Lack Of Damage To CE-399

[Martin Weidmann]

In reading "Six Seconds in Dallas," I suspect that Thompson was "leading" the witness Sam Holland. In a dramatic apogee worthy of Gordon Ramsey's "24 Hours to Hell and Back", Thompson wrote (p 127-29, Geis):

    "When we took Holland to the assassination site and asked him to
     stand in the position where he found the curious footprints and saw
     the smoke, his head appears in the exact position defined by this
     shape. Earlier, we had shown him the Moorman photo in a
     particularly clear print. He looked at the photo for a long time,
     and then announced:

        Well, now you have something there ... I didn't see this before.
        [Almost twenty seconds pass, then Holland continues:] Well do
        you know I think that you're looking right down at the barrel of
        that gun right now!

And that's not where Holland saw the "smoke" anyway. He saw it in a line-of-sight to the retaining wall.



The day before the interview with Holland, Thompson interviewed Marilyn Sitzman who stood about 150 ft closer to the fence corner than was Holland. Sitzman was also elevated and could see down towards the fence line and into the parking lot. She had no recollection of a figure standing there. Thompson therefore ignored the better witness.

She had no recollection of a figure standing there. Thompson therefore ignored the better witness.

Since when is somebody who has no recollection of something "the better witness"?

[Andrew Mason]

A little bit less deceptive please, counselor...?..

Why does that principle not apply to the statements of Agent Todd who positively identified CE399 as the bullet that was handed to him by Agent Rowley who, at the time, - without being able to positively identify the bullet itself - said it had been handed to him by Agent Johnson who, in turn, - without being able to positively identify the bullet itself - said it had been given to him by O.P. Wright. who - without being able to positively identify the bullet itself - said it had been given to him by Darrell Thomlinson, who could not positively identify the bullet itself.  What reliable knowledge do you have that any of those people were lying?

There, I fixed it for you.

And to answer your question; nobody was lying. Tomlinson gave a bullet to Wright, who in turn gave it to Johnson, who in turn gave it to Rowley, who in turn gave it Todd, but none of the first four men could identify the bullet now in evidence as CE399 as the one they had passed on.

It is not as if Rowley said there were other bullets that he had given to Todd that were given to him by Johnson.  So by Todd verifying that CE399 was the one that Rowley gave to him, Todd is verifying that it is the same bullet that Johnson had given to Rowley - unless Rowley was lying and had deliberately substituted CE399 for the actual bullet. 

And, by similar reasoning, that verifies that CE399 was the bullet given to Johnson by OP Wright - unless Johnson is lying and had deliberately substituted CE399 for the actual bullet. And that verifies that CE399 was the bullet given to OP Wright by Tomlinson unless Wright is lying and had deliberately substituted CE399 for the actual bullet. And that verifies that CE399 was the bullet discovered by Tomlinson, unless Tomlinson is lying and had deliberately fabricated the story of CE399 being found at Parkland.  So the only way CE399 was not the bullet found by Tomlinson is if someone was lying AND had substituted CE399 for another bullet.

So, again, what reliable knowledge do you have that any of those people were lying?

[Martin Weidmann]

It is not as if Rowley said there were other bullets that he had given to Todd that were given to him by Johnson.  So by Todd verifying that CE399 was the one that Rowley gave to him, Todd is verifying that it is the same bullet that Johnson had given to Rowley - unless Rowley was lying and had deliberately substituted CE399 for the actual bullet. 

And, by similar reasoning, that verifies that CE399 was the bullet given to Johnson by OP Wright - unless Johnson is lying and had deliberately substituted CE399 for the actual bullet. And that verifies that CE399 was the bullet given to OP Wright by Tomlinson unless Wright is lying and had deliberately substituted CE399 for the actual bullet. And that verifies that CE399 was the bullet discovered by Tomlinson, unless Tomlinson is lying and had deliberately fabricated the story of CE399 being found at Parkland.  So the only way CE399 was not the bullet found by Tomlinson is if someone was lying AND had substituted CE399 for another bullet.

So, again, what reliable knowledge do you have that any of those people were lying?

So by Todd verifying that CE399 was the one that Rowley gave to him, Todd is verifying that it is the same bullet that Johnson had given to Rowley 

As Todd had no way of knowing which bullet Rowley received from Johnson, there is no way that Todd could even come close to verifying anything beyond that CE399 is the bullet he received from Rowley. Alternatively, Rowley, being unable to positively identify the bullet wasn't even able to confirm that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was in fact the bullet he had given to Todd.

What you call "similar reasoning" is nothing more than speculation. All we can say with any kind of certainty is that the evidentiary life of the bullet now known as CE399 started with Todd at the FBI lab in Washington.

[Andrew Mason]

So by Todd verifying that CE399 was the one that Rowley gave to him, Todd is verifying that it is the same bullet that Johnson had given to Rowley 

As Todd had no way of knowing which bullet Rowley received from Johnson, there is no way that Todd could even come close to verifying anything beyond that CE399 is the bullet he received from Rowley.

If Johnson gave Rowley only one bullet and Rowley says he passed the bullet that he received from Johnson to Todd, how does Todd's verification NOT verify that the bullet that Rowley received from Johnson was CE399 (unless Rowley was lying and substituted another bullet)? 

If you disagree, give us a scenario in which CE399 is NOT the bullet that Johnson gave to Rowley.

[Martin Weidmann]

If Johnson gave Rowley only one bullet and Rowley says he passed the bullet that he received from Johnson to Todd, how does Todd's verification NOT verify that the bullet that Rowley received from Johnson was CE399 (unless Rowley was lying and substituted another bullet)?

Because it can not be ruled out that, if anybody substituted the bullet, it was Todd himself.

[Walt Cakebread]

In reading "Six Seconds in Dallas," I suspect that Thompson was "leading" the witness Sam Holland. In a dramatic apogee worthy of Gordon Ramsey's "24 Hours to Hell and Back", Thompson wrote (p 127-29, Geis):

    "When we took Holland to the assassination site and asked him to
     stand in the position where he found the curious footprints and saw
     the smoke, his head appears in the exact position defined by this
     shape. Earlier, we had shown him the Moorman photo in a
     particularly clear print. He looked at the photo for a long time,
     and then announced:

        Well, now you have something there ... I didn't see this before.
        [Almost twenty seconds pass, then Holland continues:] Well do
        you know I think that you're looking right down at the barrel of
        that gun right now!

And that's not where Holland saw the "smoke" anyway. He saw it in a line-of-sight to the retaining wall.



The day before the interview with Holland, Thompson interviewed Marilyn Sitzman who stood about 150 ft closer to the fence corner than was Holland. Sitzman was also elevated and could see down towards the fence line and into the parking lot. She had no recollection of a figure standing there. Thompson therefore ignored the better witness.

Sam Holland speaks.....

https://jfkfacts.org/eyewitness-in-dealey-plaza/

[Andrew Mason]

Because it can not be ruled out that, if anybody substituted the bullet, it was Todd himself.

So you are saying that it could be that Todd was lying.  Which proves my point that the only alternative to CE399 being the bullet found by Tomlinson is one in which someone was lying. 

So, again, what reliable knowledge do you have that any of those people were lying?

[Martin Weidmann]

So you are saying that it could be that Todd was lying.  Which proves my point that the only alternative to CE399 being the bullet found by Tomlinson is one in which someone was lying. 

So, again, what reliable knowledge do you have that any of those people were lying?

Your question, to which I responded, was; "how does Todd's verification NOT verify that the bullet that Rowley received from Johnson was CE399 (unless Rowley was lying and substituted another bullet)?"

Do you now agree that Todd's verification does not automatically verify anything other than that he received a bullet from Rowley? 

As for the "reliable knowledge" question, there are two sides to that coin;

Do you have reliable knowledge that nobody was lying?

Can a circumstantial case of possible evidence tampering be made? Yes...IMO it can.

Will that case ever be conclusive? Based on the evidence now available, the honest answer would be no, but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth...