Did Marina have a reason to claim the MC rifle belonged to Lee?

[Richard Smith]

The serial number on the rifle sent by Klein's to Oswald's PO Box is the same as the rifle found in TSBD.   Oswald's prints were found on that rifle.  There are photos of Oswald holding that rifle. There is no accounting for the rifle in Oswald's possession except as the rifle found in his place of employment.  On planet Earth, that is considered evidence.  It is of type used in any criminal investigation.  It is hard to imagine how there could be much more evidence than exists to link Oswald to the rifle.  A time machine is only necessary if you are someone who takes a defense attorney approach that nothing can ever be proven.

[John Iacoletti]

The serial number on the rifle sent by Klein's to Oswald's PO Box is the same as the rifle found in TSBD.   

There’s no evidence that any rifle went through the postal service, was delivered to Dallas, or was picked up by Oswald or anybody else.

Oswald's prints were found on that rifle. 

No, there were some prints near the trigger guard that were unsuitable for identification purposes, and a single partial palmprint showed up a week later on an index card.

There are photos of Oswald holding that rifle.

No, there are photos of Oswald holding a rifle that cannot be uniquely identified to the exclusion of all other rifles.

There is no accounting for the rifle in Oswald's possession except as the rifle found in his place of employment.

The burden is on you to prove that it’s the same rifle, not on anybody else to prove that it isn’t.

On planet Earth, that is considered evidence.

On planet Earth, that’s called misrepresenting evidence.

It is of type used in any criminal investigation.  It is hard to imagine how there could be much more evidence than exists to link Oswald to the rifle. 

Why, you have no problem imagining all sorts of things. Imagine having any conclusive evidence of any of the above claims. For example, evidence that was actually properly collected, documented, stored, and secured.

[Richard Smith]

In the contrarian world, nothing can ever be proven no matter the evidence while anything can be implied no matter the lack of evidence.  Here they tell us that they are taking no position except that the evidence linking Oswald to the TSBD rifle is lacking.  But in supporting this position, they claim the evidence has been manipulated or falsified.  His prints are apparently not on rifle despite the DPD saying so etc.  Of course, there is zero evidence to support any fabrication of this evidence which comes from a variety of different sources in different timeframes.  To even suggest that the evidence is fabricated is then taking a position that were was a conspiracy.  Nevertheless, the contrarians refuse to even acknowledge they are CTers while making outrageous conspiracy claims to support their "non-position" on the case.  It is humorous.  A defense attorney approach to the case but without a client.  That is the only way to avoid accepting that obvious conclusion to be drawn from the evidence that Oswald committed this crime.

[Richard Smith]

I don't respond to Dishonest John but this one is a real keeper and provides insight into the "mind" of the contrarian:  "There’s no evidence that any rifle went through the postal service."  What does this even mean in that context?  That some postal worker would remember one of thousands of packages over a period of many months?  They didn't keep such records in 1963.  Does that mean it is impossible to prove Oswald ordered and received the rifle as stupidly suggested?  Of course not.  We know from the Klein's records that someone using an alias associated with OSWALD ordered a rifle, that rifle would have been sent to the address noted on the order, that address was OSWALD"S PO Box, that rifle had the same serial number as the one found at OSWALD"s place of employment, Marina confirms that OSWALD obtained a rifle in this same timeframe, there is a picture of OSWALD holding the rifle, experts have indicated that rifle is the same rifle found on the 6th floor, the DPD indicates that they found OSWALD'S prints on TSBD rifle (with the same serial number as the one sent to OSWALD'S PO Box), and there is not a scintilla of evidence after six decades to suggest that Oswald possessed any rifle other than the one found on the 6th floor.  None.  There is no accounting for the rifle which Klein's sent to Oswald's PO Box in any other way except sending it to Oswald.  What exactly does the contrarian think Klein's did when they received an order requesting delivery at a specific address?  They would send the purchased item to that address. That address is OSWALD'S PO Box.  But we don't have "evidence that any rifle went through the postal service"!  HA HA HA.  So nothing to see here unless someone invents a time machine to confirm it was put in the mail.  Wow.

[Martin Weidmann]

I don't respond to Dishonest John but this one is a real keeper and provides insight into the "mind" of the contrarian:  "There’s no evidence that any rifle went through the postal service."  What does this even mean in that context?  That some postal worker would remember one of thousands of packages over a period of many months?  They didn't keep such records in 1963.  Does that mean it is impossible to prove Oswald ordered and received the rifle as stupidly suggested?  Of course not.  We know from the Klein's records that someone using an alias associated with OSWALD ordered a rifle, that rifle would have been sent to the address noted on the order, that address was OSWALD"S PO Box, that rifle had the same serial number as the one found at OSWALD"s place of employment, Marina confirms that OSWALD obtained a rifle in this same timeframe, there is a picture of OSWALD holding the rifle, experts have indicated that rifle is the same rifle found on the 6th floor, the DPD indicates that they found OSWALD'S prints on TSBD rifle (with the same serial number as the one sent to OSWALD'S PO Box), and there is not a scintilla of evidence after six decades to suggest that Oswald possessed any rifle other than the one found on the 6th floor.  None.  There is no accounting for the rifle which Klein's sent to Oswald's PO Box in any other way except sending it to Oswald.  What exactly does the contrarian think Klein's did when they received an order requesting delivery at a specific address?  They would send the purchased item to that address. That address is OSWALD'S PO Box.  But we don't have "evidence that any rifle went through the postal service"!  HA HA HA.  So nothing to see here unless someone invents a time machine to confirm it was put in the mail.  Wow.

They didn't keep such records in 1963.

Really? If that's true, why is there a shipping document for the revolver?

Are you seriously suggesting that a mail order company would send merchandise to clients all over the country without some sort of proof of shipment?

[Richard Smith]

They didn't keep such records in 1963.

Really? If that's true, why is there a shipping document for the revolver?

Are you seriously suggesting that a mail order company would send merchandise to clients all over the country without some sort of proof of shipment?

They received an order with a name and address.  They send the item to that name and address.  Marina confirms that Oswald obtained a rifle in that same timeframe.  The rifle found in the TSBD has the same serial number as the one Klein's sent to Oswald.  I'm not even sure what you mean by "proof of shipment".  There was no requirement in 1963 that I'm aware of that would require any such record.  Do you believe that Klein's was required to keep any such "proof"?  If not, you are just suggesting that they should have complied with some imaginary best business practice that you have conjured up nearly six decades after the event.

[Richard Smith]

They didn't keep such records in 1963.

Really? If that's true, why is there a shipping document for the revolver?

Are you seriously suggesting that a mail order company would send merchandise to clients all over the country without some sort of proof of shipment?

As I recall, there were different legal rules for shipping handguns.  Different companies also have different business policies.  You have shown us nothing to support the conclusion that Klein's must have had additional evidence of the transaction.  For example, is there is any evidence that Klein's handled any other rifle order differently from this one?

[Martin Weidmann]

They received an order with a name and address.  They send the item to that name and address.  Marina confirms that Oswald obtained a rifle in that same timeframe.  The rifle found in the TSBD has the same serial number as the one Klein's sent to Oswald.  I'm not even sure what you mean by "proof of shipment".  There was no requirement in 1963 that I'm aware of that would require any such record.  Do you believe that Klein's was required to keep any such "proof"?  If not, you are just suggesting that they should have complied with some imaginary best business practice that you have conjured up nearly six decades after the event.

Thank you for not answering my question.

Do you believe that Klein's was required to keep any such "proof"?

Required by whom? They would be utter fools and very quickly out of business if they didn't keep some sort of postal receipt to show that a particular item was send to a particular client or address. Just imagine the free for all as a result of a lack of such proof of shipment; anybody could order something, receive it and then claim their money back by pretending they never received it.