DAVID VON PEIN SAID ALL THIS.
JON G. TIDD SAID:
Either Marina's husband ordered the alleged murder weapon or someone went to lengths to make it appear he did.
If someone did go to such lengths, what did that involve? Answer: [1] forging Oswald's handwriting, [2] fabricating Waldman Exhibit 7, [3] connecting Oswald to the alias Hidell. I have to say, all of this could have been accomplished pretty easily by individuals who were trained in such matters.
The back yard photos don't prove Oswald ordered any rifle. If the BYP are genuine, all they establish is that he possessed, when the BYP were taken, a rifle. A rifle, some argue, is different in certain ways from the alleged murder weapon.
I say reasonable doubt exists that Oswald ordered the alleged murder weapon.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And I say you are wrong and that absolutely not a SHRED of a doubt exists regarding Oswald's rifle purchase. You, Jon, are thumbing your nose at all of the corroborative items I mentioned earlier.
The evidence shows that Lee Oswald definitely DID order a rifle from Klein's, with Klein's then shipping Rifle C2766 to Oswald ("Hidell") on 3/20/63. That fact is proven in Waldman Exhibit 7. And that document was dug out of the Klein's files in Chicago on the morning of 11/23/63. So if the FBI (or whoever) was framing Oswald with a "fake" Waldman #7, they sure did take action in a hurry to start framing the sap named Lee.
Also....
Before someone brings this up, I'll pre-empt the defense's (CTers') argument about the missing bank stamps on the back of the $21.45 money order that Oswald mailed to Klein's (Commission Exhibit No. 788).....
That "No Stamps" argument, it seems to me, is a weak one. Why? Because we know (and can prove via Waldman 7 AND William Waldman's testimony) that Klein's in Chicago positively DID have that $21.45 money order in their hands on March 13, 1963 (the date stamped at the top of Waldman 7), because of the mere EXISTENCE of that document--Waldman Exhibit No. 7....
The above document provides the proof that two things occurred:
1.) Klein's received an order for a rifle from a certain "A. Hidell" in March of '63.
2.) In connection with the order from "A. Hidell" mentioned in #1, Klein's received PAYMENT VIA MONEY ORDER in the amount of $21.45 (the exact same amount that would be needed for a Klein's customer to purchase the Italian carbine with the scope via the Klein's magazine ads).
Number 2 above is confirmed on Waldman 7 via the written-in amount "$21.45" and the initials "M.O." that appear in the box marked "Total Amount Enclosed".
So we KNOW from Waldman 7 that Klein's did receive a mail-order coupon and a money order in the amount of 21 dollars and 45 cents from Oswald/Hidell and we know that Klein's acted upon receiving that order form by generating Waldman #7 and then mailing a rifle with the serial number C2766 on it to P.O. Box 2915 in Dallas (Oswald's box, of course) seven days later on March 20th.
So, in order for the "No Bank Stamps = The Money Order Is A Fake" argument to be an accurate one, we'd have to completely ignore the two relevant facts above. So I'd say to CTers --- Go gripe to First National Bank in Chicago about the lack of stamps on the money order. But don't blame Klein's. Because Klein's DID stamp the back of that money order. It's clearly stamped with a Klein's stamp -- "Pay to the order of The First National Bank of Chicago".
And: That money order has Lee Oswald's writing all over it. It's the HANDWRITING OF THE SO-CALLED "PATSY". That fact was determined by more than one handwriting expert.
So we know that Oswald had possession of that money order AND Klein's had possession of that money order. And even with the "No Stamps On The Back" argument that CTers love so much, I don't see how those conspiracists can UNDO those two basic facts about both Klein's and Oswald being in possession of the money order at some point in time.
Plus, as I also mentioned, there's William Waldman's Warren Commission testimony on this matter. Waldman confirmed that Waldman No. 7 was found amongst the Klein's files in Chicago and confirmed what all the various numbers and codes mean on Waldman No. 7.
So, am I supposed to believe that Bill Waldman was just flat-out LYING to the Warren Commission when he testified about these matters? Why would I believe that? Why SHOULD I believe such a thing? I don't think any conspiracy believer can give me a good enough reason to totally dismiss and toss in the gutter all of the CORROBORATIVE things I just talked about above, which are things that indicate, when added together, the undeniable fact that Lee Harvey Oswald purchased (and was shipped) Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle No. C2766 from Klein's Sporting Goods in 1963.
JON G. TIDD SAID:
DVP,
Would it have been easy to fabricate Waldman Exhibit 7? That's the only question.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But a lot more than just Waldman 7 would need to be fabricated in order for the CTers to be correct in this matter.
There needs to be a fake mail-order coupon to Klein's (with "fake" Oswald handprinting on it) [CE773].
There also needs to be a fake money order (with "fake" Oswald writing all over it).
And another part of CE773 (the envelope) needs to be fake too, because that envelope has Oswald's writing all over it too.
And then we'd have to have the Vice President of Klein's Sporting Goods, William J. Waldman, lying through his teeth in his WC testimony....
From 7 H 366...
DAVID BELIN -- "Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 and ask you to state if you know what this is."
WILLIAM WALDMAN -- "This is a copy made from our microfilm reader-printer of an order received by Klein's from a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box No. 2915, in Dallas, Texas. I want to clarify that this is not the order, itself, received from Mr. Hidell, but it's a form created by us internally from an order received from Mr. Hidell on a small coupon taken from an advertisement of ours in a magazine."
~~~~~~~~~~~
Please tell me, Jon Tidd, with Bill Waldman's testimony staring me in the face, why should I even begin to believe that Waldman Exhibit No. 7 might have been "fabricated"?
You really think William Waldman of Klein's was part of a plot to frame Oswald? Really??
Or do you think the FBI (or some other nefarious plotter/conspirator) somehow managed to plant the document known as Waldman 7 into the Klein's files prior to 4:30 AM on November 23, 1963?
If either of those above things did NOT happen, then the rifle order shown in Waldman 7 is legitimate.
Jon, your earlier observation is a very good (and accurate) one. You said:
"Either Marina's husband ordered the alleged murder weapon or someone went to lengths to make it appear he did."
Now, with those two options in mind, in conjunction with all of the things that I've been talking about in my posts in this thread (including the testimony of the Klein's Vice President)....which of those two options should a reasonable person embrace as the likely truth?
In my opinion, it's not a very difficult choice. In fact, it's not even close. Marina's husband purchased the rifle from Klein's.
~~Mark VII~~
KENNETH DREW SAID:
Two of the rifles found in the TSBD on 11/22 were Mausers...
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Great. Now we've got TWO make-believe "Mausers" (plural) being found in the Depository.
I guess the plotters were trying to frame that schnook Oswald by planting two rifles in the building. Did they figure Lee would be holding a gun in each hand simultaneously as he shot Kennedy?
KENNETH DREW SAID:
...and there certainly is no evidence of anyone anywhere ever ordering a Mauser associated with this case.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And yet your goofy patsy-framers arranged so that TWO Mausers would be left inside the Depository, eh?
Brilliant work!
KENNETH DREW SAID:
Everyone in the world that was watching television on 11/22 saw the Mauser being held up with the 7.65 Mauser stamped on it.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It might be nice if you stopped making things up, Ken.
FYI, here's the film showing the rifle in the TSBD. It's a Carcano. Not a Mauser....
KENNETH DREW SAID:
...one mauser without a scope was found on the roof of the TSBD.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Here's a 1993 audio clip with Tom Alyea (the cameraman who filmed the video posted above).
"There was no rifle on the roof. We looked everywhere." -- Tom Alyea; Nov. 20, 1993
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
Kenneth,
The number of already-debunked conspiracy myths and inaccuracies in this post of yours is staggering.
You totally disregard OSWALD'S handwriting on all of the various documents relating to the rifle purchase order.
You totally dismiss and/or disregard the two large bullet fragments (CE567 & 569) that were found in the front seat of the limo. And those fragments came from Rifle C2766 and no other gun (and that's the same gun with OSWALD'S prints on it and the same gun Klein's mailed to OSWALD'S post office box). I wonder how bullet fragments from the gun shipped to LHO's P.O. Box by Klein's managed to find their way into JFK's car? Any ideas on that?
You totally disregard OSWALD'S prints being on the C2766 rifle itself (the palmprint and the two fingerprints on the trigger guard; the latter were said to be OSWALD'S prints by Vincent Scalice in 1993).
You totally cast aside the fact that OSWALD had at least one card in his wallet on Nov. 22 bearing the name "Hidell" (with OSWALD'S picture on it, to boot). And yet you claim there's no evidence at all that Oswald used the name Hidell. Was this Selective Service card planted on him?
You totally ignore Volume 6 of the HSCA regarding the backyard photos, in which it is said that the gun Oswald is holding in the pictures is the C2766 rifle.
In short, you are dead wrong about----everything.
A perfect .000 batting average. Not even a foul tip. Congratulations.
ROBERT PRUDHOMME SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Robert,
Why are you trying to jam the word "Argentine" into Kenneth Drew's mouth and posts? Kenneth never said anything about his TWO make-believe "Mausers" specifically being "Argentine" Mausers. He just said Mauser, period.
And in most of the early November 22 reports on TV and radio, the commentators are calling the TSBD rifle a "German Mauser". (Except for a couple of references made by Ron Reiland and Bob Clark, who call it an "Argentine Mauser" at one point.)
It's true that one of the Dallas deputies who first saw the gun on the sixth floor on November 22, Seymour Weitzman, said in his affidavit on November 23 that the rifle was a "7.65 Mauser".
But Weitzman, of course, was incorrect about the type of gun it was, and he later said he was mistaken, as everyone can hear him say for themselves in the 1967 video presented below, which includes a statement by Weitzman that a large number of conspiracy theorists have completely ignored. And the CTers who haven't ignored it usually say that Weitzman was lying in that 1967 interview with CBS. The CTers can see the shiftiness in Weitzman's eyes. But the things a CTer can "see" don't usually have any relation to reality at all.
ROBERT PRUDHOMME SAID:
Dave,
You frustrate me almost as much as some of these other half-baked researchers. Do you ever actually read anything completely through?
Why do I call it an Argentine Mauser? For the simple fact that Seymour Weitzman identified the rifle in his statement as a "7.65 Mauser", and the only Mauser on the planet chambered for the 7.65 x 53mm cartridge just happens to be known worldwide as the "Argentine Mauser".
Do you get it now or do you want me to draw pictures for you?
P.S.,
Ron Reiland and Bob Clark were obviously the only ones who knew their butts from a hole in the ground when it came to rifles.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yeah, right. Reiland and Clark got some inaccurate info from either the newswires or from some other source, and that suddenly makes them world-class rifle experts, right? Too funny.
ROBERT PRUDHOMME SAID:
This is precisely what everyone on this forum cannot stand about you. Even when you are obviously wrong, you cannot admit it, and resort to childish taunts.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
So, Bob, you actually think Ron Reiland and Bob Clark examined the rifle THEMSELVES before reporting that an "Argentine" Mauser had been found in the Depository?
Neither one of those men examined the rifle for themselves. They were merely repeating the incorrect information they received from another source (or sources).
When the facts were finally confirmed via the DPD about what type of rifle it was (at approximately 6:16 PM CST on 11/22/63, as the CBS-TV footage shown below proves), everyone then began reporting it correctly as an "Italian" rifle. The words "Mannlicher-Carcano" weren't heard until the afternoon of November 23rd, however.
GARY MACK SAID:
Hi Dave,
You are quite correct about Reiland and Clark regarding the "Argentine" weapon. One has to read the AP and UPI wire reports - and I certainly have - to know that they distributed the misinformation early that afternoon. No individuals were named as sources, but they certainly weren't Reiland and Clark who were, respectively, in a news car on the way to Oak Cliff and [at] Parkland when the Carcano was found in the TSBD.
The only newsmen on the TSBD sixth floor when the rifle was found were Tom Alyea of WFAA and Kent Biffle of the Dallas Morning News. Weitzman identified the rifle as a Mauser while it was still on the floor and partially hidden by boxes. Later, when Lt. Day lifted it out for Capt. Fritz, Day found the rifle was an Italian weapon.
Unfortunately, either Alyea or Biffle had already gotten word out to their newsroom and the misidentification went around the world only to be repeated by Reiland and Clark before corrections appeared. Such problems are quite normal in the news profession to this day but inaccurate information gets corrected as soon as possible.
Gary
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Thank you, Gary. As always.
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
I'll also add this note....
WFAA's Ron Reiland refers to the Depository rifle as an "Argentine 6.5 Mauser" in this WFAA-TV audio clip from the afternoon of 11/22/63 (below). He doesn't call it a "7.65" weapon at all.
So much for Mr. Reiland being one of only two people in Dallas on November 22nd "who knew [his] butt from a hole in the ground when it came to rifles".
WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
The question shouldn't be whether Oswald ordered the rifle, the question should be if and when did he pick it up?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
So you seem to accept the fact that Oswald (using his "Hidell" alias) did order the rifle. But you can't envision a situation where Oswald could have merely gone to the post office, handed the clerk the slip he found in his P.O. Box, and then have the rifle package handed to him by the clerk??
That scenario is played out in hundreds or thousands of post offices all over the USA every day.
Plus, let me ask this simple, common-sense question.....
Why would somebody order something by mail-order and have it shipped to their post office box (whether it be a rifle or any other item) and then never go to the post office to pick up the merchandise? Why would anybody do that, Bill?
WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
How come not one Post Office employee recalls handing a rifle over the counter to Oswald and taking the balance of payment for the pistol?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You think a clerk should have instant recall regarding every package he/she gives out to every John Doe in Dallas---even after eight months have passed? Come on.
RELATED CAT FIGHT....
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Von Pein is the prime example of the Warren Commission Crazies or kamikazes. I mean, see there was never any evidence that Oswald ever picked up the handgun used to shoot Tippit at Railway Express. In fact, even more exculpatory, there was never any evidence that the FBI even went there. So how did the transaction happen?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
How about that for sterling logic and razor-sharp evaluation of the evidence against Oswald in the Tippit murder, folks? DiEugenio is much more concerned about the lack of a paper trail that would connect Lee Harvey Oswald to the Smith & Wesson revolver that killed Officer J.D. Tippit than he is about the PROVABLE FACT that Oswald had that very same gun ON HIM (as he was trying to shoot more policemen with it) when he was arrested inside the Texas Theater just a half-hour after Officer Tippit was gunned down.
There are no words left for me to use to describe how utterly preposterous DiEugenio's thinking is regarding this matter concerning Oswald's revolver and the Railway Express.
To DiEugenio, Oswald being caught red-handed with the murder weapon in his very own hands in the movie theater on 11/22/63 is of far less importance than being able to answer the following question --- When and where did Oswald first pick up the revolver after he purchased it by mail order in early 1963?
BRUCE FERNANDEZ SAID:
David, too many questions...
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Bruce,
IMO, there are no unanswered "questions" with respect to Oswald's rifle purchase at all. To the contrary, it couldn't BE any more crystal clear from the paperwork that Oswald ordered a rifle from Klein's and Klein's shipped Rifle C2766 to Oswald's PO Box. How much more straightforward can it get? And the testimony of the Klein's representative (Waldman) seals the deal on the transaction---that rifle WAS shipped by Klein's in Chicago to Oswald's post office box in Dallas.
The rifle transaction is, in a sense, ON FILM --- microfilm records.
Sure, anybody can pretend that all the documents are fakes. But that's just a cop-out. No CTer has ever proved that ANY of the documents connected with LHO's rifle have been manufactured. And yet many CTers seem to think they ALL were faked.
As they have done in so many other areas of the JFK murder case, conspiracy advocates have invented any number of flimsy reasons to disregard the perfectly solid evidence that proves Oswald ordered the rifle and that Oswald (aka Hidell) was shipped the eventual Kennedy murder weapon by Klein's.
In addition, I think one of the silliest and dumbest and lamest of all the theories put forth over the years by CTers is the throry that has a group of unknown plotters creating all of the rifle documents from whole cloth in order to have what looks like a solid trail for the rifle purchase. A much much better "CTer theory" would be to just accept what is obviously the truth about Oswald ordering and possessing the C2766 rifle --- and then the CTers can pretend that the plotters went about the much easier task of framing Oswald with his own rifle, versus having the conspirators having the need to invent the rifle trail from the ground up themselves.
But that's what usually happens when CTers go down these silly paths to conspiracy --- they end up looking mighty foolish when the truth (and the paperwork and the testimony of William Waldman) is stacked up alongside the weak-sister "Everything's Phony" excuse that is always propped up by the conspiracy believers.
MARK KNIGHT SAID:
So where are those microfilm records TODAY? Can you produce them? Can you tell us where in the National Archives they might be found?
Because if that microfilm CANNOT be found today...then its evidentiary value is greatly diminished.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Mark,
The WC exhibits known as Waldman 7 and CE788 and CE773 are photographic copies made from the original Klein's microfilmed records. That's practically the same thing as having the original microfilms. Although for handwriting anaylsis, it is always better to have an "original". But that argument certainly doesn't apply to Waldman #7, which has no "Oswald" writing on it at all. So that excuse won't work for CTers regarding the crucial document known as Waldman Exhibit No. 7.
Plus there is the testimony of Bill Waldman, who verified that what we see in Waldman #7 is a copy of the original.
Those things don't meet your requirements for "proof", Mark? You MUST see the "originals" in order to believe the documents are authentic, is that it?
In order for the rifle paper trail to be a falsified trail, CTers have no choice but to call William Waldman a big fat liar. There IS no way around that.
Now, somebody please tell me WHY I should think William J. Waldman was a liar and a person who wanted to frame Oswald?
Should I have a reason to think everybody EXCEPT Lee Harvey Oswald is a suspect in this crime?
MARK KNIGHT SAID:
I don't know that anyone called Waldman a liar; those are YOUR words, not mine.
I'm pretty sure you won't find anything in my post above saying the paper trail is falsified. I haven't made that accusation.
I just asked about where that microfilm is today. Because if the microfilm cannot be produced today, then it cannot be examined.
And if it cannot be examined, we can no longer determine whether or not any evidence allegedly taken from the microfilm is what it is represented to be.
SHOULD a grand jury ever be convened to examine the evidence--which has NEVER been done in this case, and which folks like Bill Kelly are trying to bring about--the admissibility of the Waldman evidence might be challenged successfully.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
We have the copies of the rifle documents preserved for all time in the WC volumes (and now online, of course). But I'm not sure where the "original" Klein's microfilms are located (or even if they were preserved at all).
But regardless of where the originals are located, the notion that the copies we currently have are tainted in some way is just another way the CTers have of pretending that the various pieces of incriminating evidence against Oswald have been manufactured or manipulated in order to frame LHO.
And, I will stress again, unless William Waldman of Klein's was lying through his teeth to the Warren Commission (and why should anyone believe he was?), then this document is exactly the same thing as having the original document in our possession right this minute, because it represents a photographic reproduction of the original microfilm, just as Bill Waldman said in his Warren Commission testimony at 7 H 366.
GARY MACK SAID:
Hi Dave,
What happened to the microfilm record with Oswald's purchase? Well, the original was certainly given back to the company. If Klein's was my company, I'd insist on having it returned, for I'd need those records for accurate information about the hundreds, thousands or tens of thousands of transactions it contains. Would I have let the FBI copy it if they wanted? Sure, but give it back ASAP.
Did the FBI ask to copy it? I don't know. There's no indication they were interested in anything other than finding out who ordered that particular rifle. Once the purchaser was located, everything else on the microfilm was probably thought to be irrelevant. And it was.
Oswald placed his order during the crucial, documented period when Klein's changed from offering shorter Carcanos to longer ones. Then, once Klein's confirmed the receipt of payment, they shipped the rifle. The company wouldn't ship a rifle to anyone without having payment, would it? And that means waiting for a check to clear or a money order to clear. Oswald's money order must have cleared since Klein's records show it and also that the shipment was made.
The lack of a money order stamp on the back would, it seems to me, be unimportant since it is clear Klein's knew the payment was made. That's all that mattered to them. Did a clerk somewhere screw up, or did a machine pinch roller misfeed a money order so it bypassed the stamp? Did the ink supplier go dry or become disconnected or clogged as Oswald's MO went down the line? Any of those and other explanations could be the mundane answer, it seems to me.
Gary
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Hi Gary,
You could be correct on all of your above points, but I'm wondering if Klein's would have worried at all about a U.S. Postal Money Order clearing before Klein's mailed the rifle to Oswald?
I doubt they would have delayed shipping the merchandise in this instance because it wasn't a private check that needed to be cleared; it was, in essence, an official document issued by the U.S. Government (via the U.S. Post Office).
If it had been a private check that Oswald had paid with, then I'd say that Klein's would definitely have waited for the check to clear. But why would Klein's need to wait for a U.S. Postal M.O. to clear? They know that's going to clear, since Oswald has already paid the post office the $21.45.
But, then too, Klein's did wait seven days to ship LHO the gun (a delay from March 13 to the 20th). And the M.O. surely did "clear" in that amount of time. But I just wonder if the 7-day delay had anything to do with the M.O. waiting to clear? I don't know.
Anyway, these are just random "Money Order" thoughts this morning.
Thanks.
GARY MACK SAID:
I don't know the PO procedure either, but I have to think that when a customer buys an MO, it is issued immediately. At some point the recipient would want to ascertain whether the MO was good or not. But you're right, this is an area that needs some exploration. There must be a reason why Klein's waited a week before shipping.
Gary
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
My guess is that Klein's might have been extra busy at that time and had a backlog of orders to fill, and they didn't get to Oswald's order for another seven days.
The Klein's deposit for 3/13/63 was for $13,827 [see Waldman Exhibit No. 10]. That sounds like a lot of sporting goods sales to me for one day in 1963. So they must have been busy indeed—based on those numbers.
DAVID JOSEPHS SAID:
There is an exhibit which shows a photo of the microfilm which had the envelope and orders from which they were supposedly printed.
That roll of microfilm is no longer in the archives... even though it was indeed deposited there back when. There was also a matter of who had it - in one report Waldman gives it to the FBI, in another he places it in a safe from where it is removed and provided later...
There is of course a little problem of Authentication David... if there is no original to look at, there is no way to confirm they are the same, other than taking someone's word for it. The FBI's word - which has a terrible record of messing with evidence.
If they hadn't been manufactured, there would be no need to lose the originals. Kinda like losing the negative to 133-A. It was found, recorded and inventoried at the DPD - and then disappears either before it gets to the FBI or after... but it disappears as did the Klein's microfilm.
That you can't see a legal problem with not having originals to authenticate the copies is par for the course, Dave...
And without a shred of June 1962 shipment evidence, how does Chapman know the serial number is wrong?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
David Josephs,
We're not in a court of law where a strict "chain of possession" for every last thing that you CTers think is mandatory needs to be produced. So why pretend we are in such a court?
You know, as do I, that there's no GOOD ENOUGH reason to actually think somebody was running around forging and faking all the documents associated with LHO's rifle purchase. It's frankly dumb, IMO, to even begin to consider such an outlandish idea regarding the rifle paperwork.
Plus, you also know, as do I, that there was no good reason for the FBI to have wanted to examine a whole bunch of OTHER unrelated Klein's orders, just to prove that the Oswald order was legit. The FBI undoubtedly didn't have that frame of mind. And I doubt the FBI has such a frame of mind about similar evidence even today.
As I mentioned to you in another discussion on a related matter that seems to concern you so much (although I've never heard of anyone else who has expressed the slightest bit of concern over this issue) —— all other Klein's orders were completely irrelevant to the FBI on 11/22 and 11/23/63. They were searching for the paperwork connected with ONE particular rifle---the one with the "C2766" stamped on it. No other Klein's order mattered. And why should it have mattered? Those OTHER non-C2766 Klein's sales weren't of any importance to anyone on Nov. 22. But they sure are important things to David Josephs in 2015....and that's because he's a conspiracy hobbyist who loves to invent new (and more) reasons to pretend Oswald never fired a shot, plus new ways to pretend the FBI was incompetent.
But, as I've said many times, the things a JFK conspiracy theorist believes couldn't possibly matter less in the long run. Lee Harvey Oswald will be forever identified (and rightly so) as President Kennedy's lone assassin by reasonable men and women everywhere --- even without ever seeing a single other Klein's order for the Italian carbine that Oswald made so famous.
IN A RELATED DISCUSSION IN 2014,
MICHAEL GIAMPAOLO SAID:
I noticed [Deputy Sheriff Eugene] Boone, at the mock trial [in 1986], said he learned the rifle was a Carcano only after the FBI had their hands on it and said it was a Carcano. He did not know Lt. Day was parading the rifle in front of the press telling them it was an Italian rifle made in 1940 on the early evening of 11-22-63...I guess.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
As far as I know, Lt. J.C. Day of the DPD never uttered a word while parading around holding the rifle over his head at 6:15 PM on November 22. Day was never interviewed by the press. He merely carried the gun in silence.
As I said in one of my forum posts recently, I don't think very many people at the DPD had an up-close look at the rifle at all on Day #1. Lt. Day, in fact, *might* have been the only person who had a really good look at it (and perhaps Captain Fritz too, who we can see via Tom Alyea's film was examining the gun up close in the TSBD).
But it was Lt. Day who took possession of the gun inside the TSBD, and it was Day who carried it out of the building, and it was Day who then locked it up in a lock box at City Hall for a few hours while he went back to the Depository to take pictures.
Lieutenant Day then went back to City Hall and started examining the rifle in greater detail. Then, close to midnight, he was told to stop working on the rifle and to turn it over to Vincent Drain of the FBI, which he did.
Ergo, the initial incorrect "Mauser" reports coming from Dallas County Deputies Weitzman and Boone became the "facts" as far as many people (and reporters thirsty for details) were concerned.
MICHAEL GIAMPAOLO SAID:
I've seen a couple clips of the rifle traveling through the DPD, but never see the whole thing like I wish we did. When asked what kind of rifle it was, Day said, "6.5, apparently made in Italy 1940".
I [saw] it aired, and heard him say it on a CNN show called "The Assassination of President Kennedy" on 11-21-13.
I recorded it and just watched it again.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I don't recall that clip with Lt. Day saying something to the press. I wonder if I have it in my video collection? I'm not sure, but I'm sure going to look for it. Thanks, Michael. And my apologies for saying that Lt. Day never spoke to the press in the DPD corridors. I guess you just proved me wrong in that regard. Thank you.
MICHAEL GIAMPAOLO SAID:
Why that is not included in the clips of this historic event, I do not understand.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Perhaps it is buried in my collection someplace. I don't know. But thanks for the info nonetheless.
PAT SPEER SAID:
I watched the CNN program he [Michael] mentions, and can verify that the quote of Day is accurate.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Thanks, Pat.
I just did a little digging into my video archives and verified for myself that at least one TV network (CBS) was most definitely identifying the assassination weapon as a 6.5-millimeter Italian rifle as of approximately 7:00 PM (Dallas time) on Friday, November 22nd.
In the video clip below, which was aired live on CBS-TV on the evening of 11/22/63, Dan Rather of CBS News clearly calls the rifle being held up by Lt. J.C. Day an "Italian 6.5-millimeter" gun. We can't hear Lt. Day say anything; we only hear Rather's narration in this clip, but it is clear from the video that Lt. Day definitely is speaking to the members of the press at the crowded City Hall. He's probably identifying the rifle in just the manner confirmed by Michael Giampaolo and Pat Speer:
So the conspiracy theorists who continue to say that everybody on radio or television was labelling the murder weapon as a Mauser all the way through Day 1 (November 22nd) are proven wrong (just as I was proven wrong on this issue too) by the above video alone. And if CBS was reporting that the assassination weapon was a 6.5mm. Italian rifle during the evening of November 22nd, you can bet that most of the other TV and radio networks were reporting the very same thing at that same time as well.
Thanks again to Michael and Pat. Your confirmation of Lt. Day's statements in the 2013 CNN program prompted me to dig further myself. And the digging paid off. Much obliged.
[2019 EDIT: I have now acquired a copy of this 2013 CNN program discussed earlier. And, sure enough, the identification of the "Italian" rifle can indeed be heard being announced by DPD Lieutenant J.C. Day (fast forward to 20:10).]
GARY MACK SAID:
David,
The original KRLD-TV video tape of Day holding the rifle is in The Sixth Floor Museum's permanent collection and it has been licensed to many documentaries over the years. The audio track includes Day's first words which were, "There's no name on it." From there, going by memory, he says, "6.5mm, made in Italy, 1940."
As Day said in his museum's oral history, he was taking the rifle back to his office and held it overhead so reporters couldn't touch it. As the clock shows, the scene happened at 6:16pm on Friday and both AP and UPI wire services soon fed his words around the world.
Boone and Weitzman, who both worked for the Sheriff's Department, never saw the rifle again after they or it left the TSBD. One of the two reporters present, either Tom Alyea/WFAA-TV or Kent Biffle/Dallas Morning News, presumably reported the ID information to their offices, so that must be how the Mauser story started.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Thanks, Gary.
GARY MACK SAID:
By the way, the video of Day was not shown live; the scene was recorded at KRLD and fed to CBS soon thereafter for Rather to narrate on the network.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, I know. It's obvious that Dan Rather isn't narrating a LIVE scene taking place at Dallas City Hall. That's why I phrased a portion of my forum post in this manner (knowing full well that the clock on the wall behind Lieutenant Day was showing a time of 6:16):
"CBS was most definitely identifying the assassination weapon as a 6.5-millimeter Italian rifle as of approximately 7:00 PM (Dallas time) on Friday, November 22nd."
Thanks.
David Von Pein
January 2014
March 2015
May—June 2015
