A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.

[Andrew Mason]

If you think there are 50 individual facts that point to Oswald being the killer of JFK, then name them.  As we saw in your last post, many of the things you listed weren't evidence of anything other than your own speculation.  And the rest are conclusions that aren't well supported by the actual evidence.  It's not a matter of the evidence not being accurate, it's a matter of your conclusions about the evidence not being justified.  For example you claimed that there is evidence that the C2766 rifle was fired on Nov 22, 1963 but provided no evidence to support this claim.  No conspiracy is necessary to point out that your argument is fallacious.

There are actually at least 52 points as pointed out by Vincent Bugliosi. 

When you argue, for example, that the C2766 did not belong to Oswald because the evidence is weak, you have to challenge at least half a dozen individual pieces of evidence that all point to Oswald, including the fact that he had the AJ Hidell ID card on his person when arrested, the evidence that it was mailed to A. Hidell to the post box that Oswald is connected to, that it arrived before the attempt on Gen. Walker, that it was identical to the rifle seen in the backyard photos, that it was found on the floor on which Oswald was last seen etc.  It is impossible that those facts just happened by chance to point to a totally innocent Oswald. If Oswald was innocent, there must have been an enormous conspiracy to frame him.

So, absent such a conspiracy, C2766 belonged to Oswald and C2766 fired CE399.  Either draw the obvious and only conclusion on that evidence or find evidence of the enormous conspiracy.  It is that simple. 

And that is just one point.  There are another 51 of those points.

[John Iacoletti]

There are actually at least 52 points as pointed out by Vincent Bugliosi. 

I said "evidence", not "points".

When you argue, for example, that the C2766 did not belong to Oswald because the evidence is weak

I'm saying that you haven't established through evidence that C2766 belonged to Oswald.

, you have to challenge at least half a dozen individual pieces of evidence that all point to Oswald,

But you don't have half a dozen individual pieces of evidence that C2766 belonged to Oswald.

including the fact that he had the AJ Hidell ID card on his person when arrested,

But did he?  What's your evidence for that?  Nobody is on record of ever mentioning the Hidell ID until after the Klein's order turned up.

the evidence that it was mailed to A. Hidell to the post box that Oswald is connected to, that it arrived before the attempt on Gen. Walker,

What are you talking about?  There's no evidence that any rifle was mailed to that PO Box or that it ever arrived there, or that it was picked up by Oswald or anyone else.

that it was identical to the rifle seen in the backyard photos,

Identical?  No evidence of that.

that it was found on the floor on which Oswald was last seen etc.

I already pointed out to you that this was not where Oswald was last seen.  What's the point of discussing anything with someone who ignores every response and just repeats the misinformation?

  It is impossible that those facts just happened by chance to point to a totally innocent Oswald.

You're getting ahead of yourself.  How do any of these "facts" show that Oswald killed somebody?

So, absent such a conspiracy, C2766 belonged to Oswald and C2766 fired CE399.

Ok, since you have been unable to show that C2766 belonged to Oswald, let's see your evidence that CE 399 had anything to do with the assassination.

[Andrew Mason]

I said "evidence", not "points"
I'm saying that you haven't established through evidence that C2766 belonged to Oswald.

Well, you said "facts" and I said "facts".  A fact may be established by several pieces of evidence.  If you want to show that a conclusion of fact should not be drawn, you have to show that many if not all of those pieces of evidence are wrong. 

Bugliosi refers to such things as: Oswald?s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was the murder weapon;  Oswald was the only employee at the Book Depository Building who fled the building after the assassination;  Forty-five minutes later, he shoots and kills Officer J. D. Tippit, Dallas Police Department; that murder bore the signature of a man in desperate flight from some awful deed; thirty minutes later at the Texas Theater he resists arrest, pulls a gun on the arresting officer; during his interrogation, Oswald told one provable lie after another, showing a consciousness of guilt.   Each of these facts are established by many pieces of evidence.

But you don't have half a dozen individual pieces of evidence that C2766 belonged to Oswald.

Yes I do.  I have the BY photos, the Klein's purchase records and shipping records; the post office records, the evidence of Marina; the green fibres in the paper bag, his palm prints on the stock; the fact that no other MC rifle was ever found in Oswald's possessions.  And that requires more than just 7 pieces of evidence.  For example, there is a whole lot of evidence just to establish that the BY photos were taken by Marina and were not altered. And that is not all.  You also have the evidence that he fired his MC at Gen. Walker and the bullets from Walker's home are consistent with the riflings on bullets fired by C2766.   All this evidence together establishes that C2766 belonged to Oswald.  One has to ask: how does all of this evidence fit together so consistently if they are all wrong?  And that is just one point.

But did he?  What's your evidence for that?  Nobody is on record of ever mentioning the Hidell ID until after the Klein's order turned up.

What are you talking about?  There's no evidence that any rifle was mailed to that PO Box or that it ever arrived there, or that it was picked up by Oswald or anyone else.

Identical?  No evidence of that.

Sure there is.  The order was in an envelope from A. Hidell with a return address of Box 2915 Dallas Texas and the envelope was stamped by Kleins stating that the order was filled and shipped to that address.  It was done in the ordinary course of business for Kleins. Business records are admissible for the purpose of establishing those facts. Do you think that in the ordinary course of business someone at Klein's is going to remember actually putting postage on that parcel and putting it in the mail?

You're getting ahead of yourself.  How do any of these "facts" show that Oswald killed somebody?

Ok, since you have been unable to show that C2766 belonged to Oswald, let's see your evidence that CE 399 had anything to do with the assassination.

The evidence is that it was found on Connally's stretcher. In any event, it was found by a Parkland nurse.  So it was either part of the assassination or part of a huge conspiracy. Unless you have evidence of the conspiracy, the evidence that it was fired by c2766 leads inexorably to the conclusion that it fired by C2766 as one of the three shots that were made during the assassination.

[John Iacoletti]

Well, you said "facts" and I said "facts".  A fact may be established by several pieces of evidence.  If you want to show that a conclusion of fact should not be drawn, you have to show that many if not all of those pieces of evidence are wrong.

No, all I have to do is show that the conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the evidence.  It's a fact that Oswald left his wedding ring behind.  It's not a fact that he did so because he was planning to shoot the president.
 

Bugliosi refers to such things as: Oswald?s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was the murder weapon;

You're already off the rails when you say "Oswald?s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle".  That's an assumption, not a fact.

  Oswald was the only employee at the Book Depository Building who fled the building after the assassination;

Define "fled".  That's a value judgment, not a fact.  He certainly left and didn't return, which is true for other employees as well.

  Forty-five minutes later, he shoots and kills Officer J. D. Tippit, Dallas Police Department;

Again, you're assuming that he killed somebody else to demonstrate that he killed JFK.  That doesn't follow.

that murder bore the signature of a man in desperate flight from some awful deed;

"bore the signature"?  What on earth does that mean?  You could also say that Tippit's murder "bore the signature" of a professional hit man -- rapid shooting from the hip.

thirty minutes later at the Texas Theater he resists arrest,

They had no grounds for arrest, nor did they tell him he was under arrest, hence he could not by definition have "resisted arrest".  Also the arrest report box for "resisted" was not even checked.

pulls a gun on the arresting officer;

That's flat out false.  Even by McDonald's account, he merely "went for it".  Whatever that means.  What does this have to do with Kennedy anyway?

during his interrogation, Oswald told one provable lie after another,

Really?  Name them.  Along with your proof that they are lies.

   Each of these facts are established by many pieces of evidence.Yes I do.  I have the BY photos,

How do the backyard photos tell you who killed Kennedy?

the Klein's purchase records and shipping records;

There are no shipping records.  How do  Klein's purchase records tell you who killed Kennedy?

the post office records,

What post office records?

the evidence of Marina;

What evidence of Marina?

the green fibres in the paper bag,

What do these fibers that can't even be tied to any specific item tell you about who killed Kennedy?

his palm prints on the stock;

You're confused.  There were no discernible prints on any stock.

the fact that no other MC rifle was ever found in Oswald's possessions.

How does that fact tell you who killed Kennedy?  The clothing in the backyard photos were never found either.  Does that mean he never had them?

  And that requires more than just 7 pieces of evidence.  For example, there is a whole lot of evidence just to establish that the BY photos were taken by Marina and were not altered.

You mean the same Marina who said she took one photo with a camera that you hold up to your face?  No wait, I guess it was 2 photos.  No, three.

But lets say that Marina took all the photos and they were not altered.  How does that tell you who killed Kennedy?

And that is not all.  You also have the evidence that he fired his MC at Gen. Walker

What is your evidence that Oswald fired an MC at Gen. Walker?

and the bullets from Walker's home are consistent with the riflings on bullets fired by C2766.

What bullets?  You mean the mutilated steel-jacketed bullet that the police said they found there?

   All this evidence together establishes that C2766 belonged to Oswald.

Actually none of it establishes that C2766 belonged to Oswald.

  One has to ask: how does all of this evidence fit together so consistently if they are all wrong?

Who said they're all wrong?  I'm asking you how any of this demonstrates that Oswald killed Kennedy.

Sure there is.  The order was in an envelope from A. Hidell with a return address of Box 2915 Dallas Texas and the envelope was stamped by Kleins stating that the order was filled and shipped to that address.

It was?  Show me that stamped envelope.

  It was done in the ordinary course of business for Kleins. Business records are admissible for the purpose of establishing those facts.

What "business record" shows that a package ever went through the US mail to this address?  Klein's would have had to pay postage for this shipment, right?  Where is the record of that payment?

Do you think that in the ordinary course of business someone at Klein's is going to remember actually putting postage on that parcel and putting it in the mail?

How do you know it went through the mail then?

The evidence is that it was found on Connally's stretcher.

The guy who found it disagrees with you.

In any event, it was found by a Parkland nurse.

No it wasn't.  I don't think you're familiar with the evidence in this case very well at all.

  So it was either part of the assassination or part of a huge conspiracy.

How does that follow?  A bullet with a pointed tip was found on an unrelated stretcher at Parkland Hospital.  What reason do you have for assuming it was related to the assassination of JFK?  Why does it take a "huge conspiracy" for an unrelated bullet to be found at a hospital?

Unless you have evidence of the conspiracy, the evidence that it was fired by c2766 leads inexorably to the conclusion that it fired by C2766 as one of the three shots that were made during the assassination.

You don't actually know that any of the shots in Dealey Plaza were fired by C2766.  That's an assumption too.  Given that you can't demonstrate that CE399 was the bullet found on the stretcher or that CE399 ever went through Kennedy, Connally, or any human body at any time, your assumption that it was involved in the assassination is completely without merit.

[Andrew Mason]

False claim: fact. Get back when you understand "fact". You mean the bag in the evidence photos?

I mean the bag that LMR and Frazier both said they saw.  They both said they did not pay much attention to the details.  Frazier never said that the bag from the SN was not the same bag. He just thought there were some differences.  But when he says things like this it is not surprising that he could not identify the bag:

(2 H 229): "Mr. FRAZIER. Well, I say, you know like I say, I didn?t pay much attention to the package other than I knew he had it under his arm and I didn?t pay too much attention the way he was walking because I was walking along there looking at the railroad cars and watching the men on the diesel switch them cars and I didn?t pay too much attention on how he carried the package at all.
(2 H 239): "Mr. FRAZIER. Well, like I say, I didn?t notice that much about it as I didn?t see it. very much.
(2 H 239): "Mr. FRAZIER. Well, you know, like I was saying, when I glanced at it, but I say from what I saw I didn?t see very much of it, I say the bag wasn?t open or anything like it where you can see the contents.

And if you can figure out what Frazier meant by this exchange, be my guest:

(2 H 240): "Mr. BALL. The color of this bag, the colored bag, has not been treated. Take a look at it. Is that similar to the color of the bag you saw in the back seat of your car that morning?
Mr. FRAZIER. It would be, surely it could have been, and it couldn?t have been. Like I say, see, you know this color, either one of these colors, is very similar to the type of paper that. you can get out of a store or anything like that, and so I say it could have been and then it couldn?t have been.

You supposed wrong.

So what is the matter with their evidence (LMR and Frazier saying they saw Oswald with a long paper package)?

Good, that's not what I speculate.

Ok. So what do you speculate?  I prefer evidence.

Hearsay. Frazier's claim uncorroborated.

It is not hearsay that Oswald said the package contained curtain rods.  It is actual evidence that he said it.  If the purpose of presenting that evidence was to prove that the package contained actual curtain rods, it would be hearsay and inadmissible for that purpose. Somehow, I don't think the FBI wanted to use his statement to prove that the package contained curtain rods - unless perhaps Oswald really meant curtain rods in the sense of a certain WWI vintage 40" Italian metal/wood variety that could also be used for shooting bullets. Frazier's claim that Oswald told him it was curtain rods is not corroborated by independent evidence, but if you are suggesting that he was lying because he was under pressure from the police or FBI, that suggestion is rebutted by his previous statement to LMR that Oswald told him it was curtain rods that morning, before anything had happened.  So the question is: why would he lie about it to his sister?

Your IQ in the two digit range? LHO was arrested. Who supplied the rifle? If LHO didn't bring the rifle to work after his visit to Irving who might have supplied that rifle? However, if LHO brought a long package with him in the car...

I guess it must be because I can't figure out what you are getting at. Who are you suggesting supplied the rifle? And how did they get it to the TSBD and how did they get the only rifle that could be tied to Oswald, which happened to be one that was purchased and shipped 8 months earlier?

[John Iacoletti]

Frazier never said that the bag from the SN was not the same bag.

Yes he did.

Ok. So what do you speculate?  I prefer evidence.

No you don't.  You're just speculating that the bag Frazier saw is CE 142.

Frazier's claim that Oswald told him it was curtain rods is not corroborated by independent evidence, but if you are suggesting that he was lying because he was under pressure from the police or FBI, that suggestion is rebutted by his previous statement to LMR that Oswald told him it was curtain rods that morning, before anything had happened.  So the question is: why would he lie about it to his sister?

Does anyone else find this story the slightest bit plausible?

Mr. BALL. Well, did you mention to Wesley that night or did you ask Wesley that night how Lee happened to come home on Thursday?
Mrs. RANDLE. I might have asked him.
Mr. BALL. Do you remember anything about curtain rods?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes.
Mr. BALL. What do you remember about that?
Mrs. RANDLE. He had told Wesley--
Mr. BALL. Tell me what Wesley told you.
Mrs. RANDLE. What Wesley told me. That Lee had rode home with him to get some curtain rods from Mrs. Paine to fix up his apartment.
Mr. BALL. When did Wesley tell you that?
Mrs. RANDLE. Well, that afternoon I suppose I would have had to ask him, he wouldn't have just told me.
Mr. BALL. You mean that night?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. After he came home?
Mrs. RANDLE. I was on my way to the store. So I probably asked him when I got back what he was doing riding home with him on Thursday afternoon.
Mr. BALL. You think that was the time that Wesley told you-
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir; after I got back home.
Mr. BALL. That Lee had come home to get some curtain rods?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, I am sure he told me that.

Why would she have wanted to know the specific reason Lee was with him on Thursday?  And why is she waffling so much about it?

[Andrew Mason]

No, all I have to do is show that the conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the evidence.  It's a fact that Oswald left his wedding ring behind.  It's not a fact that he did so because he was planning to shoot the president.
 
You're already off the rails when you say "Oswald?s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle".  That's an assumption, not a fact.

Define "fled".  That's a value judgment, not a fact.  He certainly left and didn't return, which is true for other employees as well.

Again, you're assuming that he killed somebody else to demonstrate that he killed JFK.  That doesn't follow.

"bore the signature"?  What on earth does that mean?  You could also say that Tippit's murder "bore the signature" of a professional hit man -- rapid shooting from the hip.

They had no grounds for arrest, nor did they tell him he was under arrest, hence he could not by definition have "resisted arrest".  Also the arrest report box for "resisted" was not even checked.

That's flat out false.  Even by McDonald's account, he merely "went for it".  Whatever that means.  What does this have to do with Kennedy anyway?

Really?  Name them.  Along with your proof that they are lies.

How do the backyard photos tell you who killed Kennedy?

There are no shipping records.  How do  Klein's purchase records tell you who killed Kennedy?

What post office records?

What evidence of Marina?

What do these fibers that can't even be tied to any specific item tell you about who killed Kennedy?

You're confused.  There were no discernible prints on any stock.

How does that fact tell you who killed Kennedy?  The clothing in the backyard photos were never found either.  Does that mean he never had them?

You mean the same Marina who said she took one photo with a camera that you hold up to your face?  No wait, I guess it was 2 photos.  No, three.

But lets say that Marina took all the photos and they were not altered.  How does that tell you who killed Kennedy?

What is your evidence that Oswald fired an MC at Gen. Walker?

What bullets?  You mean the mutilated steel-jacketed bullet that the police said they found there?

Actually none of it establishes that C2766 belonged to Oswald.

Who said they're all wrong?  I'm asking you how any of this demonstrates that Oswald killed Kennedy.

None of it does individually, just like one piece of 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle doesn't give you the picture. But altogether they establish a crystal clear portrait of Oswald pressing the trigger of the MC at JFK. Maybe there are a few pixels missing, but that picture still is unmistakeably Oswald.

It was?  Show me that stamped envelope.

Here it is: http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo2/jfk4/4p332f504.gif

What "business record" shows that a package ever went through the US mail to this address?  Klein's would have had to pay postage for this shipment, right?  Where is the record of that payment? How do you know it went through the mail then?

It is established by the evidence from Kleins of their system for processing orders.  According to that system, mail orders were processed and the ordered item(s) were shipped by mail to the address stated on the order.   The evidence of the order and Kleins' stamp on it (showing the order was processed in the normal course) establishes that it went through that process. We also know that the package was shipped because it arrived at the Dallas post office and was picked up 5 days later.   Are you serious about this or just making up arguments for the sake of being argumentative?

How does that follow?  A bullet with a pointed tip was found on an unrelated stretcher at Parkland Hospital.  What reason do you have for assuming it was related to the assassination of JFK?  Why does it take a "huge conspiracy" for an unrelated bullet to be found at a hospital?

You seem to be overlooking that a rifle was found in the TSBD and CE399 was a bullet that was fired from that rifle. CE399 either ended up in the President's car that was shot and was discovered later on Connally's stretcher at Parkland or it was planted by a conspirator at Parkland (or flawlessly fabricated by persons connected with the investigation).  Unless it was planted or fabricated (please provide at least a scintilla of evidence of that) it had to have been fired during the assassination.

You don't actually know that any of the shots in Dealey Plaza were fired by C2766.  That's an assumption too.  Given that you can't demonstrate that CE399 was the bullet found on the stretcher or that CE399 ever went through Kennedy, Connally, or any human body at any time, your assumption that it was involved in the assassination is completely without merit.

You don't seem to want to apply common sense to objective facts.  The bullet CE399 was found in Parkland. It had been fired by C2766. What is your explanation as to how that could occur if it was not part of the assassination or if it was not planted as part of an elaborate conspiracy.  When I said "could occur" I mean in the real world, not some make-believe fantasy.

[John Iacoletti]

None of it does individually, just like one piece of 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle doesn't give you the picture. But altogether they establish a crystal clear portrait of Oswald pressing the trigger on the MC. Maybe there are a few pixels missing, but that picture still is unmistakeably Oswald.

So you keep claiming.  But if none of the jigsaw pieces fit then you get no picture at all.

It is established by the evidence from Kleins that their system for processing orders.  According to that system, mail orders were processed and the ordered item(s) were shipped to the address stated on the order by mail.

The "system" (at least as expressed by the VP who never actually performed any of the steps in "the system") said nothing about how packages were delivered to the post office, postage paid, or any documentation of when this was done.  You would think the post office would also have a paper trail for packages that entered their system.  Otherwise, what would they do if a package was claimed lost or stolen?

   The evidence of the order and Kleins' stamp on it (showing the order was processed in the normal course)

I'm still trying to figure out what envelope or order you think has a Klein's stamp on it.  Please post a picture of it.

[edit:  I see you edited your post to add a link to a picture of CE 773.  Where do you see a "Klein's stamp showing that the order was processed" anywhere in that picture?  I don't think you really understand what you are looking at.]

We also know that the package was shipped because it arrived at the Dallas post office and was picked up 5 days later.

We do?  Do you have anything at all that demonstrates that this package arrived at the Dallas post office and was picked up 5 days later?  I seriously don't know where you're getting this stuff.

You seem to be overlooking that a rifle was found in the TSBD and a bullet that was fired from that rifle ended up in the car that was shot at.

I'm not overlooking anything.  How exactly do you know that "a bullet" (sic) ended up in the car, and how do you know it was fired from that rifle?  Be specific.  And let's say for the sake of argument that this is all completely true without any doubt.  How does that tell you who pulled the trigger?

You don't seem to want to apply common sense to objective facts.

"Common sense" is what people appeal to when they don't have real evidence.

  The bullet CE399 was found in Parkland.

That's a matter of dispute among the people who actually handled the bullet found at Parkland.

It had been fired by C2766. What is your explanation as to how that could occur if it was not part of the assassination

This is the beginning of a circular argument.  CE 399 was part of the assassination because it was fired by C2766, and C2766 was the murder weapon because it fired CE 399.

  When I said "could occur" I mean in the real world, not some make-believe fantasy.

Your entire narrative is a make-believe fantasy, disguised as "common sense".