Oswald's Day

[Alex Hidell]

Eyewitness accounts can be misleadign and outright wrong.However, if you have hundreds of eyewitnesses to an event, as we did here, then a majority view begins to emerge.NO ONE saw Oswald fire a rifle that day, NO ONE.96 people identified the grassy knoll as a lcoation where at least some of the shots came from.A majority of people heard more than 3 shots and a vast majority of people said the final shots came in a cluster, right on top of one another.This is eyewitness testimony that you can take to the bank.In statistical analysis, numbers don't lie and in this case, all of the above reports have the advantage of being statistically significant.

[Kirk]

So can we agree that the weapon found or put into evidence was not capable of doing the actions required? If it is not capable, then there must be another weapon right? Is the carcano the only weapon that Oswald could have managed to bring or hide at the TSBD, if he in fact hid any weapons? Is the lack of evidence and capable weapon enough to exclude Oswald from firing a rifle that day? What is the concensus of Oswald's actions during the assassination? What do we think about the Rambler picking up Oswald at just the right time? Did it happen? Was it Paine's Rambler? Who drove it? Where did they go, and why did they drop off Oswald at the rooming house to get a jacket or revolver? Why didn't the Rambler wait for Oswald to drive him to the Movie theater? Oh and what if it did?

[Alex Hidell]

Carolyn Walther said she saw 2 men on the 6th floor about 15-20 minutes before the murder.One was older, dark complected, with a brown sport coat on. The other younger with blondish hair. The younger one was seen with a weapon that was shorter than a rifle. This is her exact description.We believe Oswald was seen in the cafeteria at 12:15/12:25/12:31PM. Could he have slipped away between 12:25 and 12:31 to shoot JFK? Yes but highly unlikely and he certainly wasn't up on the 6th floor between Noon and 12:30PM waiting for JFK. That was the time several witnesses said they saw the 2 men on the 6th floor, one with a gun.Could the co-worker who said she saw Oswald in the cafeteria at 12:15 and 12:25 been mistaken?Another witness watching from a building under construction on the south side of Dealey Plaza said he saw a man running from behind the TSBD in a brown sport coat shortly after the murder. This man ran south on Houston, over to Record Street and got into a car. The Rambler?

[Dealey Joe]

OK back to the question of why was LHO in the bulding if he knew what was coming down?Was he actually supposed to shoot?Did he have a clue that he was going to be a patsy?I don't think he was stupid.Why would he take a gun from Ruby?At what point did he realise he was in trouble?

[Davyjones]

Hi Dealey my view is he was expected to shoot that day...he was lined up as a patsy. It is possible he fired one shot(taugue) as a warning shot (yes I know he was a negative on the paraffin test) and walked away but more probably he stayed away in the canteen? Assuming he was in the canteen then he did not think he was a patsy until his arrest at the movie house. If he took a gun from Ruby he still thought he was OK and probably did not think taking the gun was big deal. Sort of took it to show team spirit kind of thing. He never looked like a man who had shot at anybody...cause he never did.

[Dealey Joe]

Your argument makes sense, A definate posibility.What about the people who put LHO in a position that he could not have beenon the 6th floor. and what about the fingerprint?

[Davyjones]

Dealey....Mac Wallace has all the credentials to be on the 6th floor. A mad homicidal pig of a guy. His fingerprint says he was there. In reality they did not need to have Oswald in the window, the WC and the Dallas Police would make sure he was!!!!

[Dealey Joe]

Davy I think you are right on the money there.

[Mike Ellwood]

People are laying a lot of emphasis on the powder test, but (playing devil's advocate here), supposing LHO really had fired a bolt-action gun that day, couldn't he simply have washed himself thoroughly in the bathroom (and perhaps changed his shirt/T-shirt) on the way out? It needn't have taken that long.Or would the powder residue resist simple washing (at least the first few washes)?I'm also a little unclear about the significance of the Mauser (I've followed the link above to the Roger Crag site, and also seen the clips on YouTube of the interview with Craig). Assuming it really was found there that day (i.e. Craig was not lying or simply mistaken), and assuming also that it was a "plant" (as I've seen suggested several times) why would it be planted? Wasn't the setup that LHO had supposedly bought a Mannlicher-Carcano, which was later claimed to be the murder weapon? Why would a Mauser be planted? (I must apologise that I haven't yet read Wim's book, and maybe questions like this are dealt with there).

[Dealey Joe]

My .02Craig is not lying or mistaken about a Mauser.Seymore Wiseman who knew firearms very well said and swore it was a Mauser.I lean toward thinking the Mauser was handy, already in the building.The mauser and the carcano look a lot alike, actually the Carcano has a mauser action.for some reason they switched the guns identity maybe because they already had the documentation to show LHO owned a rifle so knowing how dumb and decievable the American people are they just pulled a switcheroo and we end up with an old junky Carcano.Actually in reality the Carcano is not a bad rifle. It had a Mauser action and a Manlicher magazineMaybe a 2x4 stock and a beer can barrell?