assassins.
What do Lee Harvey Oswald and Roger Craig have in common ?
Both were pathological liars and both had psychological issues.
Both of these mens undesirable characteristic traits have spawned
a never ending cycle of cognitive dissonance amongst gullable, naive, and illogical generations of individuals who are seriously
lacking proper insight, common sense, critical thinking abilities
and are unable to discern the difference between fact and fiction.
Here’s something they have in common-they both may well have told the truth. Oswald said he didn’t shoot anybody on 11-22-63 and Craig said he saw the stamped title of “7.65 Mauser” on a rifle. There’s plenty of evidence in both statements, which means there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK. Now, a lot of that evidence was destroyed(or has been hidden) by those involved in the conspiracy, but that’s a different matter. As to all you say about their similarities, frankly it looks like statements of fear and desperation from you.
Your rant is a pattern with the purveyors of obfuscation: resort to bizarre claims to disparage the purveyors of truth and then keep on repeating them like a crazed parrot. Oswald and Craig were perhaps the most sane and logical men that day. A rational soul can tell that from their recorded testimony. Also the evidence surrounding the events (due the diligent work of many such as Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, David Lifton, and so on …) backs them up. I can’t help but think that people who make posts like yours are just looking to get a rise.
Comedy hour in the TSBD. It is very amusing. Interference with the chain of evidence. Incorrect identification of the alleged weapon. Clumsy handling of the weapon by police. No proper photo’s of the alleged crime scenes before the police had combed the areas and disturbed the articles of evidence. Recreated photo’s of the alleged crime scene days after the event. Misplacement of evidence.
A crime scene presided by clowns is a crime scene that takes away from efforts to investigate.
All you need is the Seymour Weitzman Affidavit (just Google). He knew
firearms, as did the other Dallas cops who joined him.
And Roger Craig SAW that a Mauser was what they were looking at on the 6th Floor shortly after the assassination. Craig was right there with Weitzman.
That’s Craig’s 1974 story.
His 1968 story was different.
I just wanted to throw in my 2 cents: I and most of America knows we have been lied to by our government. The Warren Report is a total joke ( and I’ve read it, twice) as we all know. With very little investigating, ANYONE can figure that out. I read a comment from “commen sense”, he seems to be convinced that NOBODY in our government would or could lie about this. Sad that people would or better yet, could think that Oswald could have done this. I love this forum though. 🙂
BEYOND THE PARAFFIN TESTS…
The Atomic Energy Commission alerted the FBI to the possibility of using Neutron Activation Analysis on the evidence collected from Oswald.
In Dec ’63 the FBI hired Union Carbide to conduct the tests at the AEC’s facility in Oak Ridge. Mr. Hoover then tried to suppress and spin the results; the actual tests weren’t released into July, 1981 (!), as the result of a Harold Weisberg lawsuit.
WC staffers Norman Redlich had the results in hand, however, when he wrote a memo to Alan Dulles on July 2, 1964, the meat of which states: “At best the analysis shows that Oswald may have fired a pistol, although this is by no means certain.”
And that “there is no basis for concluding that he also fired a rifle.”
Anyway, the key here is that the weapon found by Dallas Police and attributed to LHO is not the one the FBI said LHO ordered. The WC said he ordered a 36″ Mannlicher-Carcano carbine, and the Dallas Police found a 40″ short rifle. Moreover, the good store in Chicago where LHO supposedly ordered the rifle from, did not put scopes on the 40″ model. Yet the one in evidence had a scope. See Jim DiEugenio’s Reclaiming Parkland, pp. 56 ff.
Photon wrote: Besides, CBS showed multiple ordinary marksmen were able to duplicate Oswald’s feat with more accuracy in less time.
That is incorrect
only one out of the eleven who attempted was able to replicate the shots and that was on his third attempt.
Howard Donahue is the name of the marksmen.
You forget that the shooter was aiming at JFK’s head at hit the target only once out of three shots.
Let’s not forget, best sniper out of Vietnam in late 60’s couldn’t do it from a lower elevation and a shorter distance.
Not just NRA but Olympic qualifiers couldn’t shortly after.
That’s right, Ronnie….Craog Roberts(the sniper of whom you speak) said “Oswald couldn’t have done it(shot&killed JFK)because I couldn’t do it”.
Paul Turner November 23,
Less than 100 yards at a slow moving target? That might not be an easy shot but it certainly is not all that difficult a shot.
5 of 10 shooters hit the target twice in the 1967 CBS re-creation.
Your claim is false. One shooter hit the target 3 times in under 6 seconds. But as I stated Oswald hit his target (JFK’s head) only once.
Go to YouTube and see it for yourself.
You can claim all you want that the re-creation was inaccurate,not truly representative of the exact conditions in Dallas, not done with the crowd noise,not done during the exact humidity as noted on Nov. 22, etc,etc.
But please don’t lie about easily obtained data, including the results seen by millions of Americans on national TV. If you have to lie about the results of a test because they disprove your theory, maybe it is time to discard the theory.
The point is, it was difficult for even experts, who had more than one try with a different MC whose scope was not damaged.
Oswald was no expert.
Also, the dissimilarity was more than just humidity.
There was no tree blockage to disrupt the bead on the moving target. They also didn’t have to shoot out of a half-open window.
Those tests basically proved that it would’ve been even harder if not impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald.
The CBS re-enactment worked like this: Shooters were located on a tower and fired at an outline target moving straight away on a small rail car moving at 11 mph. The shooters operated the bolt of their Csrcano quickly and easily.
The re-enactment was flawed for a number of reasons:
1) The CBS rail car moved at a fixed speed on a level track. JFK’s limo moved at varying speeds along Elm Street, which sloped down and curved first to the left and then to the right.
2) The shooters fired a well-functioning Carcano, not the piece of junk alleged to be the murder weapon.
3) The shooters, all of whom were experts (unlike Oswald), had an unobstructed view of their target: no Live Oak, no S.S. follow-up car, etc.
4) The shooters were not constrained the way a sniper’s nest shooter would have been constrained.
In other words, apples and oranges.
A real re-enactment would have involved the alleged murder weapon or equivalent piece of junk, the sniper’s nest, a re-creation of the motorcade down Elm Street, and shooters having Oswald’s Marine shooting scores.
But there were TWO headshots, Photon. That means another shooter besides Oswald fired at JFK’s ahead. Conspiracy.
It’s pretty easy to understand why most people in the US believe that their government lied to them regarding JFK. Let’s take a little stroll down memory lane, shall we?
1. Affordable healthcare for all
2. Weapons of mass destruction
3. I did not have sex with that woman
4. Read my lips, No new taxes. I was never in the CIA before I was in charge.
5. I don’t recall
6. I moved the position of the wound in an effort to be more clear.
7. I am not a crook
8. We need to escalate in Vietnam because of an incident in the gulf of Tonkin
9. The USS Liberty was “accidentally” attacked by Israeli forces.
I think most thinking people have the feeling that their government has been lying to them for a very long time. As a matter of fact, if we take a look at recent history, it would seem to illustrate that being told the truth by our government is the exception rather than the rule.
Preach it Pablo. The Warren Report is the government’s Mother of Lies.
Excellent points all. I would add an even earlier instance, Eisenhower’s claim that he’d no idea we were overflying the USSR with the U2s. This was hurriedly issued once the “one of our weather planes is missing” explanation was proved by the Soviets to be a pile of puffed wheat. Unfortunately, there was already a suspicion among the populace was Ike was disconnected from his duties as POTUS and that Nixon and the Cabinet were really running things (this was not true, but a lot of people believed it). The claim that he knew nothing about the U2 reinforced this belief, so Ike finally had to ‘fess up and admit that he’d known about it from the beginning and had authorized every mission, including the one where Powers was shot down and captured. Though not the first time a President lied to the US public, it is considered to be the first time a POTUS was caught in a lie and had to admit the truth.
One more lie.
“It was only a weather balloon”.
In one of the TV movies about the assassination, it was rather funny to watch Oswald’s character firing 3 rapid shots from what was supposed to be the Mannlicher-Carcano. As I remember it, the character placed too much effort on the work involved in firing the shots and trying to get 3 off in 8 seconds. He didn’t move the rifle in the way one would in trying to hit a moving target(the motorcade). The motorcade did slow down to a near stop, but after it was past the TSBD.
Osanic’s video is misleading when he claims the case with the bent case lip could not have fired a bullet. Of course the case lip was bent on extraction and ejection AFTER the bullet in it had been fired.
Not necessarily so. You make an assertion when you say:
“Of course the case lip was bent on extraction and ejection AFTER the bullet in it had been fired.”
Experimenters have found, as I’m sure you know, the M-C doesn’t dent the lip of a full loaded cartridge upon extraction following firing. It only dents the lip of an empty cartridge loaded into the rifle and then extracted; i.e., a plant.
Bill Clarke, you have been preceded here by John McAdams, Photon, and Jean Davison, among others. Your efforts are worthy but repetitive.
Can you document that?
I’d like to make the detailed argument myself, but I’ve not experimented with an M-C. The full details of the argument (and more) are laid out in:
THE DENTED BULLET SHELL:
HARD EVIDENCE OF CONSPIRACY IN THE JFK ASSASSINATION?
Michael T. Griffith
@All Rights Reserved
The basic argument as I understand it is that if a live round is fed via clip into the M-C firing chamber, fired, and then ejected, there is no occasion for the shell case lip to get dented. If on the other hand, an empty case is forced into the firing chamber (which cannot be done via clip) and then ejected, denting of the case lip may well occur. The FBI determined that the dented M-C case in question had been fed into the alleged murder weapon at least three times.
Wrong. There are occasions when the case is bent on extraction before it leaves the rifle.
True, if the bolt is used to chamber an empty case without the bullet to help guide the round into the chamber you can dent the case lip. This can occur when the bolt isn’t pulled back far enough for normal extraction and the bolt is pushed forward thinking we are loading a new round. This can even jam the weapon for a bit.
Perhaps Oswald fed the rounds through his weapon as practice.
Photon, I can’t so much but Jean Davison, as is her way, has some good evidence to support this. I hope she will comment on this subject.
My documentation is my personal experience with rifles and I readily admit these rifles were not the Carcano. But a bolt gun is a bolt gun, despite many claiming the Carcano was something special.
To dent the case lip of a loaded case (the bullet inserted) would take a sharp blow with a hammer. That case isn’t going to chamber so the man was right. This dented but loaded round can’t fire since it can’t chamber.
But here is what can and does occur; a normal case with bullet is chambered and fired. The bolt is turned, the extractor grips the case and the bolt is pulled back removing the case from the chamber. Now the ejector pops out and slams the case toward the ejection port (port where the case flies out) but it does this a bit too soon.
A bit before the case has been pulled back far enough for ejection the case lip slams into the receiver wall and is dented. As the case is pulled farther back it is ejected through the ejection port. The case lip isn’t dented by striking a floor or other object but is dented by the rifle itself.
I hand loaded for many years and loaded for many friends. I went through a good number of rifles and found this occurrence to be not so common but then it wasn’t so rare either.
Thanks, Bill. What you’re saying is what I’ve heard others who’ve fired an M-C like Oswald’s say: the empty cartridge often gets dented when the empty case is forcefully ejected and it hits a part of the rifle as it flies out. The HSCA’s firearm panel showed an example, but I’ll have to look it up again.
Sorry Bill, I was addressing Jonathan’s claim, which is bogus.
We had a similar issue with my father’s 1903 Springfield. I thought that there was something wrong with the 50+ year old shells, but it was very intermittent .A generous use of Hoppe’s seemed to mitigate it somewhat.Perhaps the bolt moved smoother after that .
Given that you have no experience with Carcanos, I invite you and the other Warren defenders here to read Michael Giffiths’s 2012 article I cite, in which Griffiths quotes Carcano experts who explain quite clearly why only an empty case loaded into a Carcano is dented on the lip upon being ejected.
After you’ve perused the article, please come back and tell everyone here if you will why the experts Griffiths quotes are wrong.
Where is the evidence thay Michael Griffith knows anything about ballistics, the Carcano rifle,the frequency of dented shells ejected from any bolt-action rifle, etc. Even his biography mentions a Masters in Theology and a Bachelor’s degree in “Liberal Arts”-whatever that means,plus a couple of Community College associate degrees. But NOTHING implying any expertise in ballistics,rifles or even basic firearms procedures. Yet he is your expert on this matter.
No wonder you believe that a .410 bore is a realistic pheasant load!
You must’ve missed the part where Michael T. Griffith’s article QUOTES **Carcano experts**.
Oh, they “state it quite clearly,” do they?
This is what real experts say:
Any conspiracist can find “experts” to tell him what he wants to hear.
The way you do it properly is to find the top experts in the country.
No, I didn’t know that Jonathan. The reason I didn’t know it is because it isn’t true.
Thank you for putting me in such high company. I’m honored.
Bill, you asserted exactly how the lip of the shell case got dented. You wrote:
“Of course the case lip was bent on extraction and ejection AFTER the bullet in it had been fired.”
Your unproven assertion is what I challenged.
Your comment in response below to Dave, about the cartridge being hot when ejected — the implication being the metal of the cartridge case is soft and bends when the case hits the floor — is good for one thing: an insight on how far you’re willing to go to argue your side of the case.
Well Jonathan, I proved it to myself years ago. I didn’t see it happen just once but I saw it happen many times. So it wasn’t an unproved assertion. You come to Texas and I’ll prove it to you.
I didn’t say the case lip was bent when it hit the wooden floor. In fact I said it wasn’t dented on the floor. It is dented on the inside of the receiver.
How are you going to prove “it” to me when you’re admittedly unfamiliar with Carcanos?
This whole discussion is moot anyway because the dented shell has been PROVEN not to have been ejected from the alleged murder weapon. It lacked the marking made by the alleged murder weapon’s bolt and contained three sets of markings on its base not tied to the alleged murder weapon and not found on the other two empty shells. Hoover memo to Rankin, 2 June 1964; FBI Ballistics Report, 25 December 1964
Here’s evidence that the dent occurs when the empty cartridge hits the receiver of the rifle as it’s ejected and flies back.
Probably the first to discover this were Harold Weisberg and R. Bernabei, who tested a rifle like Oswald’s in the 1960s. Bernabei’s description is in Weisberg’s archives. He wrote that he was certain that’s what happened because the brass left a mark where it hit the rifle.
The HSCA’s firearms panel also got the same dent on ejection in one of its four test cartridges. It pointed out that there was a similar dent on the lip of one of the FBI’s test cartridges as well (CE 557).
Here’s how the panel members were chosen and their qualifications:
The HSCA’s conclusion is #155 here:
(Notice it also says it found no evidence the cartridge had been chambered more than once.)
The testimony about the dent starts here:
I’ve seen posts from 3 or 4 people on other JFK forums who’ve reported the same thing happened with their M-Cs. One of them noted that it happened in about one out of four shots, the HSCA’s ratio. The force or speed with which the bolt is operated may have something to do with it.
Apparently this is a common problem with some semi-automatic weapons and there may still be online videos showing in slow motion how this happens, though granted, the M-C is a different type of weapon.
So far as I can tell, Mike Griffith quoted only one person who could be considered a firearms expert (Donahue). Dr. Chapman is a medical examiner, I believe, and not a firearms specialist, so far as I know.
What is the alternative, CT explanation for the dented shell? Did somebody throw down a cartridge that “couldn’t have been fired that day”? How silly is that?
In answer to Jonathan’s request that I “please come back and tell everyone here if you will why the experts Griffiths quotes are wrong”.
First a link to Griffith’s article which Jonathan must have forgot ; http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/dent.htm
Next I see Griffith well educated to pray and learn languages but no reference to any knowledge about rifles. This makes it hard for him to understand his experts. I believe you are also having this same problem. We will leave his webpage about Pearl Harbor without comment.
Now Jonathan, I have no problem with what the “experts” say except the statement by Ian Griggs in which he states, “This can only happen with an empty case that has already been fired and even then only occasionally (emphasis by Griggs). Griggs is flat wrong. Pray tell how he knows it is the ONLY way. Did he try the method I described or other methods? If so he doesn’t report it. In summary Griggs is very wrong on this part.
True, the case could not have been fired if it was dented as we see in the picture. You couldn’t have put a bullet in the bent case. If the case was bent after the bullet was inserted it still wouldn’t chamber and could not be fired. I don’t see why one must be a mental giant to realize the case was bent AFTER it was fired. And no, it wasn’t dented on the floor and you can’t dent it by stepping on it. I agree. But the ejector can slam the hot brass into the inside of the receiver and dent it just as the picture shows.
Did you miss this in the article; “Another shell [of the three found on the sixth floor] was dented on the rim, raising doubts that it could have been fired from a rifle in that condition. In experiments by the House Select Committee, rapid firing of the Carcano resulted in some shells being dented in the exact same location upon ejection (HSCA, Vol. 1, pp. 435, 454, 534). (Case Closed, New York: Random House, 1992, p. 270)”
Well Jonathon it looks like your getting ganged up on here. I’m no firearms expert like those arguing with you so not much help.
While I’ve not in years I used to hunt deer in Texas. One close witness to the public slaughter of JFK was quoted as saying “In all the years I’ve hunted deer I’ve never had one fall towards me”. Me either.
The first time I was in Dealy Plaza and stood under the Dal-Tex second or third window over from the corner and second window up I thought Bingo. Elevated 8-10′ I’m on a tee stand, with a straight shot at a downward angle (as Elm does) with an almost level shot because of that angle of about 100 yards or less.
Previously, more than once, I’d been behind the picket fence. Looking at the x’s the saying “fish in a barrel” came to mind.
I thought I could hit a quarter or 1/2 dollar most of the time with a 22 at that distance.
Some of those times were after I went to the Warren Omission story on the 6th floor and crouched as close as I could to the “sniper’s nest” and looked through the tree limbs.
I’ve read elsewhere the W.O. used not just the best of the NRA but Olympic
qualifiers to duplicate the shots but couldn’t.
In addition the best sniper out of Vietnam in the late 60’s could not duplicate the shots from a lower elevation with a closer target.
I think both of these statements are paraphrased from Destiny Betrayed.
I’m certainly no expert shooter or firearms expert but O through trees at that angle with a defective rifle and scope in six seconds is to my simple mind impossible.
I re-iterate what Jonathan has said here. The point is not simply the dent but the side markings which weren’t linked to the MC.
As predicted a conspiracy theorist brings up the Carlos Hathcock lie again. Ronnie, I don’t know where you get your information but I don’t recall any Olympians shooting for the Warren Commission. As Olympic shooting events involved stationary targets at the time it would have been pointless. Besides, CBS showed multiple ordinary marksmen were able to duplicate Oswald’s feat with more accuracy in less time.
For Jonathon and Gerry. What you claim is not what these experts say.
TESTIMONY OF FIREARMS PANEL: MONTY C. LUTZ, DONALD E. CHAMPAGNE, JOHN S. BATES, JR., AND ANDREW M. NEWQUIST
Mr. MCDONALD. Mr. Champagne, in your examination of those cartridge cases, did you compare your panel test cartridge cases, JFK No. F-280 with CE-543?
Mr. CHAMPAGNE. Yes; we did.
Mr. McDONALD. As a result of your examinations, what conclusions did you come to, and if we could have JFK chart F-99 placed on the easel, if you would use that in explaining your answer.
Mr. CHAMPAGNE. To answer your question, we did come to a conclusion with respect to the tests that we had fired and exhibit CE-543. The conclusion we came to was that exhibit CE-543 was fired from the rifle.
Mr. McDONALD. And which rifle are you referring to?
Mr. CHAMPAGNE. Exhibit CE-139.
The conclusion that we came to was based on a number of factors. The tests were compared microscopically with CE-543 in a number of areas. One of those areas was in the firing pin impression. The firing pin impression is an indentation in the primer of the center-fire cartridge. It is caused by the impingement of the firing pin on the soft metal of the primer. Any individual identifying features that may be present on the firing pin are then impressed into the metal of the primer. These can be in the form of machining marks that are put on there during the time of manufacture or they can be in the form of irregularities that are put on the firing pin impression during its use during its lifetime.
Some of the marks that we found, and this is a photograph taken through a comparison microscope, shows exhibit CE-543 in the lefthand side of the field and panel test No. 1 in the right-hand side of the field. There’s a dividing line through both of these. In the comparison microscope, we take two physically separated objects and bring them together optically. It is almost as if we cut the two in half physically and bring them together. We do this through the prismatic bridge system of the comparison microscope. So that we have two objects brought together microscopically side by side and adjacent to one another.
In the firing pin impression, we have a series of irregularities that show up and go from one side of the dividing line to the other indicating that the same firing pin caused the marks on both cartridge cases.
In the lower photograph, we have what are known as extractor marks. Each extractor in each firearm has its own individual peculiarities. When the cartridge case is extracted from the weapon and thrown out of it, the extractor will leave irregularities or individual identifying marks on the rim of the case. In the lower photomicrograph, we have CE-543 and panel test 3.
We have the same type of situation here where we have the dividing line down the center. We have a series of striations that have been put on the rim of the cartridge cases and you can see that there is a correspondence there among those striations.
There were other areas that we examined as well as these two, breech face marks and some other marks that were not of a suitable nature for photographing. As a result of examination of all
these marks, we came to the conclusion that CE-543 was fired in the exhibit rifle.
Mr. McDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Champagne. Mr. Chairman, I would like to move JFK exhibits F-99, F-98 and F-100 be received into the record at this time.
Chairman STOKES. Without objection they may be received in the record at this time.
[JFK exhibits F-98, F-99, and F-100 were received into the record.]
Reply to Bill Clarke, 5-11-14 and 5-13-14:
THE DENT: The HSCA produced DENTS, it did not replicate THE DENT on C.E. 543. Furthermore, it did so only by RAPID FIRING of the alleged murder weapon. As found on 11-22-63, the alleged murder weapon was NOT in rapid firing condition. Its bolt operated only with difficulty.
THE PRIMER INDENTATION AND EXTRACTOR SCRATCH: Those marks are consistent with firing through C.E. 139. As in dry firing. Which the DPD easily could have done.
Given the lack of provenance of C.E. 539 (no proof it was found in the sniper’s nest, no chain of custody); given the markings on it that don’t match with C.E. 139; given there’s absolutely no proof Oswald fired C.E. 539 on 11-22-63, none, it’s irrelevant to any discussion of the JFK case except as a possible plant.
Face it, the “case” against Oswald doesn’t exist except in the fabric of the imagination of the Warren defenders. The real-world facts and plain common sense reveal Oswald was what he claimed to be, a patsy. This is one fact “you people” (in the style of John McAdams) don’t handle well.
@ Jean Davison (& Bill Clarke):
I defer to Michael T. Griffith’s detailed analysis in his article here which hasn’t been rebutted in this thread at all:
Like Jonathan pointed out, there are other features or indications that the dented hull was already fired (even Hoover’s memo pointed that the shell was loaded and extracted THREE TIMES!!!).
As for a loaded case, a dent occurring one in four is NOT the same as one in three (the alleged WC shooting scenario).
How many times did this happen in any of the test firings conducted by the WC or CBS (let’s not include the HSCA for now)? Obviously not enough since Howard Donahue test fired for CBS and made no remarks about this phenomenon.
Dr. Chambers is as much of a firearms expert as the LAT commentators opining on here. His observation that the indentation at the base was DEEPER than the other shells further makes the suspect shell distinguishable from the others.
(If Dr. Chambers’ evidence is less important, what makes Dr. Lattimer’s ballistic demonstrations important? Not only is he not a ‘firearms expert’ but neither is he a medical examiner. I believe he was a urologist.)
Jonathan and Gerry,
How do you know that the sources you’re quoting know what they’re talking about?
One of your sources cites (but doesn’t quote) a Hoover memo and “FBI ballistics report” and claims that “the dented shell has been proven not to have been ejected from the alleged murder weapon.”
The exact opposite is true. Both the FBI and the HSCA’s firearms panel concluded that the dented shell, along with the other two, were definitely fired from the M-C rifle.
Your source isn’t giving you the FBI conclusion but rather telling you how *he* interprets what they wrote.
I’m certainly no firearms expert but many of those who are seem to have no problem with the WC conclusions. Duncan MacPherson is the author of this book (which I haven’t read and no doubt wouldn’t understand if I did):
MacPherson has been quoted as saying, “The
major frustrating feature of the Kennedy assassination phenomenon is the willingness of people to pretend to talk authoritatively on subjects they know absolutely nothing about, especially things related to firearms.”
Sorry if that’s offensive, but that’s what he said.
I’ve learned through bitter experience that you can’t rely on anything in a secondary source — you need to check the footnotes and look at the original document, before you buy it.
Reply to Jean Davison @5-14-14:
The argument I’m about to make is based on the Hoover memo to Rankin of 2 June 1964 (C.E. 2968). It is an argument that has been made by others and never refuted.
1. The dented shell, C.E. 543, bears many marks, one of which stands out.
2. The mark that stands out is the unique mark made by the magazine follower of the alleged murder weapon.
3. The magazine follower pushes rounds upwards in the clip and only marks the BOTTOM ROUND in the clip.
4. The bottom round is THE LAST ROUND in the clip.
5. We are told this: (a) the dented shell, C.E. 543, was found on the floor of the sniper’s nest; and (b) a round, the fourth and last round loaded into the clip, was found unfired in the firing chamber of the alleged murder weapon.
6. Proposition 1-5 establish conclusively C.E. 543 WAS NOT FIRED from the alleged murder weapon in the murder of President Kennedy.
In order to have been so fired, it would have had to have been THE LAST ROUND IN THE CLIP, given the unique magazine follower mark it bears, but IT WASN’T.
It was, therefore, a plant plain and simple.
How do you know that the sources I quoted are NOT accurate?
I trust Michael T. Griffith’s honesty and objectivity in his articles, as well as his research.
I also defer to Jonathan’s follow up reply.
I do own firearms and have handled a MC, but I wouldn’t call myself an expert just like I wouldn’t call Vincent Bugliosi a firearms expert, although we both can rely on such experts to back up our statements or writings.
Yes, the argument that the Hoover memo (CE 2968) shows that the dented shell was “a plant” has been made by many, but it shows no such thing.
The 2-page memo starts here:
The first paragraph tells what it’s about: Rankin had asked the FBI to examine the cartridge cases to see if there were indications that they’d been loaded into and ejected from the rifle “more than once.” The memo reports that there were such markings on the cartridges.
Evidently this suggests that someone had been practicing operating the bolt by ejecting the unfired bullets and loading them again. The dented shell could have been the last one in the clip on one of those occasions.
Once again, I think your sources have misled you.
Michael Griffith’s essay buries the notion that the CE-543 shell held a live round at 12:30 p.m. on November 22, 1963. CE-543 is yet another sour pickle in the government’s whopper deluxe.
Photon/Paul. The Olympic reference is to qualifiers. I “discovered” it in Reclaiming Parkland. Jim D’s source is obvious and means the info has been around a long time if we all would read more.
Pg. 53. “As Meagher explains it, these “master marksmen” were rated at the very top of the scale, not by the Marines, but by the National Rifle Association. In other words, they were even better than the top shooters in the by two or more classes; so proficient they they qualified for open competition and even the Olympic Games!
…”One bettered Oswald’s time..firing from thirty feet up at a still target.”
…”these men practiced all the time.”
I.E. they were the best of the best under less taxing circumstances.
Reply to Jean Davison @May 15 5:59 p.m.:
Think about what you’re writing in the last paragraph of your comment. You’re making my point. Someone loaded the empty dented shell into the firing chamber of the alleged murder weapon. Why? In order to mark it.
Welcome to the Warren critics side of the fence.
Think about it, Jonathan. The “unique” marking you mention doesn’t show that CE 543 had been fired from the weapon, only that at some point it had been loaded into it and extracted. CE 543 was linked to the murder weapon by the firing pin impression on the primer.
What was the frame-up squad trying to do? Show that Oswald had practiced working the bolt? Good job!
Bullet casings don’t dent so easily upon ejection. What did it hit that was so hard? The old wooden floor of the 6th floor TSBD.
True Dave but I have described what happens in my reply to Photon. Remember that the just fired brass is very hot at this time.
Bill, I’m afraid I am just more convinced by the observations and logic of the sources Griffiths cites, particularly Donahue and Kurtz. Although, you or anyone else are free to post a video of MC shell casings being dented in this same manner after firing. That would go a very long distance to convince me and many others that you are right.
Dave; As you wish but I hope you can at least keep this explanation in mind when this subject comes up again. I find it sad that such a simple explanation for the bent case lip can’t be understood and accepted. I wouldn’t harp on this but I have picked up too many hulls with the neck bent.
Of course I’m not set up to do any filming of a case neck being dented and I know of none that shows this.
But lets do this. Disregard how the lip got dented for a moment. Now I see no reason why a person can’t see that the case lip was fine and held a bullet. It was chambered and fired and then bent AFTER firing. That is simple.
Author Kurtz isn’t a firearms expert and got his facts wrong. He quotes Dr. E. Forrest Chapman saying that CE 557 “is a test cartridge fired *empty* from Oswald’s rifle” by the FBI, but CE 557 is actually two cartridges fired in the usual manner. One is dented:
There’s nothing unusual about the dent.
The HSCA’s firearms panel found that one in four of its test cartridges was dented during ejection. The second shell in Figure 2 has a D-shaped dent:
Top view of CE 534 found in the sniper’s nest:
According to others who’ve fired similar Carcanos, it’s normal for some of the shells to be dented as they’re being ejected.
Donahue apparently misunderstood the HSCA argument. Nobody claims that the dent was present when the bullet was fired.
Mike Griffith is honest, but JFK books and online articles are filled with this kind of misinformation passed on from one researcher to another, apparently forever.
How logical is it for the frame-up crew, always ready with evidence to be planted, to throw down a cartridge that “couldn’t have been fired” from the murder weapon?
Reply for Jonathan and Gerry, 5/23/14.
Osanic said the case with the bent lip could not have been fired. This is wrong. It isn’t just a little wrong but it is instead very wrong. Anyone with the plain common sense you speak of plus a little experience firing a bolt rifle can easily understand this.
If you can’t understand this I’m afraid there isn’t much I can do to help you. I’ve explained how the case lip is bent AFTER firing and neither of you have proved this wrong or impossible. It matters not if Oswald was a patsy or not, it has to do with the firing of a rifle. Don’t confuse the two.
Jonathon, are you the one that said you were an Intelligence Officer in Vietnam?
For Jean Davison; May 14, 2014 at 2:36 pm
Jean, I checked out http://www.amazon.com/Bullet-Penetration-Modeling-Incapacitation thinking I might buy it. Then I saw they want $65 for it and changed my mind.
The one review was a 5 star and says the book is excellent but is technical and not a light read. Probably too technical for our use.
I like what he said about all these “experts”. It does make things confusing.
I think a strong case can be made for a 7.65 mm Mauser’s being found somewhere on the upper floors of the TSBD.
— The on-scene, first-day, DPD, firearm-familiar witnesses.
— The fact JFK was hit at least once from above and behind. I believe twice.
— The fact witnesses saw men in sixth-floor windows before and after the assassination.
— The fact one of the men seen in the windows was seen holding a rifle.
— The fact the Mannlicher-Carcano was observed by Robert Frazier on the morning of November 23 to have a corroded barrel.
— The fact the alleged murder weapon had a very difficult bolt operating mechanism and a mis-aligned scope.
— The fact JFK’ss death certificate states he was killed by a high-powered or velocity round, whereas the M-C is a medium velocity weapon.
— The fact a 7.65 Mauser is a superior, high velocity weapon.
Why would Weizmann of all people clearly, unequivocally identify a rifle as a 7.65 Mauser based on metal stampings then assert he had made an honest mistake?
ANSWER: The Official Story, formed after Weizmann’s identification, was not about to be challenged by Seymour Weizmann. Not if he valued his career. On this point, let’s all be real. He conformed his story to the Official Story. Easy to do when you’re a DPD constable and your story conflicts with that of the President of the United States and the Director of the FBI.
Weitzman was there(in the 6th floor to see the Mauser). LBJ and Hoover weren’t. The fact that the Mannlicher-Carcano became the official weapon, when it may not have been, should confirm that LBJ and Hoover wanted the killer to be Oswald, when he may not have been. In the aftermath of the JFK Assassination, the Ï”in FBI didn’t stand for Ïnvestigation” at all.
Great post Jonathan. While I’m not totally ignorant about firearms I don’t have your knowledge of them.
I’d really like to see Robert Prudehomme posst on this.
A 22 hollow point in the throat…
I doubt that anybody on the DPD had even heard of a Carcano rifle. On the other hand most would have known about a Mauser, including ETO vets. The Carcano has a Mauser-type action and a similar appearence.The fact that the Carcano was initially identified as a Mauser would not have been unusual- and probably even expected.
Initial reports stated that JFK was transported to Parkland by ambulance. Why haven’t conspiracy theorists dissected those reports ad nauseum?
So let me get this straight. Photon says the DPD IDed the rifle as a Mauser because it had a Mauser-type action and the appearance of a Mauser? And most DPD officers would have been familiar with Mausers, and could ID a Mauser. Hey, sounds like Photon thinks it was a Mauser!
From a Google search,
Photon, I’ll give you partial credit on the ambulance transportation, in that sirens could be heard over the radio report being done by the overhead helicopter. But Nellie Connelly states that during the ride to the hospital,. no one in the limousine said anything. I think those who got into the limo at Love Field were still in it at Parkland(inlcuding, of course, JFK).
I think reference to ‘high-powered’ rifle in the death certificate is not an exact one and can include a medium velocity weapon. Who signed it?
There are many examples of witnesses changing their story to conform to the official version after the fact, or had their testimony change to align with the official version.
The certificate referred to was not signed by any physician.
The reference to a high-powered rifle is contained in the Warren Report.
The Texas Certificate of Death, signed by a J.P., states the cause of death as “multiple guns wounds to the head & neck.”
George Burkeley’s White House Certificate od Death states the cause of death as a “gunshot wound to the head.” Burkeley’s narrative on the Certificate make three things clear to the reader:
1) The skull was broken apart.
2) The right hemisphere of the skull and its contents were greatly damaged.
3) The back wound was at T-3.
At trial, this Certificate would be admissible into evidence as an official record. As would the Texas Certificate.
When is a certificate of death ever admissible if it is not signed by a physician?
Paul, ever since the body was stolen at gunpoint from the autopsy required by Texas law. Seems to be the type of “law’ for this case.
Photon, check Texas law in 1963.
I think it would pass muster if signed by a J.P.
It’s not the equivalent of an autopsy report.
I’d also add that any controversy over the term ‘high-powered rifle’ is merely semantical.
I’d even call the MC a H-P rifle, whereas a 22 caliber is not (my dad had a neat little semi-automatic Franchi .22 rifle which is obviously smaller than his high-powered .30-06 Browning).
you must not be counting Dr. George Burkley, JFK’s personal physician. He signed it, Photon.
Photographic evidence trumps:
ATF agent Frank Ellsworth, who said that he was present in the TSBD, said that his recollection was that the rifle wasn’t found on the 6th floor. A woman whose relative (either a Dallas P.D. officer or deputy) once told her that the rifle Oswald was supposed to have used was not found on the 6th floor. I’m ratting around in some old stuff to see if i can find that conversation.
In re the above post, the woman was close to or related to Seymour Weitzman. She said that even after changing his story, he maintained privately that it was a Mauser that he identified correctly. The other was from a man who worked with a friend, and that friend was close to a Dallas County deputy who was one of the men credited with finding the gun. He said that the deputy would never talk about the assassination, except for one comment that he is aware of. He said that the deputy maintained, in private, that the rifle claimed as the murder weapon was not the one he found in the TSBD. From a post on JFK Lancer, April 12, 2010.
If you believe the Warren Commission then you believe there was no cover up at any time during the investigation. I find that impossible given all the EXAMPLES:
1. Jackie Kennedy’s first reaction after the head shot was to jump on the BACK of the limo to retrieve a piece of her husband’s skull and at least one motorcycle cop riding behind had blood and tissue on his cheek. Not to mention that many witnesses stated that the back of his head exploded in a rear trajectory. How could this happen if the shot entered the rear of the head? If that was the case then the front of his head would have exploded out. And how is it that witnesses who were within feet of the killing weren’t called to testify before the WC?
2. Every staff member at Parkland stated there was a GAPING hole in the rear of his head, yet the photos from Bethesda show a perfectly intact rear head. And why was the body taken illegally from Parkland where an autopsy by qualified pathologists could have been done? Instead it was whisked away to Bethesda and two doctors with no experience in forensic pathology performed the autopsy on the murderer of the century.
3. How is it that the man who is accused of blowing the president’s head off in broad daylight is interrogated for 12 hours and there are no tapes or recorded notes? I’m not in law enforcement but this doesn’t seem like standard procedure to me. And then of all the people who walk into the basement of the DPD and shoot Oswald in front of live TV just happens to be a strip club owner with mob ties that half the police force knows and frequent his strip club.
whose strip club caters to half the police force
#2 correction: “murder of the century”
Interrogation notes were later discovered but they were written by Captain Fritz well after the fact.
They are not verbatim since there is no tape recording or transcript by a court reporter.
Captain Fritz’s other actions are questionable.
Nice work, Richard. I’ll just add that as to your first point, it really angers me that WC members kept saying to the witnesses they DID have “It couldn’t have happened that way, you must be mistaken”. As if the WC members were right there, too????
“There was another rifle in the building. Warren Caster had two rifles, a 30.06 Mauser and a .22 for his son..” Lee Harvey Oswald speaking to Captain Fritz in Fritz’s office.
Why would Oswald say this? Was there really another gun in the building where Oswald worked? A Mauser?
Yes, there was… read on.
Questioned by the Warren Commission, Warren Caster, who had an office in the building, admitted he had a Mauser 30.06 – just as Oswald had told Fritz.
Mr. BALL. Did you ever bring any guns into the School Book Depository Building?
Mr. CASTER. Yes; I did.
Mr. BALL. When?
Mr. CASTER. I believe it was on Wednesday, November 20, during the noon hour.
Mr. BALL. Whose guns were they?
Mr. CASTER. They were my guns.
Mr. BALL. And what kind of guns were they?
Mr. CASTER. One gun was a Remington, single-shot, .22 rifle, and the other was a .30-06 sporterized Mauser.
Mr. BALL. Who owned them?
Mr. CASTER. I had just purchased them during the noon hour that day.
Independently Roger Craig, Deputy Sheriff, always insisted they had found a Mauser and he was standing only three feet away when it was found. How could Oswald know this? He was not there when the gun was found. Just a very curious coincidence that is difficult to fathom?
I am making no conclusions, simply pointing towards something very curious indeed.
Often the truth is far more strange than fiction.
Roger Craig saw the title “MAUSER” stamped right on the weapon, let alone being just 3 feet away, as you said.
Where are the crime scene photos?
The Italians recently did tests on an identical Carcano rifle made in 1940. I think it was the makers or their military. The fastest they could get off three rounds was approx. 19 seconds in ideal conditions not hanging out of a window. They also at 80 yards fired it through sides of beef and got very different results.
Has anyone timed a Mauser 7.65 in the fastest 3 rounds? How would that gun hold up to the conditions out of that window?
I just watched a re-run of a PBS Nova show titled “Cold Case JFK,” first aired 11-13-13. It focused on forensic autopsy (which was never conducted, mistakenly) and the terminal ballistics of 6.5 M-C ammo. Several notable bits were shown (and, oddly, never addressed in the program):
film of the test-firing of a Mannlicher-Carcano at the range by an experienced forensic ballitician (who probably was not born in ’63, and may have little experience with boltguns) showed a notably clunky/balky bolt action;
he actually jammed the action with a stovepipe empty ejection;
there was film of this team firing into white pine boards, ballistic gel, and ballistic soap, and vintage film of firing into a gel-filled human skull, and none of these targets displayed the reactive movement back toward the shooter predicted by the “jet-nozzle exit effect” proponents.
Useful info from the show:
JFK’s jacket showed the smudgy soot of an entrance wound in his back/neck/shoulder (and that jacket, shirt and tie was left behind in Dallas, so the pathologists in Bethesda did not have essential info);
the Bethesda pathologists saw the wound in his back, but the exit at the throat was obscured by the previous Dallas attempted tracheotomy;
the Mannlicher ammo tended to remain axially stable in target media, but tumble upon re-emergence (as in, leaving JFK’s throat). This is consistent with the elongated entry in Connally’s inital jacket wound, and also consistent with the smooshed-along-its-length profile of the so-called “pristine” stretcher/Magic Bullet.
In regard to timing of the shots, please consider that the shooter of a Mannlicher would presumably begin with a loaded rifle, so the sequence would be:
Fire the first round;
first bolt action to eject the fired case, cock the striker, feed a fresh round, and re-lock the breech;
reacquire the target and Fire the second round;
second bolt to eject, cock, feed and re-lock;
reacquire the target and Fire the third round.
The sequence of “Bang, click-click, Bang, click-click, Bang” seems like it’s possible in 6-10 seconds for any rifleman experienced with his weapon; whether that particular rifle, ammo, and man could hit that intermediate-size moving target at that intermediate distance is still up for discussion. LHO’s rickety, misaligned cheapie scope might be a red herring, as a good rifleman could just as easliy use the gun’s stock military iron sights. I’ve never seen any discussion of where those sights were aligned.
There was a picture on the front page of a Greensboro, N.C. news paper on Nov.22,1963 that showed agents holding a rifle and ammo that they had just found in that building. The rifle was an Argentine Mauser Model 1891 7.65 and the ammo had pointed projectiles, not rounded like a Carcano uses. I remember full well because I had one just like it and I went and got it and showed it to my wife. One of the detectives had been a gun smith and he said it was a mauser and read the information off of the receiver.
I saw the same photo of the Mauser – in newspapers over the weekend of 11/22-11/24/63 and in several current books related to the assassination. Unfortunately, neither a video of the Mauser being pulled out of it’s hiding place on the 6th floor nor a good smack over the head with it is gonna change a closed mind. After all, this is the United States where President Lyndon Johnson’s team of Blue Ribbon investigators determined that John Kennedy was shot from the rear by a lone nut with a Mannlicher Carcano. There’s no room for doubt or speculation. You’ve been told how it happened and that’ll be the end of it, thank you. No more questions or smart remarks; Off to bed with you then and you better know you’re lucky you weren’t given a good spanking and left to cry yourself to sleep. And see to it that your attitude has changed come morning. Go ahead then; Off with ya, you’ll learn soon enough.
Where was Oswald’s wallet found exactly. In the squad car or on the street? I’m sure he would have picked it up before reloading . Tippet was probably dead by them.
The Mannlicher Carcano has a Mannlicher magazine that loads by use of an “Enbloc” clip. Unlike the Mauser stripper clip the enbloc clip stays in the magazine until the last cartridge in the magazine has been chambered by movement of the bolt.
The rifle can pnly be used as a repeater if the enbloc clip is present in the magazine.
When empty the enbloc clip will either fall free through a square opening in the bottom of the magazine or be pushed out by loading a fresh clip.
If only three shots were fired the clip would remain in the magazine unless pulled out from the top.
The Winchester brand 6.5 ammunition Oswald used was noted for the bullets breaking in half inside a wound. The jackets of these bullets were not properly annealed and the process of crimping the bullet into the case mouth caused cracks a bit more than halfway back from the nose.
One bullet nose was found and mis identified as a .25 (6.35mm) ACP pistol bullet, which would be about the same size as a broken off 6.5mm bullet nose.
The Mauser–Carcano issue is a red herring that leads nowhere. Clearly Boone and Weitzman were mistaken with their hurried initial identification and neither one EVER said later they were intimidated ot coerced to change their story by “powers that be.” Besides all bullet fragments and the one intact bullet recovered from the Connally stretcher matched Oswald’s rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons on the planet. We do not have any bullets in existence today that were associated with the assassination of President Kennedy that do not match the Mannlicher-Carcano purchased, handled, owned, and fired by Lee Harvey Oswald. His prints were on it, it was found where he worked, and it was missing from his wife’s residence.
End of issue.
End of issue you say lol?
CE399 is devoid of biological matter or cloth fiber! End of issue?
CE399 smashes through 10 cm of rib bone and radial bone but is virtually unscathed, yet allegedly, the bullet fragments found in the car of the nose and base broke apart by hitting skull bone moments later leaving the middle section embedded on the outer table of JFK’s skull as seen on the X-ray? Orlando Martin, decorated Drill Instructor, says a FMJ bullet would not break up like that if it hit a skull. Then we have a particle cloud of fragments as well as seen in the right lateral x-ray of JFK’s head? But wait, how can that WCC FMJ bullet disintegrate like that? Didn’t Dr. Lattimer prove with that silly pine board test that the WCC is VERY STABLE? (Relevant if JFK was Pinocchio but that’s besides the point here).
End of issue you say?
I could go on and on, but you don’t have to be a competent defense attorney to make the jury laugh at such incredulous beliefs or claims.
SV, there also was a print on a box right at the sniper’s position, belonging to Mac Wallace. Of course the FBI said it wasn’t a match to Wallace, because that would have ruined the work of John Edgar Hoover. Let’s say the only shooter was Oswald. Wallace “conspired” to make sure he had a comfortable position to aim the rifle.
There are several models of 7.65 Mauser rifle. Those most commonly encountered as surplus rifles during the 1960’s were the 1891 Argentine Mauser, the 1909 Argentine Mauser, and the 1989 Belgian Mauser.
The 1909 resembled the 7.92 Caliber Gew 98 Mauser used by Germany in WW1.
The 1891 and 1889 Mausers resembled the Italian Manlicher Carcano. Each of these rifles had a slim single row box magazine that protruded from the bottom of the stock ahead of the trigger guard.
The 1909 Mauser had a double row magazine that did not protrude.
The markings on military rifles are notoriously hard to make out, most especially when the metal is worn, dinged up or dirty. It would be fairly easy to mistake a 6.5 for a 7.65 marking if that was what you expected to see.
Best way to examine markings is to clean the metal and rub chalk or light colored grease pencil over it to fill in the stampings.
Not Surprised but you did not address my point at all. You basically ignore or bypass any point you do not have an answer and make sure you add an insult in any response.
Never shot a rifle, have you Heather? The three shot scenario has been excuted multiple times by multiple organizations on multiple media sites in even less time than we now know Oswald had-beginning with CBS in 1964. The claim that Oswald couldn’t make the shots is pure baloney. Whether you like it or not Oswald was able to make USMC Sharpshooter-that is a matter of public record. That makes him about an average shot among the some of the most expert riflemen in the world. And the most amazing thing about Oswald’s markmanship record is that like most everything else he did in the Corps he didn’t even care to make his best effort.
The fact that someone can jerk and pull the MC hard enough to crank off three rounds in the allotted time means little. Was the shooting scenario a replica of the 6th floor in the TSBD on 11/22? That would include the tree that blocked a good part of the view from that window . As a result, whoever was shooting from that window did not have long to see and then aim in on JFK. The tests that I’ve seen have been pretty generous in allowing time for the shooter to prepare the first shot. Further, I know of no test that produced the results of the actual assassination. In addition, Oswald scored in the lowest category of shooter in the Marines and, if I’m not mistaken, barely qualified in that category the last time he had to qualify. Nelson Delgado, a fellow Marine, said that Oswald used to hit “Maggie’s Drawers” (a missed shot) pretty regularly. Also, the fact that Oswald hit a target with a rifle a few times several years before 11/22 means nothing. Shooting accurately is a skill that tends to degrade if you don’t stay at it. There’s no indication that Oswald did. The world still awaits an accurate recreation of the alleged feat, with the same or very simialr results. Don’t hold your breath for it.
While in the Marines he was using weapons that were markedly better than the Mannlicher – as well. I saw a special with a Marine sharpshooter using Oswalds weapon in the TSBD on the 6th floor and he tried to duplicate Oswalds alleged shooting – they came to the conclusion the rifle was such a POS it was virtually impossible.The comment earlier about Oswald hitting the persons target next to him with that rifle at a range rings true . Has anyone here looked at the claims of a Remington Fireball being used from the Grassy Knoll?
The only guy who duplicated Oswald’s feat was Howard Donahue, a weapon’s expert, and on his third try only lol, using a different MC and with some practice and a good scope.
It was a moving target but there were no trees obstructing the view, and they didn’t have to shoot from a half-open window.
You can read more about his by googling Michael T. Griffith and the issue of Oswald’s marksmanship.
Even that Australian Detective in the recent documentary entitled, The Smoking Gun, put two and two together when he says that a guy like Oswald (whose marksmanship declined over the years from Sharpshooter to barely passing as Marksman) would never have accomplished what he did on the 1st try in real life adrenalin-pumping conditions against the POTUS.
(Incidentally, Oswald used an M1-Garand semi-automatic rifle in a horizontal-body position shooting at a fixed target. Not quite the analogy or persuasive comparison as a shooter from the alleged sniper’s lair).
Actually, in one Marine boot camp photo, Oswald is seen semi-kneeling or crouching above off the ground (and not lying flat on his stomach as in a concealed sniper position).
Not old enough? That is about the strangest answer I have seen. How old do you have to be to understand history, to have knowledge of a historical figure? If I wasn’t old enough to remember the Kennedy assassination I couldn’t comment on it or have an opinion? That’s nonsense.
The simplest answers are almost always the correct answers. Occam’s razor. The more complicated a theory is the less likely it is to be true. A theory that professional killers were shooting from the TSBD simultaneously with a shooter on the grassy knoll while planting 3 shells to frame Oswald and somehow then getting Oswald to leave the building and go back to his room and pick up his gun and then get framed for killing a second individual and then run into a theater without buying a ticket and then shooting a third person unsuccessfully because that person’s thumb blocks the trigger while Oswald says ” it’s all over now” at the same time that a rifle that Oswald’s wife took a picture of him holding is discovered on a sixth floor of a building that unknown strangers used as a sniper’s nest while eating fried chicken and being completely unnoticed by anybody else despite never having worked at building and and and- is simply too complex to be logical or likely.
The simple thing would have been for Oswald to buy a gun from anywhere and take advantage of the lax security and shoot Kennedy on the parade route.
Better yet use the easier shot available to him from TSBD. Instead he fired 3 shots that were so difficult that most sharpshooters could only dream of making.
That ‘simple’ explanation defies logic.
A trained sniper was quoted in James Tague’s book as saying “Oswald couldn’t have done it(fired the fatal shot)because I couldn’t have done it”. His last name was Roberts.
Have you considered that the genius behind the conspiracy studied that razor of Occam’s and devised the plan, and that certain members of the Warren Commission had the same handbook?
You totally oversimplify Occam’s Razor (and misquote it).
The single-bullet theory relies on too many assumptions for Occam’s Razor to apply.
It’s simply unbelievable.
The umbrella man was identified years ago. He said that he was making a political statement,equating JFK with Neville Chamberlain.,ergo the umbrella. But hey,the conspiracy crowd likes to believe that he shot JFK with a curare tipped flèche tote to ” set him up for the fatal shot”. Curt your theories about Oswald and the TSBD are entertaining but not logical. The only thing I agree with is wondering why Oswald didn’t take the shot as the limo turned to the left to go toward the triple underpass. From the sixth floor he couldn’t have missed, but he may have felt too exposed. Or perhaps he didn’t have the nerve to see his victim’s face.
At any rate your scenarios are like doing a tonsillectomy through the rectum. Wouldn’t it be much simpler to accept the fact that the only scenario that doesn’t require insanely complex and illogical actions is that Oswald fired 3 shots,dropped the rifle and left the building so he wouldn’t be caught?
The umbrella man was not old enough (or wise enough in my opinion) to have understood the Chamberlain nuance. At best, he might have been coached. None of what you state explains why he walked approximately 8 blocks from the Rio Grande National Life Ins. building to position himself at the very end of the parade when there were numerous spots along the route that would have been suitable. I have watched his interview and my personal assessment is that he is frightened and unsure of his playbook.
I was looking at some photos of the motorcade and noticed that there were 3 spectators holding umbrellas (closed). This illustrates to me that there were at least 4 individuals that were prepared for the possibility of rainfall, and makes “umbrella man” seem a little less out of the ordinary.
I think that it would be much more productive for those who have the desire to further the case for conspiracy, to concentrate on the facts. Spending limited and precious energy bickering about theories and hypotheses serves only to “wear you down” and allow the dialogue be focused on non facts. A skilled debater will continually steer the line of questioning back to the facts, while deflecting and ignoring his opponents attempts to avoid the facts. For 50 years we have been dealing with a disinformation machine that has used its understanding of human psychology and behavior to create doubt and confusion with regard to the assassination. (Know you enemy). It is up to we, the truth seekers, to rise above the temptation to argue over hypotheses, and spend our time searching for more truths.
Personally I believe Oswald did it, the question being, why? To see these same repetitive ill informed arguments backed up with increasingly ridiculous problem solving scenarios is tiring. You talk of facts then bring up umbrella man..?!?
When engaging in “research” try to look at all view points and consider them objectively instead of searching out the “facts” that fit your belief.
Try this http://www.jfkfiles.com/index.html you really won’t like it but I’d be interested to learn where they’ve gone wrong.
Pablo is not fooled by computer-animations that are based on pre-conceived notions.
If you are weary and searching for the simplest of answers, that is entirely understandable.
Perhaps the Warren Commission too would have benefited from those with the capacity for critical thinking and/or less institutionally indoctrinated minds.
Interesting discussion on Oswald and TSBD. I think he falls in a gray area-somewhere between being totally innocent and firing the fatal shot (also see 1963 SS renactment video at end of this write up):
On the involvement side: Marina always said he admired JFK, so why wasn’t he out watching the motorcade? Also, if it was a total frame up, the conspirators would have to know where he was at the given time–if Oswald had decided to go out with other workers and watch the parade, the set up wouldn’t have worked. Then, instead of lingering in the crowd after the shots as everyone else does, he goes home and gets his gun, having been intentionally dropped off a block or two from his actual rooming house. Personally, I believe he was in the lunchroom during the shooting. Why have him on the 6th floor when you can have some professional killers shoot, and by being in the lunchroom, there’s less risk of him being captured. Oswald already worked there, so that’s one strike against him already. His knowledge of logistics in the Depository may have been helpful to the plotters.
Okay, now evidence he wasn’t the shooter: Carolyn Arnold sees him on the ground or second floor at 12:15 the same time Arnold Rowland and others see two men in the TSBD 6th floor window (he sees time on Hertz sign on TSBD flash 12:15). Why would he leave three spent shells the floor? Answer: because they were intended to be found–suggesting a set up. But perhaps Oswald’s role was to serve as a willing fall guy, perhaps not totally knowledgable about his co-conspirators. Motive still not clear.
My theory on the shots. Consider the first shot was reported to sound more like a firecracker, different from the rest, and SS agents turning around to their rear (as shown in Altgens) photo. Seems convincing first shot came from TSBD, could well be exhibit 399 that lodged in his back and fell out. Second gunman from rear hits Connally, third and fatal shot from grassy knoll, and a fourth shot from the rear which may be the missed Tague shot, its angle tracks much closer to the Da Tex building than the TSBD.
Check out his 1963 Secret Service video recreating path of JFK limo, JFK an unbelievable easy target as the limo approaches the TSBD, if it had only been the alleged shooter Oswald.
Curt: I think that is a very interesting hypothesis. It will be interesting to see if others can challenge it in stages.
I would add that 1) the depository business itself was the backdrop and certain characters involved in the business were privy to the plan 2) the umbrella man (no, he did not fire darts at the motorcade) was the spotter – his actions served to signal the direct hit as well as align the target.
Better said: May Have served to signal the direct hit ….
Just a couple comments, Curt. The second gunman from the rear, as you describe, may well have been the second person Arnold Rowland saw. From that angle(as opposed to the sniper’s nest), it would have been easier to hit Connally). And you’re right…the missed shot(the one that sprayed debris onto Tague)probably came from the rear, as I believe the grassy knoll shooters were professional snipers. I’ll throw in that the shot that hit JFK in the back could well have come from the Dal-Tex bldg.
My earlier reply – I saw 2 women interviewed who were both TSBD employees at the time of the shooting and knew Oswald – They were standing in the ladderwell that Oswald would’ve had to come down to get to the cafeteria and they stated no one least of all Oswald came down the ladderwell –
Now I get it- the Dallas PD put the real A. Hidell in those lineups. Earlier in the day they programmed him to shoot Tippit. After they took him back into custody they secretly planted the same gun on Lee. Lee just wanted to go to the movies on his lunch break and see that hit “War is Hell”-everybody wanted to see it.
Yea,that’s the ticket. Actually it was free-he didn’t even need a ticket. He always spent his Fridays going to the movies. I can’t believe that I couldn’t see it.
Jonathan, how can you explain the Tippit line ups?
“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”. Jonathan, unless Lee was taking target practice in the backyard why would you think that Marina would have seen him practicing with the rifle? Did she go to the range with him? Did she go with him out to the country and set up targets? More to the point,exactly how would she know what he was doing with the rifle when he wasn’t even living with him? I don’t believe that I used any medical terms today,but feel free to correct that statement if you have identified one.
I find in general that when people start losing an argument they start to fall back to the “you’re stupid” argument and insults.I am reminded of Harry Truman-“I don’t give them hell, I tell them the truth and they think that’s hell.”
The Mannlicher-Carcano was at Marina’s flat in Irvine, not at the rooming house in Dallas where Oswald stayed during the week for work.
Oswald didn’t drive. There’s a report allegedly of Oswald at a firing range prior to November 1963 wherein he hit the next shooter’s target lol.
Other than that, the FBI came up with no evidence that Oswald live-practiced with a rifle prior to the assassination.
” . . . why was Walter Cronkite reporting that the weapon was a “Manlicther Charcono” within 6 hours of the assassination? That’s on YouTube.
” . . . All of the networks reported that a secret service agent was killed in the shooting. Where is the body?”
In my view, you can’t have it both ways. And in PD Moynihan’s view: “you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.:
Pay no attention to common sense.
He presents (to use a medical term) as a disbelieving person.
Except he’s ignorant and arrogant.
Strangely enough and not meaning to sound provocative, I have a sense that I am addressing a female. I can’t say precisely why.
I’m a male.
I think cc is too.
I know you are, clearly.
Well, I see that the conspiracy Wolkenkuckucksheim is well populated. Jonathan, please explain to us why witnesses to the Tippit murder identified Oswald as the murderer out of not one, not two, but three separate police lineups. Please tell us why Marina’s comment about the jacket has any bearing whatsoever when she wasn’t even living with him but the housekeeper who was identified it? Isn’t it much more likely that Oswald got rid of his billfold so as to not have ID on his person, rather than to have some conspiracy secretly plant it while a half dozen witnesses were standing by? Was some secret ray gun used to blind them and at the same time cause mass hyteria so that they would pick the same innocent guy out of multiple lineups? If this Mauser nonsense is so significant why was Walter Cronkite reporting that the weapon was a “Manlicther Charcono” within 6 hours of the assassination? That’s on YouTube. All of the networks reported that a secret service agent was killed in the shooting. Where is the body? Why are they covering that up? Could it be that in the moment THEY MADE A MISTAKE? Could it be that multiple police officers who had never even heard of a Carcano but who had seen Mausers (one of the most common European bolt-action rifles) might mistake the similarly appearing Italian rifle for being one? Leslie Sharp, if you don’t know about Oswald’s time in NYC and that school district’s identification of Oswald as a sociopath you might want to study it. It is a classic story of an alienated loner with severe psychological issues-hardly a candidate for any conspiracy, or frankly any close human interaction.
Hey, common sense. You want to communicate to me?
Use elegant grammar.
CS: I am well informed about Youth House. I have tracked his doctor(s). I see suggestions that they were functioning under pressure, and I know of one particular coincidence involving one of them which no thinking individual could accept as such. I even know who the attorney was for Youth House and know his affiliations with major corporations. I also know that the facility was associated with Columbia University where one of it’s star social scientists was establishing a serious bona fides in the field. I also know of a distinct connection to the Human Ecology experiments taking place at Cornell University during the same period.
Is it necessary for you to resort to this? “Wolkenkuckucksheim.” Is that a term taught at the higher levels of education? I prefer not to engage in the spirit you are displaying, but you obviously recognize that it is impossible to allow your observations to go unchallenged.
Here is a good answer to your question “explain how witnesses identified Oswald out of a line up 3 times:” IF you really are interested in the answer! 🙂
This just reveals more about the dubious nature of Captain Will Fritz.
keep dreaming Anthony. Explain this. The most important piece of evidence in this case would have been the limo that JFK was riding in. It would have showed numerous bullet impacts and would have most certainly shown where the shots came from just by the blood splatter evidence and direction. It would have been crucial to finding out the real truth but for some reason someone gave an order to start cleaning and wiping down the limo while it sat outside Parkland Hospital.
LHO probably never even fired a gun that day. Wake up as Oswald was a patsy from the beginning and no way could have done the shooting
Jonathan: It’s critical to include in any argument involving Marina the details of where she was in the immediate aftermath of the assassination and who she was with. After one night in a hotel near the LBJ Freeway – and I believe (do not quote me yet on this) that she encountered Dick Stolley in this location – she was moved to Six Flags Over Texas which was owned by the Wynne family. As I’ve pointed out before, there were literally dozens of hotels with ample security and obscurity between LBJ and Arlington, so the choice of Six Flags had to have been based on something. I think it was PD Scott who first made this connection. A counter argument could be made that it was close to the Paine’s home, but that in and of itself introduces a further and obvious curiosity.
Marina is key.
In 1964, she nailed her husband. When shown the purported Carcano, told the W.C., “the fateful rifle of Lee Oswald”, at which point Earl Warren “admits” the rifle into evidence.
She told the W.C. she never saw Lee practicing with the rifle.
In recent years, Marina has said LHO was innocent. June has said, let’s see the facts. I applaud June.
That is a display of courage suggesting there is hope for the future of their descendants.
Do you remember The Late Late Show with Tom Snyder?
He interviewed one of Oswald’s daughters (could’ve been June but I can’t recall for sure).
It was right after the O.J. Trial!
Accordingly, she was comparing to that trial and felt that if they found reasonable doubt for O.J. Simpson, that they easily would’ve found that for her father, had he gone to trial.
PM: One last question: Was Craig the sole source of testimony about the Mauzer-Carcano confusion? I may not be following this closely enough when it’s clearly significant.
Craig maintained his story until 1968 when he did an interview with the Los Angeles Free Press. During the interview he was asked if he had handled the rifle. His response:
Roger Craig was interviewed in 1968 by the Los Angeles Free Press. In that interview he was asked if he handled the rifle. This was his response:
“Yes, I did. I couldn’t give its name because I don’t know foreign rifles, I know it was foreign made, and you loaded it downward into a built-in clip. The ID man took it and ejected one live round from it. The scope was facing north, the bolt facing upwards and the trigger south.”
When Craig was interviewed for “Two Men in Dallas,” Craig claimed “7.65 Mauser” was actually stamped on the barrel. So which is it?
So much ambiguity from Craig Leslie.
Paul: tks. It would have been extremely inconvenient for there to have been two rifles, less so for there to have been one which was misidentified, and more curious for either or both to have been left in the location to have been readily found. Authors of chaos were indeed present, but Oswald was not an author, he was a character in their story.
Whose story Leslie?
PM: I will ignore this, and rely on you to do some research.
Paul, do you deliberately omit the last sentence in your quote of the LA Free Press article? Or was it just a big mistake?
SOURCE => http://22november1963.org.uk/roger-craig-when-they-kill-a-president
Paul: I wasn’t familiar with the Mary Ferrell story. And of course suicides are committed by some who fell within the parameters of the Kennedy assassination. I do believe that each should be scrutinized closely. Thanks for this info on Craig.
I tend to agree that the clip is probably a more interesting story than the Mauser. The fact is that the clip should have fallen out of the gun as soon as the last round was chambered, so the pictures showing the gun with the clip in are head scratchers.
Jason L. You are correct the ammunition “clip” is a more interesting story. But let’s get technical. The manlicker uses a “cartridge carrier.” The Mauser uses a “stripper clip.” When the Mannlicker is loaded, the cartridge carrier holds 5 bullets. It is pushed into the gun from the top and stays with the gun until the last shot is fired. Then it falls out of the gun. The Mauser is also loaded from the top, only it uses a stripper clip. The new cartridges are pushed into the gun and the stripper clip is removed leaving the 5 new bullets in the gun.
When the Dallas Sheriff showed the rifle used to kill the President, holding the gun by its strap, he raised it over his head for all to see. A photograph was taken of him. In the photo we can see a cartridge carrier still in the gun, indicating the weapon was loaded. Regardless of any and all stampings on the barrel of the rifle, we can see in the photo the gun was a Mannlicker, and not a Mauser.
Please post the link that shows a clip in the rifle… Even the “film” of the rifle’s discovery shows no clip in the rifle….
The only picture I’ve seen that shows a clip in the rifle is the one taken outside of the TSBD.
Jonathan: I now realize your point about the billfold. A very solid piece of evidence, and yet a very careless mistake by Oswald, the man who contrived to kill Kennedy, the man whose motive was to “create chaos.”
Leslie, Jonathan actually brought up the suicide issue regarding Craig. I simply responded to it. For myself, it’s not a matter of comfort in discussing various subjects. Craig has been endorsed over the years by various conspiracy theorists as a reliable source on the events of 11/22 concerning the Carcano versus Mauser issue.
PM: I understand now. Apologies for seeming abrupt.
When Oswald was taken at the Texas Theater, he was found to be carrying his own wallet, containing a library card for someone else.
The Tippit crime scene holds the key to the ground-level events on 11-22-63.
Imagine you’re a plotter. You have two basic objectives. Kill JFK. Frame a patsy. And maybe a third objective: make it look like the patsy was working for the soviets or for Castro.
JFK has to be killed. Not because of Cuba. But because he is seeking to end the Cold War (a dangerous matter c. 1963).
With JFK out of the way, the path is clear for the Georgetown crowd to plough into Viet Nam.
Jonathan: So we agree that Tippitt had to be murdered – that he was called to the location where someone was waiting, and that someone shot him, planted a billfold that would incriminate Oswald and fled – meanwhile, Oswald was en route to his boarding house to get … what? … change clothes or? and proceeded to the Texas Theatre where he had been instructed to rendezvous with someone who was going to get him out of the city (thinking of the idling plane at Red Bird if that has been validated)? If I were writing this movie, that’s how it would play.
Now, I would like to hear a specific rebuttal to this theory, evidence that proves this did not happen.
>>Now, I would like to hear a specific rebuttal to this theory, evidence that proves this did not happen.<<
Obviously no one can disprove your theory. Unfortunately your theory requires clairvoyance and a lot of luck. And it doesn't make much sense.
This all had to be preplanned, right? How could the conspirators know that Oswald would not be locked down at the TSBD? How could they know that he wouldn't get trapped in a traffic jam?
Did they choose Tippit beforehand? How did they lure him to the scene? How could they be sure that Tippit would stop their guy? How did they know that Tippit's murder would be witnessed? Did the conspirators know that Oswald's revolver had been rechambered to fire .38 specials, and did they supply a similarly modified weapon to the guy who killed Tippit? What are the odds? How did they know that Oswald would arm himself at his rooming house? If he weren't carrying a gun, wouldn't that have been a problem?
How did they know that a shoe store clerk would see someone who looked like Oswald sneaking into the theater? What if the clerk was busy with something else? What if it was raining? How would that affect their plans? (At one point I had a list of about fifty such questions.)
Reality: The shoe store clerk identified Oswald at the theater. Under interrogation Oswald admitted that he was carrying a gun when arrested. (He never accused the police of planting it.) The gun matched the mail order weapon and it matched the type of worn and modified weapon used in Tippit's murder. There are better, simpler theories for Oswald's actions after 1:00 o'clock. There's no reason to make him innocent of Tippit's murder. (Hint: Don't get stuck on Martino's story. Conceivably he was just filling in some missing blanks to make sense of the plot as he knew it.)
On the flip side – Prove this did happen?
But in answer to your post, the amount of room for error in everything happening the way you say is massive. If you were going to risk all this then it would have been easier to wait for Oswald to fire the last shot and throw him put the window to make it look like a murder suicide. He had previous suicidal tendencies. It doesn’t make sense to let your “patsy” walk around town catching buses and taxi’s.
I really wonder if LBJ believed his own words when he said the attacks on the Maddox and Turner Joy ships was enough evidence to begin the escalation of our soldiers into Vietnam.
The escalation of our soldiers in Vietnam had been going on since 1961 and by 1963 had increased from less than 1,000 to around 17,000. Like it or not, that is an escalation. Johnson continued this low level escalation for over a year before the communist forced him to fish or cut bait.
The attack on the Maddox was in fact real. LBJ and McNamara had time to know that the Turner Joy attack was suspect. I suspect that they did know.
You would have everyone here believe LBJ merely carried on JFK’s policies in Viet Nam until he shifted gears into full-blown war.
This is a distorted view.
Roughly until 1-1-64 (or the death of JFK in late 1963), U.S. military activity in Viet Nam was confined to advisory efforts in the South. Beginning in 1964, the Special Operations Group (SOG), consisting of American special operators attached to the Fifth Special Forces Group, began conducting cross-border operations into North Viet Nam (and Cambodia and Laos).
These were anything but advisory in nature. They were in the case of North Viet Nam hostile incursions, involving American and indigenous forces. These incursions, which involved recon and prisoner snatching, were also not of a defensive nature. They were offensive in nature and highly secret.
LBJ approved the secret SOG cross border offensive operations. JFK did not.
When I read the following, it seems that the Maddox had it coming. It wasn’t an innocent bystander vessel.
Seriously, if JFK wouldn’t support the losing rebels on the beaches of the Bay of Pigs, would have gotten fully into this deteriorating situation?
Jonathan , how do you know JFK did not authorize similar operations?
Jonathan May 13, 2014 at 6:46 pm
The only distorted view here belongs to you, Jonathan.
From the death of JFK until March of 65 (some 15 months) LBJ did as JFK did in Vietnam. He continued sending “advisers” and equipment and material to SVN. I’m sure “Jack” was cold in his grave by March of 1965.
With the MACV command in 1962 this pretense of our troops as “advisers” pretty well went to hell in a hand basket. Even the Kennedyphilic books such as John Newman’s have given up on this bit of propaganda. We were losing Americans in the air and on the ground. Why? Because they were engaging in combat.
You don’t know what JFK approved or didn’t approve. Do you know for sure those 400 Special Forces boys never crossed a border? Neither do I. But I have a good guess.
To Photon and Bill Clarke:
So, LBJ was just carrying on JFK’s policies in Viet Nam? Believe that if you wish.
BTW, Photon, we know JFK did’t authorize SOG cross-border operations because SOG didn’t come into being until 1964.
BTW, Bill Clarke, you can SPECULATE that the S.F. forces in SVN in 1962 and 1963 engaged in purposeful cross-border recon and snatch operations. You can speculate all day. A reasonably informed person would ask: Why then was SOG formed?
Bil Clarke, you claim to know a lot more about Viet Nam than I. Yet you pick at the fact that American advisers were getting killed in Viet Nam — for example at Ap Bac in early 1963. Bill, I believe you don’t understand, or otherwise you’re misrepresenting here, what those advisers were doing. Sure they were going into combat with ARVN units, but not for the purpose of being warriors against the Viet Cong. Their job, as you either know or don’t know, was to try to increase the fighting efficiency of the ARVN troops.
JFK NEVER gave a signal that he intended to inject U.S COMBAT FORCES, such as the 1st Marines or the 1st Air Cav, into Viet Nam and to take over the war there. Quite the opposite as one gleans clearly from NSAM 263. Quite the contrary as one gleans from the neutrality deal JFK worked out in Laos. It’s LBJ who lusted for American control of the war in Viet Nam.
It’s not my view that’s distorted, Bill, it’s yours.
The country didn’t have any of this during the JFK administration:
“Hey, hey, LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?”
Jonathan May 15, 2014 at 10:52 am
I will believe that LBJ continued doing just what Kennedy had been doing until you show me different. So far you haven’t done so, your misunderstanding of Special Operations in Vietnam included. See below for shoot down of your SOG argument.
Your wrong answer to Photon: You don’t seem to know the history of these operations. Just because they didn’t name it SOG until 1964 doesn’t mean that the same type of operations was not being run before 1964. I don’t know what you think SACSA was doing under Krulak in 1962 and 1963 but I’d expect a conspiracy buff to suspect the worst, not the best. Pardon the Wikipedia reference but it serves the purpose in this case.
“The Special Operations Group (as the unit was initially titled) was in fact controlled by the Special Assistant for Counterinsurgency and Special Activities (SACSA) and his staff at the Pentagon.a This arrangement was necessary since SOG needed some listing in the MACV table of organization and the fact that MACV’s commander, General William Westmoreland, had no authority to conduct operations outside territorial South Vietnam. This command arrangement through SACSA also allowed tight control (up to the presidential level) of the scope and scale of the organization’s operations. “
“1.^a These officers included Major Generals Victor H. Krulak, USMC (1962–1964)”
I’m not speculating about Special Operations in Vietnam. I’m stating the history of it. You should learn some. Come on Jonathan, aren’t you a military man? You should know how the military works. Everything is rocking along fine and then someone comes up with a new alphabet soup lettered new command name or a new Task Force or whatever. The formation of the MACV command in 1962 caused a lot of new names. But you knew that.
The First Marine Division or the 1st Cav Division are military UNITS. And you are correct; JFK did not send combat UNITS to Vietnam. Neither did LBJ for 15 months after the assassination of JFK. But JFK did send individuals that did in fact engage in ground combat. This is a fact. The air combat role we played is undeniable.
Jonathan: The country didn’t have any of this during the JFK administration
Yes they most certainly did. You just didn’t know about it.
Jonathan: “Hey, hey, LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?”
Now I see where you get your Vietnam history.
One of our neighbors where i grew up – a Beverly Hills Cop at the time told me as a Marine they were in Laos in 1964 – He did’nt tell me exactly what they were doing but i;m sure they were’nt selling Girl Scout cookies..
RM: Have you studied the period when Oswald was in NYC? Aside from the theory that there was both a Lee and a Harvey, that stage of Oswald’s life would have been crucial in his development.
Ian Griggs, who believes a conspiracy killed JFK, says it was a Mannlicher-Carcano that was found- which does not mean that it was used in the JFK assassination.
For years I believed Roger Craig’s account of a Mauser, but I may be leaning more to a Mannlicher-Carcano being found (planted) on 6th floor TSBD:
Didn’t the Dallas force immediately get in touch with the S, Klein’s manager who was able, very quickly, to trace the life of the gun? Or am I confusing that time line?
If so – and with all that should have been done – to stop and trace the rifle (to establish a paper trail for a press release?) seems odd.
I’m feeling the presence of Vince Salandria …. ‘they will wear you down!’
Was a Mauser found at the TSBD?
The facts are that the police reports filed said a Mauser was found.
Four police officers initially said a Mauser was found: Boone, Craig, Fritz, and Weizmann. Boon, Fritz, and Weizmann changed their tune and went on to have good careers with the DPD. Roger Craig never changed his tune and wound up shooting himself to death in the chest with a rifle.
Your implication being? Roger Craig had deep personal as well as psychological issues. No surprise about his suicide.
Paul, surely you’re uncomfortable going down the suicide trail?
Are you referring to Craig? If so Leslie please post anything relevant showing something else.
No. I haven’t followed the Craig debate closely. My reference was to suicides relating to the assassination given that you broached the subject.
Leslie, no doubt you are familiar with Mary Ferrell. Mary had a relationship of sorts with Gary Craig. Here is what Mary had to say:
I knew Roger Craig for several years before his death. It is my belief
that Roger was a very sick young man. He had made a name for himself as a
very promising young law enforcement officer. When he came forward with
some of the “stories” he told following the events of that November
weekend, he believed that he would be offered a great deal of money and,
possibly, speaking engagements. I am very sorry to say that I am one of
the few conspiracy nuts who never believed Roger Craig. When Roger made a number of speeches about the fact that “they” prevented him from getting a job, I talked my husband into giving him a job. Roger
did not want to work. He wanted people to give him money because he had
“seen something or other.”
I have made enemies because I have continued to say that I have never
really believed him.
I had the opportunity to chat with Mary several times before her untimely death. Craig came up several times in conversation. Mary sounded almost embarrassed by Craig’s activities.
Apologies Leslie. I mean Roger Craig, not Gary. Mea Culpa :-).
I’m aware of Craig’s psychological problems that developed in the wake of the assasination, but there were other witnesses to his claim of seeing a man come down the grassy area between the TSBD and the street and get into a Nash Rambler wagon. I’ve always believed that part of his story.
What evidence exists to confirm that Mary Ferrell actually said that about Roger Craig?
All right, Paul.
Whatever version of history you wish.
Please tell: In your view how many shots were fired, and from where, so as to account for (a) JFK’s wounds, (b) Connally’s wounds, and (c) Tague’s wounds.
Three shots from above and behind because that is what the available evidence shows us.
There is much evidence which suggests the head shot came from the front.
Multiple witnessess at the scene stated they believed the shots came from the grassy knoll.
The doctors at Parkland Hospital, describing a entrance wound to the neck, and an exit wound to the head.
Governor Connollys insistence that the single bullett theory was incorrect, and that the bullett which hit him was not the bullett which hit the president.
The Zapruder film.
sadly, the Warren Commission, via the FBI, made sure that no “available” evidence of more than one shooter would be made official. They had to work hard to cut off the “available” evidence.
A lot of the available evidence is either questionable OR can lead to a different conclusion or raise reasonable doubt.
Paul, part of that “available evidence” you mention shows a shot coming at the right side of JFK’s head, from a location that I simply don’t believe is the TSBD.
You can hear 4 shots fired. The last two were almost simultaneous.
I’m not sure which way to go on Roger Craig’s involvement. He was highly honored for his police work prior to 11-22-63. I’m not ready to believe he committed suicide.
There were at least 2-3 attempts on his life previously. Read his manuscript.
Craig owned pistols. He was killed by a rifle shot to the chest. Scarcely a suicide choice.
That’s right. Everybody involved in the assassination, or who had something to say that was opposite the WCR, was either a lone nut, acting spontaneously, or mentally-disturbed.
Roger Craig’s story has some corroboration or jives with others.
Poor guy probably suffered anxiety and the like from feeling like an outcast.
Paul, I’d be surprised, because I’m not convinced Craig killed himself.
My belief is that Roger Craig did not commit suicide because many of the mysterious deaths were also suicides or accidental overdoses silly things like that for people that had a lot of purpose for living. Roger Craig was officer of the year in 1960 so he fit into his job, apparently he knew what he was up against when he stuck with his story and view of the Mauser issue. If it was a suicide, then it was the same type of suicide as Henry Marshall, five bullets to the back by a long rifle, head trauma, and signs of a struggle – that’s the official record of the “suicide” The CIA specializes in the stuff.
The surprise would be if it WAS a suicide. 50 years on and we still don’t know for sure.
Fritz denied to the WC that he had said “Mauser,” although Boone said he thought Boone said that.
Craig most certainly changed his story. This is an interview in the March 1968 Los Angeles Free Press. FP is “Free Press,” PJ is “Penn Jones,” and RC is “Roger Craig.”
>> although Boone said he thought Boone said that.<<
Of course, that should be "although Boone said he thought Fritz said that."
I’m not sure Craig shot himself…I know many have said so, but Jamesd Tague reports in his bok LBJ AND THE KENNEDY KILLING(p. 146) that Craig’s nephew told him(Tague)of evidence Craig had been murdered, while Craig’s sister thought he was trying to kill himself.
I don’t think we’ll know what really happened to Craig. In James Tague’s book LBJ And The Kennedy Killing, he writes that Craig’s nephew had information pointing to his uncle being murdered, but Craig’s sister said it was suicide. Back to square 1.
It never was proven how Craig was killed.
Kinda difficult to shoot yourself in the chest with a rifle most suicides shoot themselves in the head – has anyone looked into ” Remington Fireball ” ?
From Micheal T. Griffith: Extra Bullets and Missed Shots in Dealey Plaza:
“Among the files released by the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) was an FBI evidence envelope (FBI Field Office Dallas 89-43-1A-122). Although the envelope was empty, the cover indicated it had contained a 7.65 mm rifle shell that had been found in Dealey Plaza after the shooting. The envelope is dated 2 December 1963, so the shell was found sometime between 11/22/63 and 12/2/63. Nothing was known about the discovery of this shell until the FBI evidence envelope was released along with other assassination-related files.”
Oh for crying out loud, if Craig says a Mauser was found on the roof, that would be the corresponding shell, unless there are records of a separate shooting incident from the TSBD.
Thanks for the reminder.
THIS REVELATION AROUND 1964 WOULD HAVE PUT A WRENCH IN THE WC!*
*(No wonder the files were sealed).
This is the link of the MTG article that Harry was referring to above:
(Again, in light of the Mauser discussion, I find this evidence envelope too coincidental!!!)
For your interest:
The Government’s physical evidence of culpability known as the Magic Bullet ‘when closely examined, is seen to have six groove markings on its casing. These markings are from Rifling… the Manufacturer’s interior barrel design criterion. Carcanos were made only with four-groove rifling. The bullet in evidence did not come from the Carcano gun claimed to be owned by Oswald.
Weizmann and Fritz told the Warren Commission it was a Mauser. The rifle was clearly stamped 7.65mm while the Carcano was clearly stamped “Made in Italy.” Roger Craig said that it was pointed out at the time that the rifle had “7.65mm” stamped on it. A report was made indicating it was so; incidentally, no corresponding report coming from the Dallas police ever said it was a Carcano. There is also the interesting fact that the Mauser is a much more plausible weapon to be used in an assassination scenario and the AARB turned up an envelope from the Dallas FBI office indicating a 7.65mm shell had been found in Dealey Plaza. The rifle became a Carcano because that was the rifle Alex Hidell ordered.
Thanks for posting again Joe. Concise.
Yes I agree. Not a guess but a knowing in order to say 7.65. A lot of Newsmen said on tv a 7.65 Mauser. So there is evidence that can prove without a doudt that they new make and Caliber. Not a mere guess but proof positive.
I have seen information that the Carcano is a Mauser-type weapon manufactured by the Italians. The one that became part of the assassination story is actually a carbine rather than a rifle, meaning it is shorter than the rifle version. I have seen also seen information that the Carcano was issued to the German Home Guard established by Hitler in 1944 as a last ditch defense against the Allied invasion. Apparently a supply of the Carcanos was readily available to the Germans for this purpose.
The rifle in the National Archives is the longer, 40.2″ model.
Klein’s records appear to show it shipped the 36″ model to A. Hidell.
For what it is worth, the Wikipedia article on the Carcano shows a photo of Commission Exhibit 139, which is identified as an “1891/38 Carcano short rifle” with a 20.9 inch barrel.
Lol, I worked the bolt on one at the range the other day and they are indeed pure garbage. I can say with certainty there is NO way you could cycle the bolt and maintain any kind of target picture. Re-acquisition of a moving head would be nearly impossible twice within 6 seconds. Impossible.
It’s not twice within 6 seconds. The first time is the start of the count, so that’s six seconds to pull off a second shot. Clearly enough time, especially with adrenalin flowing.
” Clearly enough time, especially with adrenalin flowing.”….I always wondered about this and how Oswald remained so calm with the Coke on the second floor…
But there were 3 shots not 2.
I believe it was in the range of 6 seconds to pull of the next TWO shots.
I saw a re-enactment done by a Marine Marksman with the very weapon Oswald was alleged to have used from the book depository and the rifle was such a piece of crap they were saying theres very little chance Oswald could’ve gotten off the shots he supposedly did.Almost to the point of being impossible.
No. Klein’s records in 1963 show it switched from the 36″ 1891 TS to the 40″ model (18) 91/38’s “effective” earlier in the year (since it ran out of TS rifles), and thereafter shipped 91/38’s to anybody ordering an “Italian Carbine” from them, as Oswald did.
What Klein’s did NOT do in February was change the photo in their advertizement which is still the TS, as you can tell from the sling swivels mounted under the weapon, not at the side of the stock. So Oswald didn’t get the TS rifle shown. He never complained. I doubt he ever noticed. The Carcano TS rifle is only 4″ shorter than the 91/38, and a 36″ length was never promised in the ad anyway. The ammo is the same.
At some point, I traced the trajectory of the shipment that included said Carcano. The data is fairly accessible I think, but unfortunately not at my fingertips at the moment. If memory serves, Savage Arms was involved in the shipping through NY, and disbursed the rifles to their wholesale/retail outlets including S. Klein. (I may be wrong about Savage – but if I am correct, it has superficial implications.)
On the subject of the weapon, some peripheral research uncovered the Remington Arms firm had their Dallas office in the Meadows Building complex where DH Byrd’s wife held her offices. A founding member of the 6th Floor Museum was Gary Weber, who had just left duPont – parent co. of Remington – to open his own investment firm. I worked with Gary’s mother when we were moving hoards of members of the American Society of Petroleum Engineers and the brother organization for geologists to destinations like the Canaries – where Sid Bass had built a magnificent retreat whose architect was the husband of Patsy Swank, stringer for Life magazine who made the call to Dick Stolley.
Could I ask about the Meadows Building complex that you mention? I have not heard of it before and would be interested in knowing what it is. Is Meadows the name of a person?
Located on North Central Expwy. near the SMU exit I believe. Al Meadows founded General American Oil. (I’m working from stream of consciousness/memory and not referring closely to my files or I would elaborate further.) For me the significance was Remington Arms/duPont and Gary Weber who would have had influence over the 6th Fl. Museum in the earliest days.
I find that disconcerting, primarily because Gary was very young then and only known to insiders. His mother and I also worked with the wife of Bruce Calder who was a very close friend of Sam Ballens who interviewed Oswald at the behest of George deM.
I had an interview scheduled with Ballen but he died before our schedules meshed.
Ballen – sans the s.
The Carcano has a Mauser-type action.
Weitzman clearly changed his story. His sworn affadavit that he saw a German Mauser *after* the rifle discovery was not a ‘loose’ misinterpretation of the facts. He had to dictate the affadavit and present the truth. And that document corroborates deputy Craig’s statement to Mark Lane that, “stamped right on the barrel” were the words “7.65 Mauser”. How could two officers – one, Weitzman, who formerly owner a sporting goods store, have conceivably made such a gross error? Let’s not call a square a round hole here.
Ron: AMEN!!! The first or second weapon found was a Mauser. Besides, the three shell casings had been two which morphed into three (and there are two photos and police reports which document this). And, no ammo clip was found, which meant that the supposed sniper would have had to manually load the weapon. And, a rifle or carbine does NOT toss the casings into a nicely aligned group, but tosses them out a good distance away. As you suggest, Weitzman had been the owner of sporting good supply shop, and swore as to the type of weapon within a day or two. The whole assassination episode was fishy “from the word go.”
Very well said. Malcolm Wallace was the other guy, why do so many writers on the subject such as Bill O’Reilly and Vincent Bugliosi seemingly miss this? Without understanding the John Kinser and Frank Marshall murders, and the testimonies made against Ed Clark, you simply are missing the largest piece of evidence in what happened to Kennedy. It was an LBJ inspired hit. I can’t understand why at this point, we’re still acting like that’s not clear.
Ed Clark, in effect, put the whole thing in motion. Mac Wallace was the man in charge of what was to happen on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the motorcade came by. LBJ knew both men very well. And, LBJ was facing serious criminal trouble which would have ended his dream of becoming President, not to mention put him in jail. He(LBJ)ordered the Kinser and Marshall murders. LBJ knew what was going to happen to President Kennedy on 11-22-63.
There never was a mauser you silly people,you believe what you want to believe.the fact is oswald was a nut from day one,and nobody wants to ever think that the all powerful JFK could be killed by a lone gunmen.the fact is oswald was a good shot and he took that rifle to the range many times.the movie jfk was a joke,all lies to sell stones theories.there was no coverup no conspiracy,just a nut with a high powered rifle and the chaos and misinformation that followed.oswald killed the president alone,the coward he was….case closed.
What about the Malcolm Wallace finger print? Any one who believes that the last shot was from the same gun is a fool!
Yes it had alternate views but still in ways went off garrison case and put into Motion witnesses who were ignored by the Warren commo commission. Also stuffed he learned puff the oswald interviews with police and his odd stuff about him and how cia held stuff from everybody! They said he was lone nut, also after the investigation ended, they found no motive of oswald I why/if did kill kennedy! Also one person o.k. commission did not sign off of final repea reports and also they ignored Lot of witnesses, and even were given pictures of autopsy that were alerted and also pictures of depository of crime scene after they cleaned up crime scene! Also oswald was poor shot, 191 was not great and even everyone that was asked bout oswald who worked with him I service including bosses, all said same thing that he was very poor short and no way in hell he got that type of shooting done! Plus his rifle had possible jamming, scope was way off plus problem with during mechanism/firing pin! Plus,it tough shooting with rifle on moving target. Also scope whether defective or good condition, the focus half the time will go out of focus, plus the time in between shots takes 2.3seconds, and very very hard and more likely more than one shooters. Also precise shots like that I that time and the wind, no way, there sets of team of experts from fbi,cbs, and another one, could not duplicate oswald performance and they had higher credentials than oswald as marksman! Also two of those sets of teams used oswalds rifle and also said the bullets drifted off target and usually to right! The other set of team, did not use oswald rifle and did not duplicate oswald alleged performance either! Get a brain and get your head out of your butt!
Whatever Oswald might have been does not preclude the simple fact that he and the rifle stated as the weapon used on that fateful day simply could NOT have been done. With all that has been lied to the American people in the past 50 years, why on the world do people with such blind devotion to the lies that contradict the simple facts of physics, angles, timing, and line of sight STILL be ignored. I wonder if these types of people still think the world is FLAT. Or that Earth is the center of the universe. It’s painful to my intellect to think people like this exist when a single shooter with ANY type of rifle could NOT have killed JFK.
Never a Mauser. HA
It was reported by 4 people, all law enforcement.
Way more than 3 shots, besides if he was a sharp shooter and if he, and that’s a very big IF, shot the president firing 3 shots, why in the world he had to eject the last shell? There was no need for him to do that but 3 shells were found. (all nicely lined up)
The whole thing has been a coverup since before the president was killed. Covered up by the fbi, the agency, LBJ and others. The case is not closed and it will never be.
And if you had bothered to read the Warren Report, you’d know the Army ballistics unit that tested it deemed it unusable. They said there was no way that rifle killed Kennedy. They couldn’t even shoot it straight and had to use shims for the scope. And it was rusted out. It hadn’t even been fired.
You Oswald swallowers are amazing. You’ll swallow anything you hear from authority. lol
Absolutely correct. The video of one of the two officers is available online- watch it and you tell me. One of the first two officers on the scene (within 1.5 to 2 minutes) CLEARLY stated that they weapon was found, and held up by the strap, and Weitzman read it right from the barrel. “7.65 Mauser”. He also states that all 3 cartridges were lined up absolutely perfectly, sitting side by side. Staged scene? Probably. My guess would be that TWO rifles were used from the TSBD windows, thus easily explaining the success of one hit- the back shot- from 2 weapons. As we all know, the odds of JFK getting hit with the Carcano 2 out of 3 times is utter bull@#$, but one hit with 2 rifles and say, 5 shots total is probable.
A former gun dealer and experienced police officer would not embarrass himself misidentifying a rifle, in this case a 7.65 Mauser which has ‘plain to see’ manufacturer’s markings on it, in a homicide case… no matter what he said afterwards about being mistaken.
His observations were corroborated by another law enforcement officer, but refuted by FBI.
If that’s an example of ‘reliable testimony’ brought into court by experienced officers… we are all in trouble.
Note: The Carcano in evidence was not stamped ‘Made in Italy’. It was stamped: ‘Made Italy’.
Each letter individually stamped by hand.
I have for many years looked at a lot of material in relation to JFK assassination and the identification of the guns is one aspect that puzzles me. The controversy that cover the two possible guns involved, a mauser 7.65 or/and a 6.5 Carcano seems to revolve around two phrases said by various witnesses “the markings Mauser 7.65 were there, very clear for everyone to see”, and “the rifle had the markings “Made in Italy””. A 7.65 mauser would be an Argentinian Mauser, but I have seen a few of these a a lot of photos and never found those marking in a Argentinean mauser as the markings I see are “Mauser Modelo Argentino; has anyone seem a Argentinian mauser with the markings “Mauser 7.65”?
I also find very strange that a Carcano rifle made in Italy during WWII would have the markings “made in italy”; I only find these markings on black powder replicas made many years after WWII. Has anyone seen rifles of these models with this markings?
The rifle was misidentified. The Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas hired an expert marksman to attempt to duplicate the Oswald-did-it-from-the-sixth-floor-with-the-Carcano-carbine and pulled it off. Oswald was a “bad shot” by U.S. Marine Corps standards, which is to say he was very much a more skilled shooter than a typical hunter or part-time firearm user. Conspiracists typically malign the Carcano as some sort of appallingly-bad rifle unsuitable for shooting anyone or anything, but this is simply not the case. As designed and used by the Italian army, it first used a 6.5x52mm cartridge, although just before WWII it was redesigned for a 7.35x51mm ammunition. The latter caliber change was found to be unworkable as Italy’s dictator took the nation to war, and so very many of those later Carcano rifles or carbines were off-loaded on Finland, which was at war with the USSR. Both 7.35mm and 6.5mm surplus rifles were commonly available as surplus arms in the United States, along with much else besides, in the 1950s and 1960s.
German-and-Belgian-manufactured Mausers in 7.65x53mm caliber were sold to many nations, as were those in 7x57mm caliber (like Chile, Spain, and Mexico), and 7.92x57mm (like China and Germany) and in a variety of Models, typically indicated by year. The Belgians and Argentines and Ottoman Empire all used a Model 1889 and/or 1891 make in the 7.65x53mm caliber. They also all used updated versions of the Mauser in the same caliber. The magazine of the earlier 7.65x53mm Mauser protrudes down in front of the trigger like that on the British Lee Enfield, and the Italian Carcano. Later Mauser models have flush-fit magazines that do not protrude from the receiver in front of the trigger guard. Small wonder that the carbine found at the Book Depository was misidentified as a 7.65mm Mauser or even a British Enfield.
The CIA purchased surplus arms from vendors like Sam Cummings at Intearmsco. At the time, importation laws were relatively lax, and importers sometimes had to stamp the origin of the surplus arms on the receiver. Franco’s Spanish State off-loaded many older weapons in inventory, particularly those used by the defeated Ejército Popular de la República Española. So clunky Soviet rifles were stamped “Made in USSR” or “Made in URRS” and variations on the theme, and shipped off to Interarmsco. The CIA acquired some of these ex-Soviet/ex-Spanish Republic rifles to equip the proxy army of Col. Castillo Armas during PBSUCCESS, the 1954 overthrow of Jacobo Árbenz in Guatemala, and there are photos in Life Magazine of these CIA forces so armed.
The “magic bullet” theory however, remains: That a 6.5mm Carcano bullet could cause grievous wounds in two men seated in an automobile should be beyond dispute. That the bullet would plow through two men, but then remain intact, and be discovered on a stretcher in pristine condition, is very highly improbable.
That Oswald had the time to wipe the carbine free of prints except for the palm print he held onto it with strains credulity. The Carcano uses a particular type of 6-round cartridge clip: A brass or spring steel clip holds six cartridges together, and is inserted into the magazine “either side up.” When the last cartridge is fired, the empty sheet metal clip falls out of the magazine through the bottom. If Oswald fired three times, there should have been three cartridges and the clip remaining in the receiver, unless after the third shot, he removed it. If so, where did it go?
That there may have been a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, and that it included the CIA must rely on concrete facts. Quibbles about the rifle and Oswald’s abilities as a sharp shooter seem to me to be a colossal diversion from far more important types of evidence.
Anyone who has visited Dealy Plaza and looked out of the sixth floor window understands it was not a particularly difficult shot, and anyone familiar with WWII-era firearms knows the Carcano is fully capable of killing anyone. It all boils down to a few frames of the Zapruder film: When POTUS Kennedy is clutching at his throat, it appears that Governor of Texas Connolly is un-wounded–at least yet. Yet, we are supposed to understand that at that precise moment a rifle shot has gone through POTUS Kennedy and also the Governor…
1) Oswald could, indeed, have carried out the attack–pending resolution of his movements.
2) The Carcano was fully capable of firing three shots with fatal consequences in the amount of time. Were there additional shots? there additional shooters?
3) The Texas LEO who made the initial identification was simply mistaken. Occam’s razor. Many Texans do love guns and count themselves as firearm cogniscenti. They make mistakes.
Yes ,Yes and a thousand time yes !
Craig & Weitzman were coerced to revise their statements. We know what happened to Craig after refusing
I recently saw film footage of the Dallas police on the 6th floor of the school depository. They are holding two rifles, a Mauser and a Manlicher. I am going to have to wade through the numerous film footage I have been watching on YouTube to find it. But in this film footage is a black and white still showing the Dallas police with both a Mauser AND a Manlicher. I know, because I owned two Mausers and spenttim e extensively illustrating the bolt and trigger assembly of the Mauser. Something I spent hours on.
I too have seen this footage/clip, it does shows two rifles in the initial TSBD search. It shows a rifle in the foreground and yet clearly a shadow of another rifle behind.. if the footage is real it crushes the official story…2 rifles on the 6th floor for the one shooter …can someone shed light on this?
Where did you see the footage?
Ian, I’m interested in 6th Floor footage as well; in fact I’ve been scouring the net and asking other people if they recall seeing film footage of what was a re-enactment of the initial search of the alleged crime scene. It is not the original Alyea film that remains on the internet in various locations; This was a film shot sometime afterward and captures Will Fritz in left profile with his hat on, handing a rifle about shoulder (or a little higher) high off to a man somewhat shorter than he, and I believe that is was Lt. Day – short sleeved shirt, tie (maybe bow?) dark rimmed glasses whom we see in the Alyea film as well. I am 99% certain I viewed this on youtube last year, but have yet to relocate it. Foolishly I didn’t download it and save it to my files. If you’re familiar with what I am describing, I would appreciate hearing any comments or information you might share. There is a possibility it is the same film being described as revealing two rifles although I don’t remember a second rifle in the forefront of the images, but it may well be there. Tks. LS
5 Series documentary called Evidence of Revision. Original footage of weapon discovery and first rifle was clearly a Mauser
I saw it last night. There’s a guy who has a bunch of typical conspiracy videos, etc, but he has a TON of good videos embedded in them. If you watch his JFK videos, you’ll see it.
I’ll try to get his youtube handle for you tonight and post it.
Maybe a little light to shed is that it’s been written by a few conspiracy authors that there was indeed more than one shooter up there. That’s whay witness Arnold Rowland said, too. The names Mac Wallace and Loy Factor need to be researched as the öthers”besides Oswald who were there, that is, if Oswald was there at all.
Could easily have been. There’s also a pic of the guy hanging out of the 5th floor of the TSBD building pointing violently at the Dal-Tex building, at the head of Dealey Plaza. I firmly believe that at least 4 positions were used. Dal-Tex, TSBD, and 2 grassy knoll “wall” positions. Anybody that sees that horrific pic of JFK with half his head gone cannot conclude that the shot came from the rear. It MUST have come from the front.
I saw two women interviewed who were TSBD employees at the time – they were in the ladderwell that LHO would’ve had to run down immediately after the shooting to get to the cafeteria both these women knew Oswald and they say no one came down that ladderwell least of all Oswald..
In this youtube time it should be very easy to direct to those clips ?
it would not be this one, would it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsnIeaAWFfo
Definitely another gun.l think J.C Day walks out with Captain Fritz holding it(longer bolt than the carcano and different trigger.Dallas police only had pump action shotguns all around Dallas ;as seen im many pics and stated as fact
Here is a YouTube clip entitled, “A 7.65 Mauser”.
If you start at about the 2:45 minute point, you will shortly see that there is a second rifle shown leaning against some boxes. Further into the clip, this rifle is outlined in red so that you cannot miss it.
NBC first reports stated several times that a rifle was found perhaps on the 2nd floor of TSBD….. and they said it was a British 303. Have any ofyou ever heard that?
I know nothing of the JFK assassination, and even less about guns. So forgive me for asking this silly question, but is there a way to simply disassemble or fold the barrel of a Mauser?
Anyway, the key here is that the weapon found by Dallas Police and attributed to LHO is not the one the FBI said LHO ordered. The WC said he ordered a 36″ Mannlicher-Carcano carbine, and the Dallas Police found a 40″ short rifle. Moreover, the good store in Chicago where LHO supposedly ordered the rifle from, did not put scopes on the 40″ model. Yet the one in evidence had a scope. See Jim DiEugenio’s Reclaiming Parkland, pp. 56 ff.
No. I have the original ad in the Feb American Rifleman. Klein’s doesn’t say any particular model– it simply says Italian Carbine, and has a photo. And from the photo, it clearly is a Carcano carbine (i.e., a very short rifle). In this case, the Carcano M91 TS (TS = Truppe Speciali, for special troops like machine-gunners, artillery crews, engineers). You can tell by the sling piling swivels which are at the bottom of the stock where you can see them. That means it’s the 36″ inch TS weapon. It’s not what Oswald got.
Klein’s had run out of Carcano TS carbines just before Oswald’s order in March 1963. But they had a stock of Carcano M91/38 Fucile di Fanteria (infantry rifle) which were 40 inches long. These have the sling piling swivels on the left side of the stock as you look from back to front. As Oswald’s does. You cannot see them at all from the side view with rifle pointed right. But you can see the sling is mounted on the right side of Oswald’s rifle in many views, including video just after it is found.
They did indeed mount scopes on this model, and they shipped a scoped to Oswald, who had paid extra for that. He never complained that he technically got the an Italian short infantry rifle, and if a Italian carbine, certainly not the carbine shown– although “carbine” is not really well-defined. At some point, really short rifles become carbines. The ammo fired (6.5x52mm) was the same.
LOL…Steven please give me your resource as to how you know Kleins ran out of 36″ rifles. The WC speculated that is what happen, but I’ve have never found testimony from Kleins that they had.
I do remember an employee from Kleins testify that the deal for putting on a scope free of charge was for the 36 inch and not the 40 inch. When the FBI asked the gunsmith at Kleins to put a scope on the 40 inch rifle he didn’t know where the FBI wanted it place since they had not put scopes on 40 inch rifles.
Indeed, Jim DiEugenio is correct!!!!
But why would a Carcano have “Mauser” stamped on it, Photon? Shouldn’t it say “Carcano”? It said “Mauser”. LHO was not the only shooter.
They are both bolt action rifles true – but thats about where the similarities end.Put a 98K next to that Mannlicher and they are markedly different.The 98K is also a much bigger round at 8mm – The Mauser is a much better weapon.