A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.

[John Iacoletti]

A deposit slip prepared by Klein's should exist. According to Klein's deposit records, a payment for $21.45 was included on the deposit slip for 3-13-63.  The bank statement is only going to show the total deposit amount. There should have been a deposit slip for the deposit marked 3-13-63. It may not show the same date as the date on which the deposit slip was prepared may be prior to the date on which the deposit was processed by the bank.

How did they prepare the deposit slip on February 15 for a deposit that included a money order sent on March 12?

True. But no handwriting analyst ever said it was Genghis Khan's.  No panel of handwriting experts, such as that convened by the HSCA, suggested that the handwriting was Genghis Khan's.  They all thought it was Oswald's. There were no dissenting opinions.

Maybe we should consult a panel of astrology experts to see if Oswald's moon was in Jupiter that day.  And see if there are any dissenting opinions.  That would be good evidence.

One of the things that HSCA expert Purtell said though merits inclusion here if you're going to base your opinion on his expertise:

"Document examiners only render a qualified or conditional opinion when working from copies. They stipulate that they have to examine the original before a definite opinion will be made."

So maybe he was a tad late for work on March 12, 1963.

Mr. JENNER. Was he regular in his arrival at work?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes.
Mr. JENNER. Were his work habits in that connection satisfactory?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes. I would say he was very punctual in his arrival to work.

  Maybe he bought it late on March 11 and they date stamped it the following day - just like banks do.

Possible I suppose, but quite a stretch.  He worked until from 8:00-5:15 and had no car.  And the alleged envelope has a 10:30 am postmark.

The fact is that a money order for $21.45 bearing what experts have said is Oswald's handwriting

Mr. FAUNTROY - All right, thank you. The second question has to do with the Hunt letter there. Assuming that that is a forgery, how would you put together such a forgery? Is it possible for a person to so analyze the writing of another person as to reproduce it in reasonable facsimile?
Mr. MCNALLY - Oh, yes. As a matter of fact, we had a famous case some years ago where there was pages and pages of writing reproduced in the so-called Irving-Hughes situation back in the seventies. It was very difficult at that time to determine whether it was good or bad.
Mr. FAUNTROY - What is the peculiar capability required to do that? Are there persons who are particularly skilled at forgery in that kind of detail, that kind of length?
Mr. MCNALLY - Yes, there are. As a matter of fact, they exist all over. You have them in the criminal field where, let's say with a quick study you could turn out something like this, particularly since Oswald's general writing pattern is simple and tends to be rather legible, and to turn out something like that would be not particularly difficult.

was purchased with a date stamp of March 12, 1963 and used to pay for a rifle that Klein's records show was C2766, which was later shipped to Oswald's post office box in Dallas.

Where is the postal record of shipment?  Where is the receipt for the postage paid?  Where is the signature of the person who picked it up? Why did the FBI who was monitoring his mail not notice a package from a gun store?  Why didn't any postal employee remember a 5 foot box being picked up?

[John Mytton]

I don't care what's "admissible".  I care about what can be demonstrated to be actually true.

Where does all your speculation go, in 54 years there is still no alternative narrative CT's suggest forgery and planting yet don't provide any evidence, btw a clerical error or something equally as irrelevant does not make a case.

But what does make a case is the following corroborated evidence.

Oswald ordered the rifle.



Oswald possessed the rifle.



Oswald's rifle was found at Oswald's work with Oswald's prints.





JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

But what does make a case is the following corroborated evidence.

sigh....

Oswald ordered the rifle.

That picture doesn't demonstrate that Oswald ordered a rifle.  And neither does unscientific handwriting "analysis" of two block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon.

Oswald possessed the rifle.

That picture doesn't demonstrate that Oswald possessed that particular rifle, because the rifle in that photo has not been uniquely identified.

Oswald's rifle

LOL

was found at Oswald's work

A lot of people worked there.

with Oswald's prints.

No, some prints were found near the trigger guard which were useless for identification purposes, and a partial palmprint was found on an index card a week later.

How any of this is supposed to prove that Oswald shot JFK is anyone's guess.  The only thing it proves is that you think repeating "Oswald's rifle" over and over again somehow makes it true.

[John Mytton]

One of the things that HSCA expert Purtell said though merits inclusion here if you're going to base your opinion on his expertise:

"Document examiners only render a qualified or conditional opinion when working from copies. They stipulate that they have to examine the original before a definite opinion will be made."

Mr. JENNER. Was he regular in his arrival at work?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes.
Mr. JENNER. Were his work habits in that connection satisfactory?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes. I would say he was very punctual in his arrival to work.

Possible I suppose, but quite a stretch.  He worked until from 8:00-5:15 and had no car.  And the alleged envelope has a 10:30 am postmark.

Mr. FAUNTROY - All right, thank you. The second question has to do with the Hunt letter there. Assuming that that is a forgery, how would you put together such a forgery? Is it possible for a person to so analyze the writing of another person as to reproduce it in reasonable facsimile?
Mr. MCNALLY - Oh, yes. As a matter of fact, we had a famous case some years ago where there was pages and pages of writing reproduced in the so-called Irving-Hughes situation back in the seventies. It was very difficult at that time to determine whether it was good or bad.
Mr. FAUNTROY - What is the peculiar capability required to do that? Are there persons who are particularly skilled at forgery in that kind of detail, that kind of length?
Mr. MCNALLY - Yes, there are. As a matter of fact, they exist all over. You have them in the criminal field where, let's say with a quick study you could turn out something like this, particularly since Oswald's general writing pattern is simple and tends to be rather legible, and to turn out something like that would be not particularly difficult.

Where is the postal record of shipment?  Where is the receipt for the postage paid?  Where is the signature of the person who picked it up? Why did the FBI who was monitoring his mail not notice a package from a gun store?  Why didn't any postal employee remember a 5 foot box being picked up?

One of the things that HSCA expert Purtell said though merits inclusion here if you're going to base your opinion on his expertise:

"Document examiners only render a qualified or conditional opinion when working from copies. They stipulate that they have to examine the original before a definite opinion will be made."

Mr. MCNALLY - These are blowups of the original photo reproduction. In the case of this particular blowup here, this is an enlargement of JFK exhibit F-504, and this enlargement of the postal money order in an enlargement---
Mr. KLEIN - Is that the money order?
Mr. MCNALLY - Yes, F-504, and the money order is F-509.
Mr. KLEIN - Are these blowups fair and accurate representations of the documents examined by the panel?
Mr. MCNALLY - They are.
Mr. KLEIN - Using the blowups, would you explain why the panel reached its conclusion?
Mr. MCNALLY - We examined and compared the writings on the microfilm reproduction with the original postal money order issued as payable to Klein's Sporting Goods. The same process, of course, was involved, an examination and comparison of the general writing characteristics which appear on this microfilmed reproduction, versus the writing which appears on the U.S. postal money order. The writing pattern on both of these documents is the same, the same degree of skill, the same slant pattern. The writing has a continuity and a cohesion, a continuous flow in the formation of "Hidell", "Dallas, Texas," "Klein's," "Chicago, Illinois." It flows right along in the same manner, as we have in the writing flow on the postal money order. The individual letter designs that occur in the writing of the name and the address and the names and addresses on the microfilm reproduction and the writing of the various letters on the postal money order correspond. In both instances on the microfilmed reproduction here we have a parallel, the writing of "Hidell" here in the top of the microfilm and the "A. Hidell," which occurs over here on the postal money order. The writing construction in both instances is the same, just a slight variation in the "H" in "Hidell" in the microfilm reproduction, but the rest of the writing conforms to the writing "A. Hidell" on the U.S. postal money order. In the writing of "Dallas, Texas," this particular writing pattern here in the upper left-hand corner agreed with the writing of "Dallas, Texas," over here on the U.S. postal money order. The variation occurring here is that in the return address on the postal money order a small "t" has been used versus a capital "T" utilized down here. In this "Texas" here in the writing of the "x-a-s" right in this portion here just following the "x" there is a slight hitch almost like a small undotted "i". That same information occurs over here just before the "a" here a little hitch in the writing pattern. The overall writing on both the microfilm and on the postal money order correspond to the extent that we came to the conclusion both were written by the same individual, again with that caveat that this is a reproduction. As a matter of fact, this if from a microfilm, and it has been blown up from the microfilm itself so that it lacks clarity and detail. But the impression gotten from examining this particular document and comparing it with the writing of the original document, the postal money order, is that the writing flows. The line quality of that on this document and that on the postal money order corresponds; the letter designs correspond. There is no significant difference between the writing on the microfilm and the writing we have in the money order or the writing we have here, for instance, on the employment application. Further, the hand printing on this particular form here, which was laid over the envelope when it was recorded, this hand printing, "A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Texas," corresponds to that which we have in this employment application and also a letter which backed up this employment application, specifically some writing in the lower left-hand corner of that letter. We did conclude again (with that slight caveat) that the writing of the microfilm in both the script writing here and the hand print here were written by the same individual who wrote out the postal money order and the employment application.

Mr. JENNER. Was he regular in his arrival at work?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes.
Mr. JENNER. Were his work habits in that connection satisfactory?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes. I would say he was very punctual in his arrival to work.

Possible I suppose, but quite a stretch.  He worked until from 8:00-5:15 and had no car.  And the alleged envelope has a 10:30 am postmark.

Oswald's arrival at work isn't the problem because Oswald was known to disappear from work.

There were occasions from time to time when I was unable to locate Oswald in and about the premises and learned that he was in the habit of absenting himself from the premises without leave and visiting a service station establishment adjacent to the Reily Coffee Company known as Alba's Crescent City Garage. Furthermore, Oswald had become quite indifferent to the performance of his duties. I spoke with him from time to time about his absences and his indifferences, all to no avail. Ultimately I recommended to my superiors that Oswald be discharged. My request was granted and he was discharged on July 19, 1963.

Mr. BALL. Did you at anytime after the President was shot see Oswald in the building?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you at anytime after the President was shot tell Oswald to go home?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

Mr. FAUNTROY - All right, thank you. The second question has to do with the Hunt letter there. Assuming that that is a forgery, how would you put together such a forgery? Is it possible for a person to so analyze the writing of another person as to reproduce it in reasonable facsimile?
Mr. MCNALLY - Oh, yes. As a matter of fact, we had a famous case some years ago where there was pages and pages of writing reproduced in the so-called Irving-Hughes situation back in the seventies. It was very difficult at that time to determine whether it was good or bad.
Mr. FAUNTROY - What is the peculiar capability required to do that? Are there persons who are particularly skilled at forgery in that kind of detail, that kind of length?
Mr. MCNALLY - Yes, there are. As a matter of fact, they exist all over. You have them in the criminal field where, let's say with a quick study you could turn out something like this, particularly since Oswald's general writing pattern is simple and tends to be rather legible, and to turn out something like that would be not particularly difficult.

This is your problem John and why you only commit yourself to some bolded testimony, you shy away from admitting a massive conspiracy because as soon as you admit any one part then your whole house of cards comes tumbling down. The simple act of forgery in itself requires a cast of many from organisers, writers to collectors which creates even more problems but hey don't let that stop you.

Why didn't any postal employee remember a 5 foot box being picked up?

Hahaha.



JohnM

[John Mytton]

sigh....

That picture doesn't demonstrate that Oswald ordered a rifle.  And neither does unscientific handwriting "analysis" of two block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon.

That picture doesn't demonstrate that Oswald possessed that particular rifle, because the rifle in that photo has not been uniquely identified.

LOL

A lot of people worked there.

No, some prints were found near the trigger guard which were useless for identification purposes, and a partial palmprint was found on an index card a week later.

How any of this is supposed to prove that Oswald shot JFK is anyone's guess.  The only thing it proves is that you think repeating "Oswald's rifle" over and over again somehow makes it true.

That picture doesn't demonstrate that Oswald ordered a rifle.  And neither does unscientific handwriting "analysis" of two block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon.

Do you have a rubber stamp that you wheel out every time you confront this evidence? Yaaawn!

That picture doesn't demonstrate that Oswald possessed that particular rifle, because the rifle in that photo has not been uniquely identified.

Well maybe when we see you present an expert refutation of the HSCA's photographic panel's conclusion then you may have something but till then any internet photoexpert wannabe's opinion who has never examined the original HSCA's evidence is worthless.

A lot of people worked there.

Too bad Oswald was the only person who was directly connected with the murder weapon.

How any of this is supposed to prove that Oswald shot JFK is anyone's guess.

Hello, Oswald's rifle was the murder weapon.

Johnm

[John Iacoletti]

[BLAH BLAH BLAH]

1. Too bad the envelope and the money order found in Virginia don't mention what item is being purchased with them.

2. What do his work habits at other jobs have to do with whether he disappeared from work at J-C-S?  Nothing -- it's a red herring.

3. Your amusing stock photo might be relevant if it was a post office pickup window.

[John Mytton]

Fair enough.  Would you agree that in addition to a stamp (which could be done by anybody), that a bank deposit slip or a bank statement showing when the deposit was made would also exist in the ordinary course of business?

As so far as I can tell, no reputable handwriting analyst has said it is not Genghis Kahn's handwriting either.

Wouldn't documentation of such help demonstrate that such an instrument was actually deposited by Klein's?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=102294#relPageId=34

Would you agree that in addition to a stamp (which could be done by anybody)

Wow, so to make your conspiracy work on top of your forgers, organisers and collectors, we now have a Kleins stamp being forged so again we add people to make your fake stamps and someone who has to collect the template, Waldmann who validated microfilms must also be involved so your list just from these minor events is already increasing exponentially. It's no wonder you shy away from admitting anything because even you must realize that what you propose is just too ridiculous and would be laughed out of any court.

This thread is very enlightening as your answers of what has to happen for this not to be just Oswald leads to a MASSIVE conspiracy and let's not forget this is only a mere fraction of the overall evidence.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Do you have a rubber stamp that you wheel out every time you confront this evidence? Yaaawn!

Yeah.  It's right next to your rubber stamp that says "Oswald's rifle".

Well maybe when we see you present an expert refutation of the HSCA's photographic panel's conclusion

The panel concluded nothing.  Cecil Kirk was the only one of the 22 panel members who gave an opinion on the matter and even he said in his testimony only that it tips the scale in the direction of it being the same rifle.

So, you're spouting unadulterated 

Hello, Oswald's rifle was the murder weapon.

How do you know what the murder weapon was?