|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 8, 2020 12:10:17 GMT -5
So We Were Told I remember being very young, like 11, (1969). I remember asking, "How did that shell get dented?""When it hit the floor."Really? Brass. It only fell about 2 feet. We never did believe that, did we? It is unlikely to have dented falling that short distance to a wooden floor. A shell like this could not be fired, and certainly could not be loaded. It is these kinds of issues that still remain in the case. Unresolved since 1964. No one could believe a brass shell could dent this way on a wood floor. It must have happened in the ejection process while firing the rifle. Also never addressed, the delay of time, and reckless aim before clearing a jam. The WC did not investigate the dented shell anymore than they investigated the marks that were found on these casings. The FBI did. There is a memo in the record, CE 2968, an FBI analysis of the shells, it shows marks that are inconsistent with having been fired from that rifle. The commission printed it, buried it, and then ignored it. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ CE 543The dented shell. June 2, 1964, Hoover sent a memo to Rankin concerning the shells. In it he described the analysis of the markings on the casings. What is curious is this rifle left specific markings on the last shell ejected. 3 of the 4 SN shells carried that mark of the magazine follower. Yet, ONLY the last shell should display that mark. "Hoover noted that Commission Exhibit 543 (FBI Number C6), the case with the dent, had "three sets of marks on the base of this cartridge case which were not found [on the other casings]." The case, according to Hoover, had also been loaded into and extracted from a weapon three times. The only marks linking the case to Oswald's rifle were marks from the magazine follower. As noted above, CE 543 could not have obtained the marks from the magazine follower on 22 November, since the last round in the clip must have been left in the chamber. Furthermore, Commission Exhibit 543 lacks the characteristic indentation on the side made by the firing chamber of Oswald's rifle." [source: Dr. Michael Kurtz ]There are markings on these shells that indicate they were fed thru the bolt more than once.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 8, 2020 12:10:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 11, 2020 11:41:28 GMT -5
Time is the Chase
A very important factor of time is the sequence of hit and miss.
Is it: MISS - HIT - HIT | or | HIT - MISS - HIT?
The WC is not clear as to which it is - and yet they should be.
In "Speculations and Rumors" they try to qualify the timing, but bring no determination.
Speculation.--Oswald could not have fired three shots from the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle in 5.5 seconds.
Commission finding.--According to expert witnesses, exacting tests conducted for the Commission
demonstrated that it was possible to fire three shots from the rifle within 5.5 seconds.
It should be noted that the first loaded shell was already in the chamber ready for firing;
Oswald had only to pull the trigger to fire the first shot
and to work the bolt twice in order to fire the second and third shots.
They testified that if the second shot missed, Oswald had between 4.8 and 5.6 seconds to fire the three shots.
If either the first or third shot missed, Oswald had in excess of 7 seconds to fire the three shots28
WCR page 646
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jam the Miss
All this plays a huge factor in the jamming of the shell, and slowing him down considerably.
He may have had to re position the gun - perhaps vertical, for leverage,
clear the jam, and re set his position and aim.
While the car was closet to the window, in the most dense part of the plaza, he missed so completely, that nobody saw it.
And then he jammed. Also where does the jammed shell land? It may even have to be picked out of the rifle.
But mostly, it has a major effect on time.
WC defenders raise the time limits to 7-8 seconds based on the above speculation, with no mention of a jam.
The commission was very careful not to commit the first two, re: which one hit vs which one missed.
Six second time estimates are now given as high as eleven sec.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 11, 2020 11:41:48 GMT -5
6.5mm Carcano
The bolt sticks
Adding more to the time, is the bolt that sticks.
A greater proficiency would be required to work such a handicapped gun.
Working the bolt forces the rifle off target. The gun jams.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ronald Simmons | WC Testimony
Weapons evaluation expert, U.S. Army Weapons System Division.
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. In our experiments, the pressure to open the bolt was so great
that we tended to move the rifle off the target, whereas with greater proficiency this might not have occurred.
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; there were several comments made particularly with respect to the amount of effort required to open the bolt.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Staley had difficulty in opening the bolt in his first firing exercise.
He thought it was completely up and it was not, and he had to retrace his steps as he attempted to open the bolt after the first round.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Watch a video of a 6.5mm Carcano.
Look at the effort it takes to move a bolt that sticks.
"...the pressure to open the bolt was so great that we tended to move the rifle off the target..."
He didn't say, to what position the shooter had to move the rifle, just to work the bolt.
Add to that, a jam, in a cramped sniper's nest, and time stops. It would hinder his ability significantly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 13, 2020 11:38:59 GMT -5
Stuffed Shells
There are several marks on these shells identified by the FBI.
When the commission showed these marks to a weapons expert,
he concluded they appear to be identical in their source of production.
Whatever made these marks, did it in the same fashion, and was probably the same weapon.
However, this does not explain the inward dent.
To link the dent with the markings, one has to consider "dry firing",
ie; loading the weapon with an empty shell, thus leaving the same marks, but, in this case, causing an in-flowed dent.
British researcher, Chris Mills, concluded the shells were loaded empty.
Mills was able to repeat the inward dent on the shell.
This confirms what Josiah Thompson had suspected in his book "Six Seconds in Dallas",
CE 543 was engaged, that explains the multiple extractor marks, but the shell was empty,
(dry fired), supporting the cause of the inward dent.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Joseph Nicol | WC Testimony
Firearms identification expert,
Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation, Illinois Department of Public Safety
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, again, if it is an ejector mark, might the difference
have been caused by the fact that it may have been associated with a dry firing rather than an actual firing?
Mr. NICOL. That might be possible.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think a person would apply a different bolt pressure in a dry firing as opposed to an actual firing?
Mr. NICOL. Well, since this is a manually operated weapon,
it is quite possible that no two operations are done with exactly the same force.
However, with reasonable reproduce ability, all these marks appear to the same depth and to the same extent,
so that it would appear that whatever produced them operated in identically the same fashion.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
British researcher, Chris Mills
concluded the dented shell could not have been fired during the assassination:
"Quite by accident, I recently dented a shell in exactly the same manner as that which
is shown in the photographs showing the shell purportedly found on the sixth floor.
My M/C [Mannlicher-Carcano rifle] is deactivated and I was experimenting with empty shells.
The very first one produced the dent on the rim. I had to repeat the operation about 60 more
times before the results were reproduced. But the damage was exactly the same.
It seems that when using a hull that has previously been fired, the lip of the case expands
slightly and can catch on a lip below the barrel opening in the breech. This can only happen
with an empty case that has already been fired and even then only occasionally.
This means that at least one of the cartridge cases found on 11.22.63 was not fired from that window."
"One of the cases [of the three reportedly removed from the sniper's nest] was found with an
inward facing dent on the lip of the casing. This could not have happened before a missile left
the shell as the dent would preclude the shell actually holding the bullet.
It must have occurred at some time after this particular shell was fired."
"Several researchers have tried to duplicate the damage by standing on the case, throwing it against walls, etc., but to no avail.
The case cannot be similarly damaged by loading a live round into the chamber either, as it is protected and guided into the breech by the bullet itself."
"What I found, by accident, is that similar damage can be caused by loading an empty case into the weapon.
It appeared to me that the more times this was attempted, the more likely the damage was to occur.
This led me to the apparent conclusion that unless the person in the 6th floor fired the weapon,
ejected the shell, picked it up and then reloaded it (a pointless activity, as I'm sure you will agree),
this particular case had been fired at some earlier time, then reloaded empty, probably several times.
I consider that this is what caused the damage." [source: miketgriffith.com/files/dent.htm] |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 13, 2020 11:39:27 GMT -5
One Tough Shell "Six Seconds in Dallas" by Josiah Thompson, was the first to bring light to the markings on these shells, and the concerns of the authenticity of CE 543 (the dented shell).Sheriff Deputy Luke Mooney found the shell, and said he took great care in preserving it The deputy assured Thompson the shell was not stepped on. "Six Seconds..." describes the dent as sharply defined, inward, That sharp definition resembles the damaged shell after being dry loaded. (this is because of the grab of the open lip as the bullet feeds)A bullet could never be loaded into this shell. That possibility suggests the casing was never fired from the rifle at that moment. Markings on this shell are inconsistent with the others. CE 543 has three marks at the bottom not found on the other shells, nor found on any shells used in the rifle test firings. The only markings ID'd to this rifle on the dented shell, are from the magazine follower, and that mark should ONLY be left on the last casing leaving the clip. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Howard Donahue, Firearms Expert part of the 1967 CBS rifle testing. Here is what Donahue told Mike Griffith. Sept. 11, 1996
Dear Mike:
Concerning the case with the damaged lip. Posner claims it could have held a projectile at that time.
Let me explain something about Posner. He will tell you anything to make a point.
There were no shells dented in that manner by the HSCA.
I will refer you to Professor Thompson's book, Six Seconds in Dallas, page 144, exhibit no. 543.
Dr. Thompson discovered this case had been fired (dry fired) at least three times.
He also tried to dent the cases by throwing them against a wall, to no avail.
Just to prove this, I am enclosing a fired 6.5 mm Carcano case.
Throw it around any way you wish and try to dent it. These cases are very strong.
It could have only been dented by feeding the case into the breech of the gun with great force.
This would be from the clip. . . .
In closing, I have never seen a case dented like this. Dr. Thompson never saw any cases so deformed.
So Posner says the HSCA had several empties dented like these???
Thanks for your interest—please keep in touch.
Howard Donahue, Firearms Examiner [source: miketgriffith.com/files/dent.htm]
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 13, 2020 11:39:49 GMT -5
A footnote on page 144 of, "Six Seconds in Dallas","I have thrown hundreds of similar cases against a wall and never succeeded in denting one"
|
|
