JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

[HSienzant]

But is it 40.2" or is it 36" ?

And who measured it and when for what reason?

It's 40.2" as measured after the assassination.

Mr. EISENBERG - Have you measured the dimensions of this rifle assembled, and disassembled?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, I have.
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you give us that information?
Mr. FRAZIER - The overall length is 40.2 inches. It weighs 8 pounds even.

Jack White computed the length of the rifle in the backyard photos and got different lengths. It was shown he didn't know JackWhite about computing lengths in photos.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

What makes you think LHO wanted a 40.2" over a 36" rifle?

What makes you think he noticed the difference?

You are assuming LHO liked the longer rifle

You're assuming he measured it and noticed the difference. If he didn't notice, what was to dislike?

I dealt with the ramifications of him not noticing earlier in this thread. You ignored it.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11821727&postcount=3272

you are assuming LHO was able to get the rifle from the post office when the package was addressed to Hidell.

Asked and answered. Repeatedly.

Hank

 

[OKBob]

he's ignoring the fact that the ad for the rifle changed from 36" to 40" at about the time Oswald ordered the weapon, that Klein's used the same catalog number for both weapons, and that the weapon that Oswald had possession of about a week after the shipment was the 40" rifle bearing the serial number C2766.

This is pertinent and well noted, Hank.

 

[OKBob]

What makes you think he noticed the difference?

Right. Or that LHO cared about the original 36-inch spec in the first place (he was buying 20-dollar war surplus). Or noticed the difference any more than Wesley Frazier could accurately note the actual length of the bag at a casual glance.

 

[HSienzant]

Deleted

 

[HSienzant]

Klein shipped the rifle with the serial number C2766; this is where the entire issue of the serial number started, Klein has records that show the 36" rifle had the previously mentioned serial number.

No, they don't have records showing that. That is your argument from the fact that Oswald ordered from an older order form that showed a 36" rifle, along with the PRESUMPTION that he was shipped what he ordered.

But as I've shown, the catalog number of C20-T750 was not unique to the 36" rifle. It also appeared in ads for the 40" rifle.

http://s1110.photobucket.com/user/johniscool5/media/36inch40incha.jpg.html

So your argument fails because the basis for your presumption is shown to be faulty.

The order form references that Oswald was shipped a rifle with the catalog number of C20-T750. That could be the 40" rifle. It's solely your presumption that they shipped the 36" rifle. Your entire argument is based on this presumption. And your entire argument fails because the presumption is unproven.

Hank

 

[Axxman300]

You're buying into his argument, but his argument is based on the fact that Oswald ordered a 36" rifle, ergo, he must have been shipped that.

That "ergo" is the problem, because he's ignoring the fact that the ad for the rifle changed from 36" to 40" at about the time Oswald ordered the weapon, that Klein's used the same catalog number for both weapons, and that the weapon that Oswald had possession of about a week after the shipment was the 40" rifle bearing the serial number C2766.

Buying into any portion of his argument is a mistake.

Hank

I find his argument hilarious, that's all.

It's as silly as silencers being used. Such an obvious red herring, and everyone knows it.

The need to have a second gunman and or having Oswald being framed has been a solid dead-end since day one. If CTers need a conspiracy they can look into who Oswald knew, and cobble together a story from there, but they won't because this would require real work, and that's a shame because you never know what new nugget of information will pop into the light.

I know there is probably nothing to find, but that's where any real CT would be discovered, and while it's not as sexy as multiple gunmen in Dealey Plaza with Mob/CIA backgrounds, but would change history just enough to make it worth an honest historian's time. The fact that not many have chosen to go this route tells me all I need to know.

 

[HSienzant]

Where did Oswald get the 40" MC he was holding in the backyard photo?

That is not for me to determine...

Who was sent the 40" MC with serial number C2766?

I do not know.

Are you claiming that a 36" MC existed with serial #C2766?

That is what Klein's records show... this is not my claim.

Where is the 36" MC with serial #C2766?

I don't know

Are there any extant photos of a 36" MC with serial #C2766?

That is a question for Klein's to answer as I do not have access to their archive.

What happened to the 36" MC serial #C2766?

I do not know

If you can't explain the simple ramifications of your argument, why do you expect others to accept your argument? Further, why do YOU accept your argument? If it follows from the facts, it should make sense and have logical consequences. Your argument doesn't make sense and doesn't have logical consequences.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Do you have evidence of other MC rifles with duplicate serial #'s?

Why would I care; I am not the one making the claim that the serial number on the 36" should be on the 40.2" rifle.

You've got it bass-ackwards.

You're the one claiming that the serial number C2766 known to be on the 40.2" rifle found in the depository and in the National Archives today was also on a 36" rifle.

You need to provide the evidence of this 36" rifle with the serial number C2766. Thus far you have merely presumed it solely from the catalog number in an older advertisement. You also assumed the catalog number was unique to the 36" product, but I have shown you advertisements with the same catalog number but for the 40" rifle.

You have admitted (based on your erroneous presumption) you don't know where the 40" C2766 rifle came from, that Klein's records show a 36" rifle with that serial number (they don't), that you have no evidence of this 36" rifle with that serial number, and you don't know where the 36" rifle wound up and why it isn't in evidence.

All this because your presumption is erroneous.

Hank

 

[bknight]

It's 40.2" as measured after the assassination.

Mr. EISENBERG - Have you measured the dimensions of this rifle assembled, and disassembled?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, I have.
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you give us that information?
Mr. FRAZIER - The overall length is 40.2 inches. It weighs 8 pounds even.

Jack White computed the length of the rifle in the backyard photos and got different lengths. It was shown he didn't know JackWhite about computing lengths in photos.

Hank

That Jack White computed a different length is not beyond believability, but any measurement he made from an image IS seriously in doubt. He has proven in many threads that his image analysis is poor to non-existent.

 

[bknight]

There is no error in measurement. It's entirely a presumption by No Other that because Oswald ordered from an order form that referenced a 36" rifle, then Oswald was shipped a 36" rifle, even though we know by March Klein's was advertising (and therefore shipping) 40" rifles. Oswald was shipped the 40" MC bearing the serial number C2766 on March 20th.

Hank

That was my point the unique serial number is key to this argument plus the assumption n my part that Klein did not ship a 36" weapon whether or not a shipping invoice may or may not have indicated the length of the rifle. No Other doesn't know what the length of the rifle was he is assuming that the rifle length shipping information to be paramount, while completely ignoring the serial number. You have stated it clearly, No Other deal with the reality of the rifle in LHO hands at found at the TSBD. No Other again the rifle length is quibbling point and non pertinent. Even Perry Mason couldn't make that work.

 

[CORed]

Serial numbers are unique. Otherwise there is no reason to use them.

The serial number C2766 is the only one of its kind ever manufactured and stamped on a Mannlicher Carcano made in Terni, Italy.

The paperwork shows this particular rifle was shipped to Oswald.
The backyard photographs show Oswald took possession of this particular rifle.
The palmprint and fingerprints also show he possessed it.
The rifle was discovered at his place of work, after being stored in the Paine garage.
Only one person had known access to both places, Lee Harvey Oswald.
Not so coincidentally, he was seen transporting a long package to the Depository on the morning of the assassination, and his rifle was found to be missing from the Paine garage on the afternoon of the assassination.

For most people, that's sufficient evidence.

Not for conspiracy theorists.

Hank

Of course.

I'm not someone who knows (or cares about) every stinking detail of the Kennedy assassination. However, once it was established that the serial number of the murder weapon matches the serial number of the weapon shipped by Klien's, it's apparent that all the quibbling about the barrel length is a complete load of nonsense.
I'm going to invoke Occam's razor: Which is the more believable scenario?

1. There were two weapons of the same make and model, but different barrel lengths, with the same serial number, one of which was shipped to Oswald, and the other of which was used (by somebody else?) in Oswald's place of employment to shoot JFK.

2. Klein's substituted the 40" barrel rifle of the same make and model that they had for the 36" barrel rifle that Oswald had ordered, and failed to note (either through lack of care or because they were hoping that the customer didn't care or wouldn't notice).

I don't think anybody who has any experience with mail order merchants would find scenario number two the least bit hard to believe, whereas scenario number one requires not only that the manufacturer had some sort of bizarre serial number policy or by some strange error made the mistake of assigning the same serial number to two different weapons, and that by a coincidence of extremely low probability, one of these two weapons (out of how many thousand?) was shipped to Oswald and the other was used to assassinate Kennedy, in Oswald's workplace.

I know which scenario I believe and I'm pretty sure it's the same scenario that any reasonable person would believe.

 

[OKBob]

2. Klein's substituted the 40" barrel rifle of the same make and model that they had for the 36" barrel rifle that Oswald had ordered, and failed to note (either through lack of care or because they were hoping that the customer didn't care or wouldn't notice).

This is where all reasonable inferences lead, of course. Moreover, the Klein's shipping order gave a money-back guarantee for dissatisfaction. Maybe some 36-inch barrel diehards returned their 40-inch rifles. Oswald didn't.

 

[Axxman300]

Of course.

I'm not someone who knows (or cares about) every stinking detail of the Kennedy assassination. However, once it was established that the serial number of the murder weapon matches the serial number of the weapon shipped by Klien's, it's apparent that all the quibbling about the barrel length is a complete load of nonsense.
I'm going to invoke Occam's razor: Which is the more believable scenario?

1. There were two weapons of the same make and model, but different barrel lengths, with the same serial number, one of which was shipped to Oswald, and the other of which was used (by somebody else?) in Oswald's place of employment to shoot JFK.

2. Klein's substituted the 40" barrel rifle of the same make and model that they had for the 36" barrel rifle that Oswald had ordered, and failed to note (either through lack of care or because they were hoping that the customer didn't care or wouldn't notice).

I don't think anybody who has any experience with mail order merchants would find scenario number two the least bit hard to believe, whereas scenario number one requires not only that the manufacturer had some sort of bizarre serial number policy or by some strange error made the mistake of assigning the same serial number to two different weapons, and that by a coincidence of extremely low probability, one of these two weapons (out of how many thousand?) was shipped to Oswald and the other was used to assassinate Kennedy, in Oswald's workplace.

I know which scenario I believe and I'm pretty sure it's the same scenario that any reasonable person would believe.

Exactly, throw in the fact that this was 1963, and this was a cheap rifle, and I'm pretty sure nobody at Klein's cared because they probably thought their customer was either broke, or just wanted something for their kid. The fact is that most rifles at that time were used for hunting deer or beer cans.

The one thing that was true in 1963 that is still true today is that a motivated individual can buy almost any weapon on the black market if they have the cash. That means no record of sale, nobody knows you have it, and you can make it disappear without it ever being linked you. In 1963 Texas Oswald could have likely bought a hunting rifle through the classifieds with no record of sale, not to mention pawn shops, and even just hanging out at a bar to make friends to find someone looking to get rid of an old gun.

My guess is he bought the Carcano because it CAME with a scope, and it was $13. That's not a bad deal.

Face it, if Oswald could have afforded a nice rifle with a Zeiss scope he probably wouldn't have felt the need to kill someone.

 

[HSienzant]

I'm not someone who knows (or cares about) every stinking detail of the Kennedy assassination.

That's why I'm here!

However, once it was established that the serial number of the murder weapon matches the serial number of the weapon shipped by Klien's, it's apparent that all the quibbling about the barrel length is a complete load of nonsense.
I'm going to invoke Occam's razor: Which is the more believable scenario?

1. There were two weapons of the same make and model, but different barrel lengths, with the same serial number, one of which was shipped to Oswald, and the other of which was used (by somebody else?) in Oswald's place of employment to shoot JFK.

2. Klein's substituted the 40" barrel rifle of the same make and model that they had for the 36" barrel rifle that Oswald had ordered, and failed to note (either through lack of care or because they were hoping that the customer didn't care or wouldn't notice).

There was a substitution but only because Klein's had run out of the 36" rifles and didn't have any more on hand to ship. This is shown to be true in the fact that the advertisement appearing in the April Issue of American Rifleman (available on newsstands in MARCH) no longer showed the illustration of a 36" rifle, but now showed the 40" rifle. Both advertisements used the same catalog number of C20-T750, nullifying No Other's bogus point that the C20-T750 catalog number was unique to the 36" rifle, and that's how we can be sure that Klein's shipped a 36" rifle with the C2766 serial number.

I don't think anybody who has any experience with mail order merchants would find scenario number two the least bit hard to believe, whereas scenario number one requires not only that the manufacturer had some sort of bizarre serial number policy or by some strange error made the mistake of assigning the same serial number to two different weapons, and that by a coincidence of extremely low probability, one of these two weapons (out of how many thousand?) was shipped to Oswald and the other was used to assassinate Kennedy, in Oswald's workplace.

I know which scenario I believe and I'm pretty sure it's the same scenario that any reasonable person would believe.

Yes, and on the note of shipment mistakes, I like to tell the story about what happened to me about 30 years ago. I went to visit my Mom for the Christmas holidays and wore a garish sweatshirt she had purchased for me from a Sears catalog and had shipped directly to my home.

When she saw me, she asked, "Where'd you get that god-awful ugly sweatshirt?"

I told her it was a gift. She asked who gave it to me.

I had to tell her, "You did, Mom. You bought it for me for Christmas. This came in the mail from Sears from you."

She complained, "Oh, my God. It didn't look like that in the catalog!"

We had a good laugh over it. Clearly, Sears ran out of the better looking item my Mom actually ordered and shipped whatever they had laying around as a substitute. Like I said, No Other likes to pretend this is an entirely foreign procedure in American commerce, and that because my Mom ordered a good-looking sweatshirt, that's the one I got.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Exactly, throw in the fact that this was 1963, and this was a cheap rifle, and I'm pretty sure nobody at Klein's cared because they probably thought their customer was either broke, or just wanted something for their kid. The fact is that most rifles at that time were used for hunting deer or beer cans.

The one thing that was true in 1963 that is still true today is that a motivated individual can buy almost any weapon on the black market if they have the cash. That means no record of sale, nobody knows you have it, and you can make it disappear without it ever being linked you. In 1963 Texas Oswald could have likely bought a hunting rifle through the classifieds with no record of sale, not to mention pawn shops, and even just hanging out at a bar to make friends to find someone looking to get rid of an old gun.

I suspect you just gave "No Other" his next talking point. After spending weeks arguing the Klein's paperwork links Oswald to a rifle with the serial number of C2766 (but only 36" long), he's now going to switch things up and claim that Oswald had no reason to purchase the murder weapon through the mail from Klein's and should have purchased an untraceable weapon by just walking into any gun store in Dallas. And why would Oswald want to buy a weapon that could be traced to him, anyway?

My guess is he bought the Carcano because it CAME with a scope, and it was $13. That's not a bad deal.

Close enough. Technically, it was $12.88 without the scope. The scope brought the price to $19.95. It became $21.45 with postage.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xkdKVRtQe...WjNbuE/s535/Kleins-Rifle-Ad-February-1963.jpg

Face it, if Oswald could have afforded a nice rifle with a Zeiss scope he probably wouldn't have felt the need to kill someone.

Excellent point. Not too many rich men decide to become assassins.

Hank

 

[Axxman300]

I suspect you just gave "No Other" his next talking point. After spending weeks arguing the Klein's paperwork links Oswald to a rifle with the serial number of C2766 (but only 36" long), he's now going to switch things up and claim that Oswald had no reason to purchase the murder weapon through the mail from Klein's and should have purchased an untraceable weapon by just walking into any gun store in Dallas. And why would Oswald want to buy a weapon that could be traced to him, anyway?

We know he was planning to kill someone, likely Walker, maybe someone else. My guess is that he planned to stash the rifle somewhere safe, and come back for it later as he did after he took that shot at Walker. From there it's a matter of breaking it down, and burying it in multiple places.

The Carcano, on top of being cheap, was also a foreign weapon, and the Italian factor would have added the sexy or cool edge Oswald couldn't resist. Throw in the cheap scope and his purchase makes a lot of sense; made under a code-name, exotic sounding name, and deadly.

I think JFK was just a slow-motion target of opportunity.

 

[MicahJava]

Oh boy. Do you lack knowledge of this case. Earl Rose was a member of the HSCA forensic pathology panel. As such, he reviewed all the extant autopsy materials and reached his own conclusions about what they showed. Vince quoted Rose because Rose is an expert who reviewed the autopsy materials.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0008a.htm

Hank

Hank, if you want a better dismissal of Earl Rose's opinions of the case other than "just another cowlicker", check out this line from the HSCA forensic pathology panel report:

(310) One panel member, Dr. Rose, wishes to emphasize the view of the majority of the panel (all except Dr. Wecht) that the absence of injury on the inferior surface of the brain offers incontrovertible evidence that the wound in the President's head is not in the location described in the autopsy report.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0063a.htm

So Earl Rose, and the entire HSCA medical panel except for Cyril Wecht, didn't even consider the plainly obvious possibility that a bullet entered low in the head and only "grazed" the cerebellum, hitting the floor of the skull and not having any relation to the large head wound. Did the idea of a conspiracy in Dealey Plaza just go over their heads, or are there legitimate reasons to believe that such a scenario would not work?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Hank, if you want a better dismissal of Earl Rose's opinions of the case other than "just another cowlicker", check out this line from the HSCA forensic pathology panel report:

(310) One panel member, Dr. Rose, wishes to emphasize the view of the majority of the panel (all except Dr. Wecht) that the absence of injury on the inferior surface of the brain offers incontrovertible evidence that the wound in the President's head is not in the location described in the autopsy report.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0063a.htm

So Earl Rose, and the entire HSCA medical panel except for Cyril Wecht, didn't even consider the plainly obvious possibility that a bullet entered low in the head and only "grazed" the cerebellum, hitting the floor of the skull and not having any relation to the large head wound. Did the idea of a conspiracy in Dealey Plaza just go over their heads, or are there legitimate reasons to believe that such a scenario would not work?

Do you not consider that might be because the evidence suggests that the only entry wound to be considered was in the "cowlick"? Where the records show it to be?

I for one would be more worried if they wasted time considering a theory about a bullet entering lower, where there was no entry wound....

 

[HSienzant]

Hank, if you want a better dismissal of Earl Rose's opinions of the case other than "just another cowlicker", check out this line from the HSCA forensic pathology panel report:

(310) One panel member, Dr. Rose, wishes to emphasize the view of the majority of the panel (all except Dr. Wecht) that the absence of injury on the inferior surface of the brain offers incontrovertible evidence that the wound in the President's head is not in the location described in the autopsy report.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0063a.htm

So Earl Rose, and the entire HSCA medical panel except for Cyril Wecht, didn't even consider the plainly obvious possibility that a bullet entered low in the head and only "grazed" the cerebellum, hitting the floor of the skull and not having any relation to the large head wound. Did the idea of a conspiracy in Dealey Plaza just go over their heads, or are there legitimate reasons to believe that such a scenario would not work?

And even Doctor Wecht agrees that near the top of the head was where the entrance wound was. Look at the next page:
== quote ==
Dr. Wecht agrees that there is an entrance wound in the "cowlick" area, and that the white substance [near the hairline at the bottom of the photo - Hank] is brain tissue, but he cannot exclude the possibility that it might overlie a very small skin and bone performation of either entrance or exit.
== unquote ==

So while you try to exclude Dr. Wecht from the Panel's conclusions, he agrees with the rest of the panel as to where the evidence indicates the head wound is. He only said there could be a small wound that the photographic evidence doesn't reveal.

And so the entire forensic panel disagrees with your assessment of the location of the rear entrance wound, with only the smallest of reservations from one member who concedes the possibility of a smaller wound that the evidence doesn't reveal.

Maybe that's why the Panel reached the conclusion they did -- they were basing their conclusion on the evidence. How you go from that to a "dismissal of Earl Rose's opinions of the case" is beyond me.

You're dismissing Earl Rose's opinions - and that of every other member of the forensic panel - simply because their expert conclusions conflicts with your lay opinion.

And it's still a change of your argument from the earlier mention of Earl Rose. Previously, you were arguing that Bugliosi should not have quoted Rose because his claim to fame was that he was Dallas County coroner and he never saw the body on the day of the assassination. At that time, you appeared wholly unaware that he served as a member of the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel.

Another thing that shouldn't have made the final cut of Reclaiming History is Vince quoting Dr. Earl Rose as "The only place he said he disagreed with the autopsy surgeons is that they reported the entrance wound to the back of the head 'too low. It was in the cowlick area.'". Dr. Earl Rose was the Dallas County Medical Examiner who argued with the Secret Service agents over where the autopsy would be performed. In other words, his place in history is being the guy who didn't get to examine the body.

Hank