JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
Medical Witness No. 5. Dr. Robt.McCellend

ROBERT McCLELLAND, MD:

"...I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered...so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out...." (WC--V6:33)


picture.php




So far the running score on medical witnesses concerning fatal wound to the head is:

Fatal shot from the Front with blowout in the back of head 5,

Conspiracy Pooh Poohers (all shots from the back) , Zero.
 
Exotic traveller said:
HI, new to the forum.

Have followed this thread as a lurker for a while, and have studied the JFK shooting quite a bit over the years.
One thing that has always bugged me is the chain of custody oddities that involve Oswalds rifle. If have been unable to find any compelling evidence that ties Oswald to the rifle, and in fact have found a number of things that appear to say that it wasnt his rifle at all.
Any experts on this thread aware of ownership discrepancies that exist?
Click to expand...

Welcome!

I don't know if you're familiar with the mock televised trial "On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald", but Vincent Bugliosi gives a brief summation to the jury at the end about Oswald's rifle.



The rifle summation begins at 3:12. You'll need to watch the rest to get further details, like Oswald's curtain rods, the rifle blanket in Paine's garage, Marina's recollection about the General Walker assassination attempt, etc.

What oddities are you referring to?
 
Exotic traveller said:
HI, new to the forum.

Have followed this thread as a lurker for a while, and have studied the JFK shooting quite a bit over the years.
One thing that has always bugged me is the chain of custody oddities that involve Oswalds rifle. If have been unable to find any compelling evidence that ties Oswald to the rifle, and in fact have found a number of things that appear to say that it wasnt his rifle at all.
Any experts on this thread aware of ownership discrepancies that exist?
Click to expand...


No answers, only questions:

Why did 3 officers describe the weapon as a Mauser, 7.65, when the rifle was clearly imprinted: "Made Italy, Cal. 6.5"

Why did former sports store owner Seymour Weitzman sign a sworn statement that the recovered weapon was in fact a Mauser, 7.65.

Why were there other reports that a weapon was found on another floor.

Why was there a paper trail of the weapon purchase, when it could have simply be bought over the counter with no paper trail.

Why the alias used in the mail order purchase when that alias ID was "found" in the suspect's wallet upon capture.

Why was there no record of anyone taking delivery of the rifle from the Post Office?

And why would there have been any possibility of a rifle substitution in such an infamous crime?


"The possibility of a rifle substitution was even admitted by Dallas police chief Jesse Curry. In 1976 in an interview with the Detroit News Curry agreed, ' It's more than possible' the rifle found in the depository could have been exchanged for the gun now in the national archieves. Curry said anyone wanting to substitute one suspected murder weapon for another 'could have gotten away with it at the time." Because no special precautions were taken to isolate the weapon as historic evidence."

From Crossfire by Jim Mars.
 
Last edited:
Robert which of these words means "open wound" in a way you think can ONLY describe the drawing you posted with the WC testemony, fallacioucsly forgetting to identify it as from a seperate source:

Blasted? Shattered? Hmm. Things we would expect to find beneath the skin in an entry wound.
How were bones able to protrude when according to the drawing they were not there?


Once again, a description consistant with the WC findings that Robert hopes is also consistant with his conclusions.
 
Robert....

Are you aware the rifle Oswald purportedly purcased from Kleins had a scope on it the likes of which they had never installed on that type rifle before?This according to the armorer they used to do such things
And that the authorities had to tell/show them how and where to mount it?
And that Oswald's gun had a rusty barrel that testimony before the WC showed hadnt had a round fired through it recently( it was looked at the next day), and there was a round chambered in it when it was found, among other anomalies?
Not to mention the permit needed to purchase such a gun in Texas,( at that time) that needed a Judge's signature has never been produced?
Many other oddities, but the above are a start
 
jimfish said:
Welcome!

I don't know if you're familiar with the mock televised trial "On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald", but Vincent Bugliosi gives a brief summation to the jury at the end about Oswald's rifle.



The rifle summation begins at 3:12. You'll need to watch the rest to get further details, like Oswald's curtain rods, the rifle blanket in Paine's garage, Marina's recollection about the General Walker assassination attempt, etc.

What oddities are you referring to?
Click to expand...

And so, your point is???
 
Robert Prey said:
So far the running score on medical witnesses concerning fatal wound to the head is:

Fatal shot from the Front with blowout in the back of head 5,

Conspiracy Pooh Poohers (all shots from the back) , Zero.
Click to expand...

You're counting Chuck Crenshaw back in again?

From a 1994 interview with Denis Breo published in JAMA in 1995.

Q: You, in 1963, did not have the background or training to perform the procedures that a forensic pathologist would perform to determine the direction of entry of these wounds, did you?

CC: No.

Q: And you don't today, do you?

CC: No, I'm not a pathologist.
Click to expand...
 
Robert Prey said:
No answers, only questions:

Why did 3 officers describe the weapon as a Mauser, 7.65, when the rifle was clearly imprinted: "Made Italy, Cal. 6.5"

Why did former sports store owner Seymour Weitzman sign a sworn statement that the recovered weapon was in fact a Mauser, 7.65.

Why were there other reports that a weapon was found on another floor.

Why was there a paper trail of the weapon purchase, when it could have simply be bought over the counter with no paper trail.

Why the alias used in the mail order purchase when that alias ID was "found" in the suspect's wallet upon capture.

Why was there no record of anyone taking delivery of the rifle from the Post Office?

And why would there have been any possibility of a rifle substitution in such an infamous crime?

"The possibility of a rifle substitution was even admitted by Dallas police chief Jesse Curry. In 1976 in an interview with the Detroit News Curry agreed, ' It's more than possible' the rifle found in the depository could have been exchanged for the gun now in the national archieves. Curry said anyone wanting to substitute one suspected murder weapon for another 'could have gotten away with it at the time." Because no special precautions were taken to isolate the weapon as historic evidence."

From Crossfire by Jim Mars.
Click to expand...

1. Because they said the rifle "appeared to be..." They did not give a detailed description of the rifle in any fashion, as I've pointed out numerous times.

2. Where is the detailed statement (as in serial number, etc) by Weitzman?
Need I point out that the title of "former sports store owner" is not a descriptive term indicating expertise in firearms identifcation?

3. Because people under stress make mistakes. LEO's are no exception.


4. Because Oswald purchased the weapon in a way where the papertrail would exist.

5. Because Oswald wasn't a professional, he was a nut. See above.

6. Were there pick up records from other package pick-ups maintained by the Post Office? I pick up packages quite often and I have no idea.

7. It's your fantasy, you tell me. I make no such assertion.

8. Mars again?

You're going to hang your hopes on a ******** artist and some people who had no expertise in firearms indentification?

Get over it kid, LHO pulled the trigger.
 
1.The Hidell( his supposed alias) money order the Warren Commision used as evidence was an American Express money order, not a postal money order he was supposed to have purchased the rifle with( serious stupid screwup) lol

2. Not one person at the post office saw Oswald pick up a package( the gun) nor was anybody ever called as a witness that said he did.
3. The post office he "supposedy" bought the money order from didnt open till 8 in the morning, and Oswald was at work at 8, and his work log at work accounts for every minute of his day( and his boss said he was extremely punctual)
4. The money order in question was never stamped by any bank, showing it had been cashed and gone through the system. In short, anytime a money order is paid, the bank stamps it, showing it has gone through their hands, this money order had no such stamp, an impossibility if it had actually ever been deposited.
5. You needed a " certificate of character" back then in Texas to purchase a gun, issued by a judge. No such certificate exists, nor has ever been produced to this day regards Oswald( Hidell), nor as i said earlier, is there any evidence his postal box ever recieved such an item..ever.
6.The sling mounts are different on the depository rifle compared to the one in his backyard photo
7. The Warren Commisions own firearms expert said the barrel of the gun was rusty, it wasnt fired the day before by anybody including Oswald. He stated one round being fired through it would remove the rust, and it was supposedly fired three times. This examination was done the next day after the shooting.
8.Govt experts had to work the bolt on the rifle 2 or 3 minutes because it was so rusty, to even try and dry fire it, it was that " set up/froze up".
9.There was rust on the firing pin, that a single shot would have removed
10. The place ( Kleins) where Oswald supposedly bought the rifle, had never mounted a scope on that particular rifle. This was verified by the armorer who worked for them, and by the FBI having to tell them how to mount such a scope on that model rifle and where exactly to mount it. They didnt know and had NEVER done it.
 
Guess Robert couldn't prove I thought his list were 40 liars. He hasn't supplied any evidence.

Guess he isn't going to tell us if Crenshaw lied to the NYT.

Or how he verified the interview where Kemp Clark described a "blow out" (or why he said signing the WC verified Clark said those words).

Is that sophomoric of him?

Lmao.
 
Exotic traveller said:
1.The Hidell( his supposed alias) money order the Warren Commision used as evidence was an American Express money order, not a postal money order he was supposed to have purchased the rifle with( serious stupid screwup) lol

2. Not one person at the post office saw Oswald pick up a package( the gun) nor was anybody ever called as a witness that said he did.

3. The post office he "supposedy" bought the money order from didnt open till 8 in the morning, and Oswald was at work at 8, and his work log at work accounts for every minute of his day( and his boss said he was extremely punctual)

4. The money order in question was never stamped by any bank, showing it had been cashed and gone through the system. In short, anytime a money order is paid, the bank stamps it, showing it has gone through their hands, this money order had no such stamp, an impossibility if it had actually ever been deposited.

5. You needed a " certificate of character" back then in Texas to purchase a gun, issued by a judge. No such certificate exists, nor has ever been produced to this day regards Oswald( Hidell), nor as i said earlier, is there any evidence his postal box ever recieved such an item..ever.

6.The sling mounts are different on the depository rifle compared to the one in his backyard photo

7. The Warren Commisions own firearms expert said the barrel of the gun was rusty, it wasnt fired the day before by anybody including Oswald. He stated one round being fired through it would remove the rust, and it was supposedly fired three times. This examination was done the next day after the shooting. 8.Govt experts had to work the bolt on the rifle 2 or 3 minutes because it was so rusty, to even try and dry fire it, it was that " set up/froze up".

9.There was rust on the firing pin, that a single shot would have removed

10. The place ( Kleins) where Oswald supposedly bought the rifle, had never mounted a scope on that particular rifle. This was verified by the armorer who worked for them, and by the FBI having to tell them how to mount such a scope on that model rifle and where exactly to mount it. They didnt know and had NEVER done it.
Click to expand...

Before the Gun Control Act of 1968, surplus military rifles were available through the mail, no questions asked. Kids bought 'em. I was one of them.

Every used Military surplus rifle of the era was fired with corrosive ammuntuion during military service, and it's a very rare example that doesn't have corrosion and rust in the bore. I can count on one hand the number of WWII surplus rifles in as issued condition that don't, and I've had several hundred pass through my hands.

Corrosion and rust from corrosive ammo is a permanent condition once it happens - you don't scrub it out of the bore. Firing rounds through it won't remove it either, even if you tried firing abrasive compound rounds. Same with the firing pin - once the damage was done, it's there forever.

The Warren Commision made no such statement, and they did not have the rifle in question in evidence the day after the shooting - the WC was established 11-29-63.
 
BStrong said:
Before the Gun Control Act of 1968, surplus military rifles were available through the mail, no questions asked. Kids bought 'em. I was one of them.

Every used Military surplus rifle of the era was fired with corrosive ammuntuion during military service, and it's a very rare example that doesn't have corrosion and rust in the bore. I can count on one hand the number of WWII surplus rifles in as issued condition that don't, and I've had several hundred pass through my hands.

Corrosion and rust from corrosive ammo is a permanent condition once it happens - you don't scrub it out of the bore. Firing rounds through it won't remove it either, even if you tried firing abrasive compound rounds. Same with the firing pin - once the damage was done, it's there forever.

The Warren Commision made no such statement, and they did not have the rifle in question in evidence the day after the shooting - the WC was established 11-29-63.
Click to expand...

Wait until he tells you his theory about how Greer shot Kennedy.
 
BStrong said:
1. Because they said the rifle "appeared to be..." They did not give a detailed description of the rifle in any fashion, as I've pointed out numerous times.

2. Where is the detailed statement (as in serial number, etc) by Weitzman?
Need I point out that the title of "former sports store owner" is not a descriptive term indicating expertise in firearms identifcation?

3. Because people under stress make mistakes. LEO's are no exception.


4. Because Oswald purchased the weapon in a way where the papertrail would exist.

5. Because Oswald wasn't a professional, he was a nut. See above.

6. Were there pick up records from other package pick-ups maintained by the Post Office? I pick up packages quite often and I have no idea.

7. It's your fantasy, you tell me. I make no such assertion.

8. Mars again?

You're going to hang your hopes on a ******** artist and some people who had no expertise in firearms indentification?

Get over it kid, LHO pulled the trigger.
Click to expand...

And shot the President from the Grassy Knoll?? I doubt it.
 
No, but the FBI had the rifle the next day, the FBI expert who officially examined it that next day( Nov 23) stated that 1 round fired through the bore would remove rust. He examimed it , and found it indeed did have rust in the bore, and this testimony was in fact heard later before the WC after it was convened.

That still doesnt account for the money order never getting stamped, no post office employee verifying Oswald showed up, and other oddities i posted.
I will recheck on laws governing what paperwork was needed back then to purchase a rifle.


Edit, did check

That law was enacted in 1938, and was in effect in Texas at the times in question. It doesnt matter if a weapon was new, used or whatever. In order to purchase a firearm, you needed a Certificate of Character from a judge in your county before you could own a rifle.( Texas)
If you dispute this, kindly point me in the right direction to find such information.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom