Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories VI: Lyndon Johnson's Revenge

[HSienzant]

Since the weapons were cleaned after every single firing session/day, soot was a sure sign of the weapon having been fired since the last check = same day since it was not allowed to firing it without superiors present.

Which clearly isn't applicable to the assassination. No one has suggested the shooter cleaned it after using it in the assassination, and the three shells, the two fragments, and the one bullet all attest to it being used during the assassination.

There is also the issue of the freshness of the soot. Smell, color and dryness. It’s easy to see the difference between old and fresh soot if you are somewhat used to it.

So now you're an expert on guns again.

Surely this test is mentioned in some criminology book and surely it has a name, and surely you can tell us what that name is and you can cite and quote from the criminology book that tells everyone how to determine a weapon has been recently fired?

#70 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

Hank

 

[traxy]

This is very illustrative of the ”investigation”. The most important murder weapon in the history of the USA, and no one is looking of it had been fired that day.

Like, lets interview ”25 000 witnesses”, but do not bother with putting your index finger in the pipe looking for fresh soot.

That is waaayyy over doing it.

There is no test that can tell you whether a rifle has been fired within a specific timeframe.

Nice try though. Top notch stuff.

 

[HSienzant]

You kind of disappeard from the thread in the Ed.Forum, Hank? Larsen was refuting yours, DVP’s & co’s efforts to disprove his documents, point by point by point, and after that, silence.

Why is that? Modesty?

It's not someplace I frequent. Someone on another forum (Amazon discussion boards) pointed out what he was claiming, and was citing it as you did as evidence against the money order. I went there, I pointed out the problems with his arguments and left, debated a couple of points and left. I haven't posted there before or since. It's not my obligation to refute his claims, although you're apparently pretending it is.

But you're still trying to shift the burden of proof, and I told you we can see right through all that.

I need not ever have posted there for you to have the burden of proof.

You don't remove that burden by citing claims by another conspiracy theorist and say 'Sandy Larsen says this'. That doesn't prove anything. Sandy Larsen has no more standing to interpret the postal regulations from 1963 than my mailman (and probably less, now that I think about it).

Citing what Sandy Larsen thinks isn't evidence, doesn't move the needle one iota, nor does it establish the money order isn't genuine.

We're still awaiting your evidence and your argument.

#71 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

Hank

 

[traxy]

The rifle was flawn to FBI HQ’s lab in DC the night of the killing. Not a single fingerprint was detected. ”The most sophisticated crime lab in the world”.

Can you get even a SINGLE detail right about this case? Like, just ONE? That's all I ask.

There were fingerprints on the trigger guard, IN ADDITION TO THE PALM PRINT!

Dallas PD found them, photographed them and covered them up for the FBI on the night of the 22nd. The FBI located the prints that same night and examined them. They found 3 points of match, 3 points of near match and zero points of exclusion for Oswald. Compelling, but not enough for a positive match...

...until 1992. Dallas PD recovered a bunch of extra high contrast photos of the prints stored in an evidence locker. HSCA print expert Vincent Scalice used those photos and Oswald's print card and found 24 points of match.

 

[No Other]

That has not been claimed, and in any case, would be impossible to prove one way or the other

It is very much possible to prove that it was not fired. I do agree with you in that it is extremely difficult to pinpoint a time when it was fired.

 

[jeffas69]

Apology accepted.

Yes it is. Why set up a Commission in order to prevent world war III and nuclear Armageddon if JFK was killed by a, Lone little Nut?

No it is'nt. To have a thorough investigation and show everyone that it was the lone nut and only the lone nut. I honestly don't see a problem with that explanation. If more rational people would actually read it instead of the conspiracy books there would be less belief in a conspiracy.

I’m really doing my very best keeping up with your requests. Nice and easy.

I have a suggestion. Start with the first one. And stop making new ones. You will finish eventually.

 

[No Other]

What's the name of the test that shows it's been fired within the last 24 hours?

As opposed to two weeks ago and not cleaned since?

Hank

It is easy to tell if the rifle was NOT fired; it is difficult to tell when it WAS fired.

 

[HSienzant]

Why set up a Commission in order to prevent world war III and nuclear Armageddon if JFK was killed by a, Lone little Nut?

The Commission was set up to determine the facts behind the assassination of JFK. They discovered - but downplayed in their conclusions - that Oswald was a pro-Castroite who had set up a FPCC chapter in the summer of 1963 and had shot at a vocal opponent of Castro (General Walker) on 4/10/63.

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/foreword.html

PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON, by Executive Order No. 11130 dated November 29, 1963,1 created this Commission to investigate the assassination on November 22, 1963, of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States. The President directed the Commission to evaluate all the facts and circumstances surrounding the assassination and the subsequent killing of the alleged assassin and to report its findings and conclusions to him.​

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

It is easy to tell if the rifle was NOT fired; it is difficult to tell when it WAS fired.

It is very much possible to prove that it was not fired. I do agree with you in that it is extremely difficult to pinpoint a time when it was fired.

Not in this case. We know it was fired, and we know to the minute when it was fired.

I can tell you when it was fired. It was fired at 12:30pm Dallas time on 11/22/63.

That's because of the six pieces of ballistic evidence (previously delineated) that establish the rifle was used in the assassination.

Hank

 

[bknight]

The Commission was set up to determine the facts behind the assassination of JFK. They discovered - but downplayed in their conclusions - that Oswald was a pro-Castroite who had set up a FPCC chapter in the summer of 1963 and had shot at a vocal opponent of Castro (General Walker) on 4/10/63.

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/foreword.html

PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON, by Executive Order No. 11130 dated November 29, 1963,1 created this Commission to investigate the assassination on November 22, 1963, of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States. The President directed the Commission to evaluate all the facts and circumstances surrounding the assassination and the subsequent killing of the alleged assassin and to report its findings and conclusions to him.​

Hank

That's the way I remember, from Walter Cronkite, but then I was just a high school student.

 

[HSienzant]

Some feel different than you. Hank just listed some elements that he thought was convincing in putting the rifle in Oswald's hands and firing the rifle.

He doesn't cite it, but it's the six pieces of ballistic evidence as detailed here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12318158&postcount=4717

Please provide documentation that the rifle was shown to have been fired on the day that JFK was assassinated.

Easy-peasy. As easy as 3-2-1 in fact..

Three shell discovered shortly after the assassination at the sniper's nest window were ballistically traceable to Oswald's rifle to the EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER WEAPONS IN THE WORLD.

Two large fragments discovered the night of the assassination in the Presidential limousine were ballistically traceable to Oswald's rifle to the EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER WEAPONS IN THE WORLD.

One nearly whole bullet discovered in the hospital near Connally's stretcher on the afternoon of the assassination was ballistically traceable to Oswald's rifle to the EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER WEAPONS IN THE WORLD.

Now you'll quibble over the claims and pretend the evidence isn't admissible because [whatever you can think of the moment] but all that evidence is admissible and all of it establishes Oswald's rifle was fired not only on the day of the assassination, but at the time of the assassination and at the Presidential limousine. To the EXCLUSION OF ALL PLACES AND TIMES.

Hank

Also reference in another post was made to the bag found in the sniper's nest corner containing Oswald's print, as well as the witnesses that described the shooter in terms resembling Oswald. Mention was also made of the fingerprints photographed on the trigger guard by J.C.Day on the afternoon of the assassination that were determined to be Oswald's by Vincent Scalise, when it was conceded the rifle was fired during the assassination, but it was requested we put it in Oswald's hands.

Hank

 

[No Other]

The original bag was still around. I provided a link to a photograph of it. <snip>How do you know they didn't put the rifle into the bag?

If they would had put the rifle in the bag, it would show that if conformed. That would eliminate the nay-sayers who say the presented bag was either too small or too large.

Can you cite for that failure to do so? Why would you expect to find oil in the bag?

Rifles have oil to keep them lubricated, oil in rifles are always escaping. The smallest amount of residue could be matched.

Already told you. To show to witnesses because the original was darkened by the fingerprint testing.

This reason (darkened) you just provided is not a reason to NOT show the evidence. If you don't know why it wasn't shown...just say so but don't make up an excuse. If this the reason that the FBI provided to the WC... then show it.




Nobody said it would.

Hank[/QUOTE]

 

[manifesto]

It is easy to tell if the rifle was NOT fired; it is difficult to tell when it WAS fired.

Exactly.

 

[manifesto]

Can you get even a SINGLE detail right about this case? Like, just ONE? That's all I ask.

There were fingerprints on the trigger guard, IN ADDITION TO THE PALM PRINT!

Dallas PD found them, photographed them and covered them up for the FBI on the night of the 22nd. The FBI located the prints that same night and examined them. They found 3 points of match, 3 points of near match and zero points of exclusion for Oswald. Compelling, but not enough for a positive match...

...until 1992. Dallas PD recovered a bunch of extra high contrast photos of the prints stored in an evidence locker. HSCA print expert Vincent Scalice used those photos and Oswald's print card and found 24 points of match.

How do you know that the fingerprints examined by the FBI are the same as those in the photographs?

 

[HSienzant]

But not found by the FBI HQ crime lab the night of the shooting?

#72 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

By whom and why was it not photographed where it was ”found”?

Asked and answered numerous times in the past. Search the thread for "Studebaker". Ignore it all you want. The facts don't change or go away just because you ask the same question that's already been answered.

Why are you leaving out the fact that neither Fraizer or his sister could positively identify the bag as the one Oswald had carried that morning?

Because nobody would expect them to ID it to the exclusion of all other bags in the world. It's a bogus requirement found only in CT world.

That they did not recognize all the tape all over it?

Because neither one examined it or handled it.

That it was way to big/long?

Was it? Randle's original estimate of the length was three feet - previously provided to you. Ignoring it makes you less credible, it doesn't change the facts any.

That Oswalds bag looked like an ordinary grocery bag?

In texture. Not in size or shape.

That Oswald had carried the bag in a way that excluded it from having contained a broken down Carcano rifle?

#73 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

Why leaving out all this? I thought you had no agenda except the truth?

Hilarious. I'm the only one here - between the two of us - citing evidence.

According to Lt. Day yes. Who taped it before photographing it and forgot that he had done so a whole week before remembering it and refusing to sign the affidavit telling the tale.

#74 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

Name them. Not a single witness could identify Oswald as the man in the window.

#75 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

Lol. Brennan was taken under treatment by the DPD/FBI and soon understood what was expected of him.

#76 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

People who met him after this treatment said he looked like an old and frightened man.

#77 - Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.​

Hank

 

[Whip]

Off topic, but what happened this morning?

I thought someone had finally tried to post a snippet of evidence everyone's been waiting for and the forum software couldn't handle it.

 

[bknight]

How do you know that the fingerprints examined by the FBI are the same as those in the photographs?

How do you know that they aren't?

 

[bknight]

I thought someone had finally tried to post a snippet of evidence everyone's been waiting for and the forum software couldn't handle it.

LOL, it would be a first.

 

[traxy]

How do you know that the fingerprints examined by the FBI are the same as those in the photographs?

Dallas PD sent the trigger housing print photos to the FBI with the rifle on the night of the 22nd. It's all first day evidence.

 

[No Other]

Not in this case. We know it was fired, and we know to the minute when it was fired.

I can tell you when it was fired. It was fired at 12:30pm Dallas time on 11/22/63.

That's because of the six pieces of ballistic evidence (previously delineated) that establish the rifle was used in the assassination.

Hank

You were 100% correct when you said you were not a Lawyer. You continue to support that comment. What you have provided is:

A LHO fingerprint was found on the trigger guard.
A LHO palm print was found.
A bag was made up by the FBI to replicate the real bag. You have not explained why the real bag was not provided.
"Ballistics" show that the bullets were at one-time fired from the rifle.

What you have failed to do is to establish that LHO shot that rifle and killed JFK. There are enough dueling experts on both sides to create F.U.D. and frankly I don't think either side has a monopoly on the truth. But to provide partial answers and to think that is sufficient is reckless and disingenuous.