Roger Craig

[Walt Cakebread]

I may be mistaken, but I don’t think that and gunpowder residue was found in the grooves of the rifled barrel of the MC rifle or in the breech.

So if I’m correct, add this to Walts observation that apparently no one mentioned and smell of gunpowder when examining the alleged recently fired approx 50 min earlier rifle.

Thank you for placing a little icing on the cake Mr Mason.  And you're quite right ...If that rifle had been fired less than an hour prior to the discovery, that chasm where Boone and Weitzman discovered the rifle, would have reeked of the smell of gunpowder.

[Rick Plant]

Weitzman confirmed it was a Mauser when he picked it up---  Weitzman nor anybody else picked up the rifle, until Lt Day picked it up.

Lt. Day and Captain Fritz both handled the rifle. Fritz was holding it when Weitzman identified it as a Mauser.       

 

He identified the weapon.--- Weitzman ventured a guess that it was a mauser....He couldn't see much of the rifle at the bottom of the dark chasm.

So, you're supporting the Warren Commission findings. Weitzman saw a lot of the rifle. He identified the rifle when Fritz was holding the rifle.

Weitzman was a pretty much a weapons expert --- No Seymour Weitzman was not a weapons expert

Weitzman previously ran a sporting goods store and he knew weapons which is why he knew it was a Mauser until he changed it to a Manlicher-Carcano. What kind of a store owner doesn't know the merchandise he's selling?   

[Rick Plant]

Rick...I truly appreciate your response.....  Like a pick up game of basketball....the game is much more interesting if there is an opponent.

 "You happen not to agree with that portion of his testimony, so you call him mentally ill to discredit him."

I'm sure that Craig was embellishing the story that he had heard from Weitzman....  Weitzman had in fact seen and examined a 7.65 Mauser and described that mauser for the FBI agent ( we can only speculate WHY Fritz wanted Weitzman to examine and describe a 7.65 mauser for the FBI)

So Craig was lying about that aspect....  But when he testified before the Warren Commission he said NOTHING about having seen "7.65 mauser stamped right there on the barrel" That came many years later. However, Craig DID tell the Warren Commission that he saw the rifle at the bottom of a chasm of boxes. Craig described that chasm as being enclosed on four sides and about five feet deep.  The in situ photo which allegedly was taken before anything was moved does NOT show a rifle lying on the floor at the bottom of a chasm.

 

Walt, if you're going to be like Doyle by making up nonsene to fit your narrative then I'm out. It serves no purpose to have a discussion because the goal posts keep moving and only new fabrications keep being presented.

Craig was right there next to Weitzman when he identified the weapon as a Mauser. That is witness testimony.

We don't have to speculate anything. Weitzman identified the rifle as a Mauser after Fritz asked if anybody knew what type it was. Since Weitzman knew weapons he was able to make a positive identification of the Mauser until he changed his story.

So what? Just because Craig did not state that before the commission doesn't mean he is lying or "mentally ill" as you claim. His testimony is consistent with what Weitzman originally stated until he changed his testimony.   

[Walt Cakebread]

Lt. Day and Captain Fritz both handled the rifle. Fritz was holding it when Weitzman identified it as a Mauser.       

 
So, you're supporting the Warren Commission findings. Weitzman saw a lot of the rifle. He identified the rifle when Fritz was holding the rifle.

Weitzman previously ran a sporting goods store and he knew weapons which is why he knew it was a Mauser until he changed it to a Manlicher-Carcano. What kind of a store owner doesn't know the merchandise he's selling?

Weitzman saw a lot of the rifle. He identified the rifle when Fritz was holding the rifle.

Nonsense!....  Anybody who has seen the film clip of Fritz examining the model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano just seconds after Lt Day picked it up by the leather strap, can verify that Weitzman , nor Craig were anywhere close enough to read anyof the small stamping on the carcano.    Use your head, man. 

Weitzman previously ran a sporting goods store

This is an often repeated distortion.....  Seymour Weitzman did not operate a "Sporting goods store".  Weitzman operated a variety store that also sold some sporting goods.   Weitzman himself said that he was not an "expert" on firearms. 

[Walt Cakebread]

Walt, if you're going to be like Doyle by making up nonsene to fit your narrative then I'm out. It serves no purpose to have a discussion because the goal posts keep moving and only new fabrications keep being presented.

Craig was right there next to Weitzman when he identified the weapon as a Mauser. That is witness testimony.

We don't have to speculate anything. Weitzman identified the rifle as a Mauser after Fritz asked if anybody knew what type it was. Since Weitzman knew weapons he was able to make a positive identification of the Mauser until he changed his story.

So what? Just because Craig did not state that before the commission doesn't mean he is lying or "mentally ill" as you claim. His testimony is consistent with what Weitzman originally stated until he changed his testimony.

Walt, if you're going to be like Doyle by making up nonsene to fit your narrative then I'm out. It serves no purpose to have a discussion because the goal posts keep moving and only new fabrications keep being presented.

Yes, I agree completely.... So let's use our heads and determine the FACTS....   

Do you agree that the film that shows Lt Day picking up the rifle, clearly shows that the rifle is a model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano?  Simply question....is your answer Yes, or no......

[Walt Cakebread]

You forced me to have another look at the rifle photo and I tried to figure out where the light source was coming from that would cast shadows like that. This had to be a flash bulb held in an extended right hand like the old days so the flash wouldn't interfere with the shot. The problem is we are dealing with low quality digital imagery which has no provenance. But there are a few things re the image itself that seem odd to me.

The boxes look arranged to create cover for the ditched MC. Otherwise, Oswald would have had to slide the MC in from the left into the cavern. So it is more likely Oswald laid down the rifle upright on the floor and leaned it against the box in the middle and pulled the other 2 boxes over to somewhat cover the MC. If this was the case, then the DPD must have found Oswald's prints on those boxes, right? Did they find any? Also, you don't damage your scope and put it grossly out of alignment by easing it down and leaning it against some boxes.

All the shadows made sense except for one, providing it is a shadow. When the MC is upright on the floor, there is a big gap where the buttend touches the floor and the stock disappears behind the box. In the photo the whole stock looks dark and it does not show any gap. Therefore the gap must be in shadow so we can't see it. However, I tried to brighten the stock up to resolve the gap but I just got artifacts due to the spombleprofglidnoctobunsty quality of the image. At any rate, if that is not a shadow under the stock then is it an MC stock? If it is a shadow then why is it in the front between the stock and the camera? Or is it just an optical illusion?

I hope the following image displays (it doesn't for me).



The only one who can put this one to bed is you Walt. If you actually have the same model MC that was found at the TSBD then you can create a reenactment of this photo and either confirm or refute that this was an authentic photo of a MC. Reenactments are the only method for a layman to analyse photos. They are deadly accurate and they don't lie.

The only one who can put this one to bed is you Walt.

Jack, I can't accomplish much by myself.....  I need an honest person to debate....  Someone who will listen and respond honestly.    I'm convinced that this photo is a composite ..... 





That rifle was never in the photo ....  When the photo is scrutinized the rifle appears to be floating in midair..... and the reason it appears to be floating without any support is because if the rifle were resting on the floor there would be only two points  of contact would be at the butt and the muzzle , and the muzzle would be about 6 inches lower than the bottom of the butt.
 ( IOW--- the rifle would not be level  ie; parallel to the floor, as it appears in the photo) 

I believe the rifle was photographically added to the photo.....

Question.... Wouldn't the barrel of the rifle have cast a shadow onto the floor ??

[Dan O'meara]

If the Carcano was there why the need for a composite photo?

[Alan Ford]

The only one who can put this one to bed is you Walt.

Jack, I can't accomplish much by myself.....  I need an honest person to debate....  Someone who will listen and respond honestly.    I'm convinced that this photo is a composite ..... 

Is the rifle straight?