Shells, rifle, SN... Who?

[Walt Cakebread]

Walt, how do you discern between your truth tellers and your “damn liars”?

I've been at this a looooong time.....

[John Iacoletti]

This particular exchange started with the reliability of statements by Weitzman, Boone, and Craig vis a' vis the rifle. It seems to have mysteriously and abruptly segued from to something about "a clip that wasn't there," which isn't really something that I've actually argued.

Yes it is. The fact remains that Weitzman originally described details (which is inconsistent with his later retraction which claimed he just saw it “at a glance”). Furthermore, he described details (like the clip) that are inconsistent with the Carcano rifle in evidence. Your excuse for how that happened is pure speculation.

[John Iacoletti]

Didn't say you claimed to. But I figure that if you want to push forwards with the idea that there were two rifles, showing that Boone or Weitzman claimed that the rifle in the Alyea film (or in any of the photos and/or film of the rifle) was not the rifle they found would be a good start.

At the moment, I don’t see any reason to assume that the rifle that they described in their original affidavits was the same rifle shown in the Alyea clip.

[John Iacoletti]

I've been at this a looooong time.....

So has Ralph Cinque.

[Walt Cakebread]

Yes it is. The fact remains that Weitzman originally described details (which is inconsistent with his later retraction which claimed he just saw it “at a glance”. Furthermore, he described details (like the clip) that are inconsistent with the Carcano rifle in evidence. Your excuse for how that happened is pure speculation.



Either you didn't understand, or just don't care to.  What I've said about Weitzman, Boone, and Craig is not speculation: Weitzman is on the record saying that was wrong. Boone is also on the record that he simply repeated what he heard someone else say. Craig's record is a bit different: he told mutually-contradictory stories that only damaged his credibility.

The fact remains that Weitzman originally described details

NO, he did NOT..... Weitzman was called back to examine a rifle later that afternoon for Detective CW Brown, and FBI agent A1bert Sawyers. and THAT's the rifle he described for Sawyers.  ORIGINALLY ( at the time Day picked the rifle up from the floor ) he simply said that the rifle looked like a 7.65 mauser.  He never DESCRIBED any details at that time. 

Here's what Weitzman told the WC lawyer....
Mr. WEITZMAN - After that, I returned to my office and I was called down to the city that afternoon later to make a statement on what I had seen.

[Walt Cakebread]

So has Ralph Cinque.

Did Ralph know that the initials DPD meant...  Damned poor Deceivers?

[John Iacoletti]

NO, he did NOT..... Weitzman was called back to examine a rifle later that afternoon for Detective CW Brown, and FBI agent A1bert Sawyers. and THAT's the rifle he described for Sawyers.  ORIGINALLY ( at the time Day picked the rifle up from the floor ) he simply said that the rifle looked like a 7.65 mauser.  He never DESCRIBED any details at that time. 

Well, that’s the story you made up. That’s not what Weitzman said in his affidavit.

[Walt Cakebread]

Well, that’s the story you made up. That’s not what Weitzman said in his affidavit.

No I didn't make up the testimony of Weitzman telling Ball that he went to the DPD later that afternoon for an interview.

Post the affidavit.....