If I had planned the conspiracy ...

[Martin Weidmann]

For what it's worth....

In their Supplemental Offence Report,  Davenport and Bardin wrote that "at 3:30 Captain Fritz of the Homicide Bureau advised Officers  to take the 38 S &W snubnose (Ser # 510210) that was used in the shooting and 3 live 38 shells and [we] also turned these over to Capt Doughty of the ID bureau" 

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338163/m1/1/

Gerald Hill wrote a duties and actions report for Curry on 5 Dec 1963. In this account, Hill, Carroll, and McDonald turn the pistol over to Homicide detective TL Baker at "approximately 3:15 PM." See here: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337502/m1/3/?q=gerald%20hill

From this, it would appear that Hill gave the pistol to the Homicide squad ~3:15PM, and they in turn handed it to Davenport at ~3:30PM, tasking the latter to turn the gun over to the ID Bureau. Given this, there's no discrepancy.

In their Supplemental Offence Report,  Davenport and Bardin wrote that "at 3:30 Captain Fritz of the Homicide Bureau advised Officers  to take the 38 S &W snubnose (Ser # 510210) that was used in the shooting and 3 live 38 shells and [we] also turned these over to Capt Doughty of the ID bureau" 

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338163/m1/1/

This seems to be correct as it matches the receipt issued by the evidence room, which does in fact name Capt. Doughty as one of the officers that received the items.

Gerald Hill wrote a duties and actions report for Curry on 5 Dec 1963. In this account, Hill, Carroll, and McDonald turn the pistol over to Homicide detective TL Baker at "approximately 3:15 PM." See here: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337502/m1/3/?q=gerald%20hill

From this, it would appear that Hill gave the pistol to the Homicide squad ~3:15PM, and they in turn handed it to Davenport at ~3:30PM, tasking the latter to turn the gun over to the ID Bureau. Given this, there's no discrepancy.

This does indeed clear up the discrepancy, even though it doesn't match what Hill said in his WC testimony.

Thanks Mitch 

This is a perfect example of how a discussion between men who don't always agree should be. 

[John Mytton]

For what it's worth....

In their Supplemental Offence Report,  Davenport and Bardin wrote that "at 3:30 Captain Fritz of the Homicide Bureau advised Officers  to take the 38 S &W snubnose (Ser # 510210) that was used in the shooting and 3 live 38 shells and [we] also turned these over to Capt Doughty of the ID bureau" 

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338163/m1/1/

Gerald Hill wrote a duties and actions report for Curry on 5 Dec 1963. In this account, Hill, Carroll, and McDonald turn the pistol over to Homicide detective TL Baker at "approximately 3:15 PM." See here: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337502/m1/3/?q=gerald%20hill

From this, it would appear that Hill gave the pistol to the Homicide squad ~3:15PM, and they in turn handed it to Davenport at ~3:30PM, tasking the latter to turn the gun over to the ID Bureau. Given this, there's no discrepancy.

Thanks Mitch,

This is how an argument should be presented with actual links to the primary evidence instead of the usual "trust me I'm a pretend defence attorney", it's like trusting someone to state the actual times but on closer inspection after my own research I quickly realized that one of the disputed times came from a months later recollection which quite specifically specified "approximately", so again thanks Mitch for doing the required research which seems to be a bit too much for members who at the merest face value want to cry foul for the slimmest of dishonest reasons.

This whole episode reminds me of Earlene Roberts who says that Oswald came in to the rooming house at around 1PM and stayed for "not over 3 or 4 minutes-just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it.", which somehow equates to meaning that Oswald left at precisely 1:04PM. And some members even try to dispute the whole getting and zipping up the jacket because Roberts was blind in one eye, but in the real World she could see well enough to do her job and watch television, I just guess some members are truly pathetic!

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Thanks Mitch,

This is how an argument should be presented with actual links to the primary evidence instead of the usual "trust me I'm a pretend defence attorney", it's like trusting someone to state the actual times but on closer inspection after my own research I quickly realized that one of the disputed times came from a months later recollection which quite specifically specified "approximately", so again thanks Mitch for doing the required research which seems to be a bit too much for members who at the merest face value want to cry foul for the slimmest of dishonest reasons.

This whole episode reminds me of Earlene Roberts who says that Oswald came in to the rooming house at around 1PM and stayed for "not over 3 or 4 minutes-just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it.", which somehow equates to meaning that Oswald left at precisely 1:04PM. And some members even try to dispute the whole getting and zipping up the jacket because Roberts was blind in one eye, but in the real World she could see well enough to do her job and watch television, I just guess some members are truly pathetic!

JohnM

This is how an argument should be presented with actual links to the primary evidence

Learn from it, because the last person on this forum to ever do something like this is you!

Mitch (with whom I seldom agree) provided an answer and I instantly accepted it, as it cleared up the obvious discrepancy.

And that, dear John, colors you as the pathetic clown you really are!

[John Mytton]

Mitch (with whom I seldom agree) provided an answer and I instantly accepted it, as it cleared up the obvious discrepancy.

And that, dear John, colors you as the pathetic clown you really are!

 

Hilarious, it's amazing how humble you are when yet again you are exposed for your dishonesty. But as I previously said, keep digging because watching an Narcissistic Insulting Bully make a fool of himself for the umpteenth time brings me joy.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Hilarious, it's amazing how humble you are when yet again you are exposed for your dishonesty. But as I previously said, keep digging because watching an Narcissistic Insulting Bully make a fool of himself for the umpteenth time brings me joy.

JohnM

Hilarious, it's amazing how humble you are when yet again you are exposed for your dishonesty.

Thank you for once again demonstrating what a nasty piece of work you really are.

All I did was ask a question and when I got an answer I accepted it. That's what grown up reasonable people do!

But you wouldn't understand the first thing about that....

[John Mytton]

Hilarious, it's amazing how humble you are when yet again you are exposed for your dishonesty.

Thank you for once again demonstrating what a nasty piece of work you really are.

All I did was ask a question and when I got an answer I accepted it. That's what grown up reasonable people do!

But you wouldn't understand the first thing about that....

All I did was ask a question and when I got an answer I accepted it.

No, you presented your poorly researched evidence as the Gospel Truth and when I did a little digging and discovered a glaring anomaly you doubled down on insulting me.

That's what grown up reasonable people do!

Well that's new, so from now on can the Forum expect you to put on your Big Boy pants and perhaps stop with the insults and start acting like a "grown up"?

But you wouldn't understand the first thing about that....

All I do is present and debate the evidence, whereas you just hurl insults.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

No, you presented your poorly researched evidence as the Gospel Truth and when I did a little digging and discovered a glaring anomaly you doubled down on insulting me.

Well that's new, so from now on can the Forum expect you to put on your Big Boy pants and perhaps stop with the insults and start acting like a "grown up"?

All I do is present and debate the evidence, whereas you just hurl insults.

JohnM

All I do is present and debate the evidence

Yeah, keep telling yourself this and maybe 1 person (i.e. you) will believe it

[John Mytton]

All I do is present and debate the evidence

Yeah, keep telling yourself this and maybe 1 person (i.e. you) will believe it

It's not a question of belief because my posting history is an open book, for instance just in the last few days I have presented many pieces of evidence;

1. Testimony from Gerald Hill
2. Testimony from Fritz.
3. Testimony from Hosty
4. Testimony from Bookout
5. Testimony from Earlene Roberts
6. Commission Exhibit 143: Oswald's revolver.
7. Oswald's revolver receipt.
8. The FBI lift of Oswald's rifle
9. The Day first day lift of Oswald's rifle.
10. HSCA exhibit confirming the gouge on Oswald's rifle
11. An Oswald backyard photo
12. Commission Exhibit 2695, DTH Kennedy virtually invites Cuban Coup article
13. Commission Exhibit 2966A 2966B Oswald's Hands off Cuba leaflets
14. 2 photos of Oswald's personal Marxist and ETC collection
15. Kennedy wearing a back brace
16. two frames of the Zapruder film showing Kennedy's head movement at time of impact
17. various photos showing examples of Jet Effect in the Jet Effect thread
18. A high contrast photo of Z313 showing matter being expelled forward

Whereas Martin, you in the same time have posted virtually nothing besides insults, so before you repeat your above misrepresentation, please think clearly!

JohnM