3 x 5 Index Card that is item # 14 On the List

[Walt Cakebread]

Corrected evidence list, now 3 shells

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338192/

Note there's a page 2.

Hi Otto ....Please note that the link that you have posted takes you to the ALTERED copy of the evidence list ( Document "B")

A person can only gain a good grasp of my point by comparing this altered copy to the original ( Document "A") from which this Document "B" was created.....  You need both the original evidence inventory list, and the altered copy of that original to gain a clear understanding that the original list was created on 11/22/63 ....  And the most important item on that original list is item number 14. Which is the 3 X 5 index card that all the lying authorities swore was not turned over to the FBI that night.

[Walt Cakebread]

Corrected evidence list, now 3 shells

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338192/

Note there's a page 2.

I can't be certain.....because the page appears to be blank at first glance....But it appears that page two is actually the back side of page one......and the writing on the opposite side is faintly visible.

[Walt Cakebread]

I was referring to the actual "(Page 2)", the back of both pages have been scanned giving a total of 4 pages.

What I didn't notice were the punched holes at the top of each page along with the outline of the original(?) punched holes. I vaguely remember the DP made a number of booklet like binders with copies of evidence; all affidavits were included, this is one of them,

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337752/

Note page numbering at the bottom, the "(Page 2)" was a later addition. I suggest the pages you're discussing were for internal use and not intended as any kind of receipt. I even think the WC had one made too.

Do you believe that evidence can leave the jurisdiction of a PD without any record ?

Commonsense dictates that both the party releasing the evidence and the party receiving the evidence would require documentation. 

[Walt Cakebread]

I was referring to the actual "(Page 2)", the back of both pages have been scanned giving a total of 4 pages.

What I didn't notice were the punched holes at the top of each page along with the outline of the original(?) punched holes. I vaguely remember the DP made a number of booklet like binders with copies of evidence; all affidavits were included, this is one of them,

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337752/

Note page numbering at the bottom, the "(Page 2)" was a later addition. I suggest the pages you're discussing were for internal use and not intended as any kind of receipt. I even think the WC had one made too.

I suggest the pages you're discussing were for internal use and not intended as any kind of receipt. I even think the WC had one made too.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, Otto.....  Does it make any difference why the Evidence inventory list was typed up?

Whether for internal use of for legal records ...the records of the Warren Commission show that the DP released the evidence to the FBI at midnight....( how could the FBI Crime Lab in Washington receive the evidence if the Dallas PD didn't release it??)

See Page 260 of Volume 24 for proof that the WC had a copy of the list....

 

[Martin Weidmann]

Do you believe that evidence can leave the jurisdiction of a PD without any record ?

Commonsense dictates that both the party releasing the evidence and the party receiving the evidence would require documentation.

I completely agree, Walt, but where is the document signed by Drain for the evidence he took to Washington and (I've asked this before) the document for the return of the evidence the next day?

I know you said that the conspirators destroyed the latter document, but that begs the question why they didn't do the same with the other document?

Btw when you go to the link provided for the list, you will note that it says that it could not be determined when the list was written.

[Walt Cakebread]

I completely agree, Walt, but where is the document signed by Drain for the evidence he took to Washington and (I've asked this before) the document for the return of the evidence the next day?

I know you said that the conspirators destroyed the latter document, but that begs the question why they didn't do the same with the other document?

Btw when you go to the link provided for the list, you will note that it says that it could not be determined when the list was written.

Btw when you go to the link provided for the list, you will note that it says that it could not be determined when the list was written.

WHO? ... could not determine when the list was written?...  The Dallas Police?....   Would they have a vested interest in leading folks to believe that the time and date of birth of the list can't be determined?

I'm mildly disappointed that you Martin can't readily see when the original list was created..... It seems so elementary to me....

I understand that many folks simply don't want to accept the bitter truth....But I didn't think you were in that crowd.

[Martin Weidmann]

Btw when you go to the link provided for the list, you will note that it says that it could not be determined when the list was written.

WHO? ... could not determine when the list was written?...  The Dallas Police?....   Would they have a vested interest in leading folks to believe that the time and date of birth of the list can't be determined?

I'm mildly disappointed that you Martin can't readily see when the original list was created..... It seems so elementary to me....

I understand that many folks simply don't want to accept the bitter truth....But I didn't think you were in that crowd.

I am just trying to understand, Walt. Not jumping to conclusions.....

[Walt Cakebread]

I am just trying to understand, Walt. Not jumping to conclusions.....

Yes...And that's exactly the way it should be.... A man should see the facts and draw his own conclusions...and that isn't easy in this case, with so much official disinformation sown through out the case.