Ahh...now we're doing the classic conspiracy theorist, "They're all lying!!!!" defense. Oh by the way yesterday you were spinning that he was carrying his lunch. Did you ever come up with a reason his lunch would be 27 inches long???? LOL I imagine that at different times, witnesses can see someone carrying something differently especially if the carrier changes their grip or whatever. WC Exhibits show that the rifle could fit into the paper sack.
So because a cop finds a piece of paper that's evidence that it was what was wrapped around a gun that couldn't have been carried by Oswald because it was too long? Oh... And what I was "spinning" was Oswald's STATEMENT that he carried his lunch. He never claimed to be carrying curtain rods.Ya know...for the sake of accuracy.
The photograph shows the gun would fit into the brown paper sack he constructed. The Fraziers both say he was carrying a brown paper sack to work. He says it was curtain rods. Nobody ever found the rods in the TSBD Nobody ever found his rifle in his residence in Irving or at his boarding house in Oak Cliff. Are you saying you don't believe Oswald? Then why bring it up???...and if you do believe him, any word on what he could have possibly had for lunch that day that measured about 2 feet in length? A set of dinosaur ribs like they had on the opening of the Flintstones perhaps?
Are you kidding? That's your idea of evidence? A cop finds some kind of paper wrapping in the TSBD and it has to be what Oswald wrapped the gun in ? Ignoring of course that the witness (one of two by the way) you keep citing also described Oswald carrying this "package" in a weigh that COULDN'T have been the rifle? Your evidence that it was a gun he was carrying is that no one found the curtain rods he was supposedly carrying? Oh... Yea. Solid. When did they look for these curtain rods? DID they ever look for them? That's the kind of "evidence" that this whole thing is riddled with
Yup. How can you carry a package in such a way that disqualifies it from being something? I guess if it were extremely heavy or too small or whatever. By her WC testimony, the amount the questioner and Ms. Frazier came up with was 27 inches more or less. I'm certain they searched for them as they searched the building. Nobody reported finding any. Ever. More importantly, why would LHO conceal curtain rods to where they couldn't be found???? It paints a compelling picture for Oswald being guilty as sin. You're ignoring that They never found his rifle at his house or the rental in Oak Cliff. You're ignoring that he was the only employee to leave the TSBD after the shooting of JFK You're ignoring that they found the rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD His guilt is pretty much an open and shut case. The only question is whether he had help or not.
Who told you that rifle being held by some bald guy was taken the day of the assassination? Where is your proof? So you got pictures of curtain rods. So what? And where do you get the idea they are "listed" coming from Ruth Paine's house? Not only can you not read clear text when it is given but you make up your own text when it suits you. Great..........
So they took the rifle back to the TSBD? See the boxes next to the cop? Oh well, the top of the screen caps say exactly that. Uh…no. The cop is in the TSBD and the National Archives say they were from Ms. Painters house.
Where is the proof that the rifle displayed was found in the TBSD the day Kennedy was shot? How many ways would you like me to ask this question? It sure wasn't there when cops originally searched the sixth floor...comprende? And what was the Dallas PD doing holding onto this evidence for decades (not that it doesn't fit the pattern of hiding and manufacturing evidence in the Oswald frame up)? Oh...right. It would exonerate Lee Harvey Oswald if the package he said held curtain rods did indeed hold curtain rods. Uh...yes. Neither one of your explanations makes any difference at all for reasons already given.
Yes it was. Don’t know why you are resistant to learning anything but video of the search reveals them finding the MC. I’ll be happy to rub your nose in it yet again if you like. No charge! There is zero proof that the Dallas PD ever had them. You reference a website that had fingerprints drawn off of them; nobody’s name was on the card, the location or any case number etc.. The curtain rods were never in the TSBD. The rifle he bought that was used to kill Kennedy was. Sorry. Your argument got blown out of the water days ago.
Sorry. A Mauser 7.65 was found and that's the way it was announced on the national news for a couple of days (until the cover up managers took charge). I've posted on it. You've added your pitiful two cents worth. Game over! Go rub your own nose in something. The indexed fingerprint cards say different, smart guy! LOL....how bright are you anyway? You can following the link to the Dallas PD's own website from that link releasing all this information and search for any item you care to. That's why it helps to actually read the links provided but why start learning something now? I've never encountered anyone like you who refuses to learn anything! That's what trolls always say. What they totally lack in facts they try to make up in self claimed victory. Sad.
they did not describe it as you claim and you keep lying about that, Wrong they also found fibers in the bag which matched the blanket he kept it wrapped in while storing it in Ruth Paine's garage. Ruth Paine is the teacher where who was providing a home for his wife and kids. You will remember her as the person you made up bullshit lies about claiming she was a manager and connected to the CIA
Yes it was found in the TSBD when they originally searched. They did not hold onto evidence for decades as you claimed
A mauser was not found and that fact has been proven adn you are lying. They found his carcano. \You have never provided links as you claim and are lying
A. Frazier testified that the way Oswald was carrying the package it COULDN'T have been the rifle because NO one has 35 inches from fingertip to armpit unless they're nine feet tall. B.Frazier's sister also said that she saw him carrying it at hi side with just the top of it sticking above his grip and it didn't touch the ground. Again...for that to be the 35 inches of a broken down Carcano he would have had to be nine feet tall. THAT is how you "carry a package in such a way that disqualifies it from being something" Curtain rods? Who knows? Who LOOKED for them and when?
The rest clearly prove him wrong There are always witnesses contradicting what others see and what the evidence proves. That is also why the few witnesses who heard shots from the knoll are irrelevant.
Every officer in on the search agreed they had found a Mauser 7 .65.....why not since the name and model number was stamped right into the gun barrel. One of the officers, Seymour Weitzman, had owned a sporting goods store in the past and was quite familiar with all manner of firing arms and he, along with everyone else, agreed the rifle they discovered was a Mauser....NOT a Manlicher Carcano. Weitzman along with other officers attested in writing as to their discovery. There is no confusion.
Wrong. You ignore that all of these officers who found and handled the weapon merely admitted to misidentifying the weapon when it was first fund. They never reported seeing mauser stamped on it they merely reported they thought it was a mauser and that it was a simple error. This is an easy error to make as the mauser and carcano are very similar in appearance. They all admitted this error and they actually found Oswald's carcano. The only hold out was roger Craig who never handled the weapon and was behind others when he saw it and who also has some credibility issue. Your claim is long since debunked and proven wrong. The rifle they discovered was Oswald's Carcano and that is an absolute fact.
Former Dallas police officer of the year Roger Craig was the only officer who would not knuckle under and recant his testimony. http://oswaldsmother.blogspot.com/2011/07/mauser-is-mauser-is-mannlicher-carcano.html The officers who all decided at some later date that their lying eyes had deceived them would not be the first to have the Warren Commission coerce and alter testimony from eye witnesses. Especially egregious is the case of Seymour Weitzman who attested in writing that he saw the Mauser named stamped right into the gun itself. Yet we are supposed to believe he just spontaneously decided that he didn't see what he saw after all. What a pitiful bunch of liars the Warren Commission were.
So you admit the others recanted because they made a simple mistake. Your claim that craig did not knuckle under is a silly lie since there was nothing to knuckle under. They were not coerced and you can provide no evidence that they were nor can you provide evidence that anyone else was coerced. Seymour Weitzman never attested that he saw the word Mauser stamped on he barrel of the weapon. Your claim is yet another of many manufactured lies The weapon they found was Oswald's Carcano which is absolute fact and the officers who found it merely mistook it for a mauser The only pitiful liar is you.
The coercion of witnesses by the Warren Commission has been posted about many times with regard to the Mauser that was discovered on the sixth floor. The fact that Roger Craig could not be bullied into changing his story is very important and telling and he discovered in 1968 that his testimony had been altered fourteen separate times by the Warren Commission after attorney David Belin tried to dupe him into signing off on his altered testimony. https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/WTKaP.html People trying to get the truth out don't operate the way the Warren Commission did. I don't know what makes people so stupid and lacking in a spine that they back whatever the WC did. It's disgraceful.
