Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[John Iacoletti]

They couldn’t have done that without pretending that a lift was sent over late and separate from other evidence?

Right, you're claiming that they made up a story about sending the magic partial palmprint late and separate from the other evidence, when it would serve no purpose whatsoever to do so, and Day, Drain, and Latona all went along with it.

[John Iacoletti]

...At the time of the initial investigation following the assassination, we impounded the tapes and held all records for just that purpose, the ensuing investigation. When the FBI took the tapes and tried to make audible sense out of them, they found that they couldn’t comprehend the tape traffic because they couldn’t understand the speech style used on the radio. The things that were said by the officers on the radio made complete sense to the officers, but they didn’t make a bit of sense to the transcribers. So an FBI agent brought the tapes back to the department, and the chief gave them back to me and asked me to transcribe them for him; of course, understanding that we didn’t have a lot of conspiracy theorists in our midst at that time...

The transcripts were made from tapes, not from the original dictabelt discs.  The fact that the transcripts say "tape splice" in several spots means that the tapes were edited in some fashion.

...An officer, depending on the individual circumstance at an individual time, might use either the digital clock in front of him, or he might use the time stamp on the other clock. Using a headset, let’s say the dispatcher turns away to do something and in the process sees the digital clock and says, “224, a disturbance at such and such location—2: 13.” He used the digital 2: 13. By now the time stamp clock might be reading 2: 15. He puts it in the slot, turns around, and now 125 says, “I’m clear.” The dispatcher says, “125 clear,” and he looks at the time stamp—2: 15, “2: 15 KKB364.” Now it would look like to all the righteous world that 125 cleared two minutes after the radio operator dispatched the call at 2: 13, but he didn’t. It was almost in one breath. So, under no circumstance could you put any stock in the real world time or any continuity on time references by the belt because there were no time references on the belt; they were only spoken times, and those spoken times had no faithful validity...

So what Bowles is saying here is that it's meaningless that the dispatcher said "1:16" shortly before the citizen reported the shooting of the police officer.

[Walt Cakebread]

Right, you're claiming that they made up a story about sending the magic partial palmprint late and separate from the other evidence, when it would serve no purpose whatsoever to do so, and Day, Drain, and Latona all went along with it.

you're claiming that they made up a story about sending the magic partial palmprint late and separate from the other evidence,

HUH??.... I most certainly am NOT making such a claim...  I've said repeatedly that after midnight 11/22/63, they sent the 3 X 5 card, which allegedly contained a palm print ( item #14 on the original evidence list) along with the other evidence on the list, to the FBI Crime Lab in Washington DC.

At that time ( midnight 11/22/63 ) we have no way of knowing if there was any print on that 3 X 5 card.    All we know is that whatever it was,  it had been lifted "off underside gun barrell near end of foregrip c 2766"   Later they liars produced a PHOTOGRAPH that they claimed was a photo of the lift.

[Martin Weidmann]

I believe that JAMES C. BOWLES Communications Supervisor Dallas Police Department explained the accuracy of the time in his interview in “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed:

Since I was the communications supervisor in charge of the dispatch office, I became involved with the tapes of all radio communications of the Dallas Police Department that day, the same tapes which were analyzed by the Warren Commission and later the House Select Committee on Assassinations. There should be no controversy about the tapes. The tapes are very simple and self explanatory if you accept them for what they’re worth...

...At the time of the initial investigation following the assassination, we impounded the tapes and held all records for just that purpose, the ensuing investigation. When the FBI took the tapes and tried to make audible sense out of them, they found that they couldn’t comprehend the tape traffic because they couldn’t understand the speech style used on the radio. The things that were said by the officers on the radio made complete sense to the officers, but they didn’t make a bit of sense to the transcribers. So an FBI agent brought the tapes back to the department, and the chief gave them back to me and asked me to transcribe them for him; of course, understanding that we didn’t have a lot of conspiracy theorists in our midst at that time...

...I just made a recording of it with a nice reel to reel tape recorder which the FBI furnished to me and then set about from the original tapes and the original Gray audiograph disks to transcribe the tapes using the originals because, according to the law, that’s the best evidence. The tapes were in as good a condition as you would expect considering the fact that the FBI had tried to transcribe them using a single stylus...

...Remember, even the House Select Committee and the National Academy of Sciences put in computer monitors on the belts and on the tapes so that the consistency of the tapes used indicated no interruption, alteration or changes. Both agreed as well as could be that the tapes at the last instance are the same as the original tapes in the first instance. No hanky panky!...

...Something a lot of people really got their lather up about was whether something was or wasn’t at a certain time. Some people tried to use stop watches to time that belt to say something happened after a certain minute, second, or fraction of a second. That is nonsense, utter nonsense!...

...The dispatcher had two types of clocks: He had a time stamp clock that didn’t show seconds, just minutes, and he had a digital clock in front of him which had the numerical hour and minutes. That was the usual clock for general sight and time statements. At the same time, the same dispatcher might use the digital clock. There was no way in the world that some six clocks in the telephone room and the two clocks in the dispatching room were synchronized. They  could be as much as a minute or two apart. Usually we didn’t change them until they became at least two minutes or more out of synchronization of each other. There was one clock in the office that had a generally reliable time. It was on the back wall of the telephone room. The only trouble was that it was way back in the corner which you could hardly see, and nobody ever looked at it. It was just there...

...An officer, depending on the individual circumstance at an individual time, might use either the digital clock in front of him, or he might use the time stamp on the other clock. Using a headset, let’s say the dispatcher turns away to do something and in the process sees the digital clock and says, “224, a disturbance at such and such location—2: 13.” He used the digital 2: 13. By now the time stamp clock might be reading 2: 15. He puts it in the slot, turns around, and now 125 says, “I’m clear.” The dispatcher says, “125 clear,” and he looks at the time stamp—2: 15, “2: 15 KKB364.” Now it would look like to all the righteous world that 125 cleared two minutes after the radio operator dispatched the call at 2: 13, but he didn’t. It was almost in one breath. So, under no circumstance could you put any stock in the real world time or any continuity on time references by the belt because there were no time references on the belt; they were only spoken times, and those spoken times had no faithful validity...

...More specifically, at the time of the assassination, when Gerald Henslee, who was operating Channel 2, said, “12: 30 KKB364 Police Department, Dallas,” it really wasn’t 12: 30 by all that I can reconstruct by all other parallels. I used several indices to try to correlate that. There were certain places you could tend to lock Channel 1 and Channel 2 together such as things that transpired where there’s cross talk between the channels or where they used a simultaneous broadcast and went on both channels. I made a big, long sheet of paper where Channel 1 was on one side and Channel 2 on the other and slid these papers back and forth to try to line up conversation in a reasonably faithful lineup. A good close proximity is the best I could do—no one can do better.

The tapes are very simple and self explanatory if you accept them for what they’re worth...

This alone should tell you enough about the evidentary value of the tapes.

There was no way in the world that some six clocks in the telephone room and the two clocks in the dispatching room were synchronized. They  could be as much as a minute or two apart.

Oops... so how does one determine the exact time?

There was one clock in the office that had a generally reliable time. It was on the back wall of the telephone room. The only trouble was that it was way back in the corner which you could hardly see, and nobody ever looked at it.

And still they maintain that the times on the transcripts are acurate. Go figure!

So, under no circumstance could you put any stock in the real world time or any continuity on time references by the belt because there were no time references on the belt; they were only spoken times, and those spoken times had no faithful validity...

Which basically destroys the claim that the transcript times are acurate....

[Walt Cakebread]

The tapes are very simple and self explanatory if you accept them for what they’re worth...

This alone should tell you enough about the evidentary value of the tapes.

There was no way in the world that some six clocks in the telephone room and the two clocks in the dispatching room were synchronized. They  could be as much as a minute or two apart.

Oops... so how does one determine the exact time?

There was one clock in the office that had a generally reliable time. It was on the back wall of the telephone room. The only trouble was that it was way back in the corner which you could hardly see, and nobody ever looked at it.

And still they maintain that the times on the transcripts are acurate. Go figure!

So, under no circumstance could you put any stock in the real world time or any continuity on time references by the belt because there were no time references on the belt; they were only spoken times, and those spoken times had no faithful validity...

Which basically destroys the claim that the transcript times are acurate....

Mr Collins was prevaricating and painting himself into a corner and you supplied the paint, Martin....  Well done!

[John Iacoletti]

HUH??.... I most certainly am NOT making such a claim...  I've said repeatedly that after midnight 11/22/63, they sent the 3 X 5 card, which allegedly contained a palm print ( item #14 on the original evidence list) along with the other evidence on the list, to the FBI Crime Lab in Washington DC.

Yes you are.  If that card was sent with the other evidence on 11/22, then Day and Drain both lied about Drain not getting it that night, and Latona lied about not receiving it until 11/29.  The question is, why would they deny that the card was with the other evidence when it would serve no purpose to do so?

At that time ( midnight 11/22/63 ) we have no way of knowing if there was any print on that 3 X 5 card.    All we know is that whatever it was,  it had been lifted "off underside gun barrell near end of foregrip c 2766"   Later they liars produced a PHOTOGRAPH that they claimed was a photo of the lift.

You still haven't demonstrated how you even know that it's a 3x5 card...

[Charles Collins]

The transcripts were made from tapes, not from the original dictabelt discs.  The fact that the transcripts say "tape splice" in several spots means that the tapes were edited in some fashion.

So what Bowles is saying here is that it's meaningless that the dispatcher said "1:16" shortly before the citizen reported the shooting of the police officer.

The transcripts were made from tapes, not from the original dictabelt discs.  The fact that the transcripts say "tape splice" in several spots means that the tapes were edited in some fashion.

That's not how I interpret the following words from him:

..."I just made a recording of it with a nice reel to reel tape recorder which the FBI furnished to me and then set about from the original tapes and the original Gray audiograph disks to transcribe the tapes using the originals because, according to the law, that’s the best evidence. The tapes were in as good a condition as you would expect considering the fact that the FBI had tried to transcribe them using a single stylus"...

"On channel 1 we used a two phase dictaphone voice recording. I stress voice recording because it was not a precision quality; it was a stenographic type recording. You had a comparatively dull stylus making a simple impression on a thin celluloid belt." (Apparently he uses tape interchangeably with belt.)

So what Bowles is saying here is that it's meaningless that the dispatcher said "1:16" shortly before the citizen reported the shooting of the police officer.

No, not meaningless, just inexact.  "A good close proximity is the best I could do—no one can do better."

[Martin Weidmann]

The transcripts were made from tapes, not from the original dictabelt discs.  The fact that the transcripts say "tape splice" in several spots means that the tapes were edited in some fashion.

That's not how I interpret the following words from him:

..."I just made a recording of it with a nice reel to reel tape recorder which the FBI furnished to me and then set about from the original tapes and the original Gray audiograph disks to transcribe the tapes using the originals because, according to the law, that’s the best evidence. The tapes were in as good a condition as you would expect considering the fact that the FBI had tried to transcribe them using a single stylus"...

"On channel 1 we used a two phase dictaphone voice recording. I stress voice recording because it was not a precision quality; it was a stenographic type recording. You had a comparatively dull stylus making a simple impression on a thin celluloid belt." (Apparently he uses tape interchangeably with belt.)

He's talking about "original Gray audiograph disks" and "dictaphone voice recording" 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_Audograph

The machines that actually recorded the radio transmissions were a, voice activated, Gray audiograph which produces disks and a dictaphone. All reel to reel tapes were recorded later from those disks.

How do you interpret it?

So what Bowles is saying here is that it's meaningless that the dispatcher said "1:16" shortly before the citizen reported the shooting of the police officer.

No, not meaningless, just inexact.  "A good close proximity is the best I could do—no one can do better."

If something is inexact, how can it not be meaningless for an investigation?