Post by Rob Caprio on Aug 26, 2020 20:51:17 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/untitled-13_zpscd8557b9.png
(Note: This is the second-part look at the 6.5 mm ammunition allegedly used in the JFK assassination. For the first-part see #318.)
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. They further claimed that the assassination of JFK required superior marksmanship by LHO.
For LHO to display superior marksmanship he would have needed to practice on a regular basis, but as we have seen already in this series there is simply no evidence showing that he ever did practice with any rifle let alone the alleged murder weapon.
Another factor in achieving superior marksmanship is the quality of the rifle used and as we have seen in this series the Mannlicher-Carcano (M-C) (Commission Exhibit (CE) 139) was of very poor quality and in very poor condition. A final ingredient is the ammunition.
Was the ammunition allegedly used in good, reliable condition? That is the focus of this post.
******************************************
On the day of the alleged assassin’s death the New York Times published this about the Dallas Police Department’s (DPD) assessment of the assassination and what would be needed to accomplish it.
Quote on
Officers starting a canvass of . . . outlets observed that the odd-sized ammunition—a little smaller than ordinary .30-caliber—might provide an important clue. The assassination, they said, involved excellent marksmanship that could only have come from regular practice recently, and this in turn would have required sizable quantities of the special ammunition. (New York Times, November 24, 1963, p. 2, column 1)
Quote off
This illustrates that the DPD, and the WC, stated that the assassination required excellent marksmanship, and that to attain this level LHO needed to practice regularly. Unfortunately for the WC they never provided any evidence showing that he did this.
Then it states that he would have required copious amounts of the special ammunition needed for all this practice, but again there is zero evidence for LHO purchasing any ammunition.
The issue of age came up in regards to the ammunition as critics had charged that the ammunition had last been made during World War II. Here is what the WC had to say about this issue.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0335b.gif
Speculation. – Ammunition for the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository had not been manufactured since the end of World War II. The ammunition used by Oswald must, therefore, have been at least 20 years old, making it extremely unreliable.
Commission finding. – The ammunition used in the rifle was American ammunition recently made by the Western Cartridge Co., which manufactures such ammunition currently. In tests with the same kind of ammunition, experts fired Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle more than 100 times without any misfires. (WC Report (WCR), p. 646)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0335b.htm
Quote off
Despite the WC’s claim that the ammunition was recently made they provided no evidence to support this claim. In fact, their own volumes of exhibits had evidence to the contrary.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/pages/WH_Vol26_0049b.gif
On March 23, 1964, Mr. R. W. Botts, District Manager, Winchester-Western Division, Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation, Braniff Building, advised [that] the Western Cartridge Company, a division of Olin Industries, East Alton, Illinois, manufactured a quantity of 6.5 M/M Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition for the Italian Government during World War II. At the end of the war the Italian Carcano rifle, and no telling how much of this type ammunition, was sold to United States gun brokers and dealers and subsequently was distributed by direct sales to wholesalers, retailers, and individual purchasers. (CE 2694, p. 12)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0049b.htm
This FBI document confirms that the M-C ammunition was manufactured DURING World War II and not close to 1963 as the WC claimed. This is further corroborated by the letter researcher Stewart Galanor received in July 1965 from an executive at the ammunition manufacturer (see letter to Stewart Galanor from Olin/Winchester Western Division WWD, dated 7/14/1965 and can be found in Mark Lane’s Rush To Judgment, Appendix VII, p. 411).
This means that the ammunition would have been nineteen-years old at the minimum by the time of the assassination. So how reliable could this stuff have been? To add insult to injury we find this comment by Marina Oswald in a FBI document.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0404b.gif
Oswald did not have any ammunition for the rifle to her knowledge in either Dallas or New Orleans, and he did not speak of buying ammunition. (CE 1403, p. 778)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0404b.htm
Quote off
Marina Oswald’s statement in this FBI interview is supported by the fact that the WC produced zero evidence showing that LHO purchased or possessed any ammunition before the assassination. Since she had said this to the FBI on December 16, 1963, the WC members should have been perplexed by these questions and comments during her testimony.
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 141 is an envelope that contains a bullet.
Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever seen bullets or shells like that that your husband had?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think Lee's were smaller.
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 145 is a small cardboard box containing two bullets, .38 caliber.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you recognize those as appearing to be the size of the bullets that your husband had for the pistol?
Mrs. OSWALD. It is hard for me to tell, because I don't understand about this. I never looked at them, because I am afraid.
Mr. RANKIN. But you have seen bullets like that, have you, in your husband's apartment or rooming house, or in the Neely apartment or at Mrs. Paine's?
Mrs. OSWALD. At Mrs. Paine's I never saw any shells. On Neely Street, perhaps it is similar--New Orleans. It looks like it. If they fit Lee's pistol, then they must be the right ones.
Mr. RANKIN. Now, do you recall your husband having any ammunition around the house at any time?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. And where do you remember his having it in the places you lived?
Mrs. OSWALD. On Neely Street, in Dallas, and New Orleans.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether that was rifle ammunition or rifle and pistol ammunition?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was for the rifle. Perhaps he had some pistol ammunition there, but I would not know the difference.
Mr. RANKIN. Did you observe how much ammunition he had at any time?
Mrs. OSWALD. He had a box of about the size of this.
Why were the WC members not curious about or interested in what caused these changes from her December 16 interview with the FBI? Clearly they both can’t be correct. Generally the words and recollections closer to the event are more accurate, thus, the FBI interview is what should be used. This is backed up by the fact that there is no evidence to support the claims by Marina Oswald. We have seen previously in this series that both the DPD and the FBI failed to locate any evidence that confirmed their claim that LHO purchased ammunition.
So what was left for the WC to do? Make an absurd claim of course.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0108b.gif
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0109a.gif
Examination of the cartridge cases found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building established that they had been previously loaded and ejected from the assassination rifle, which would indicate that Oswald practiced operating the bolt. (WCR, pp. 192-193)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0108b.htm
Quote off
The WC would claim that LHO practiced by operating the bolt only since they couldn’t support the claim that he had purchased ammunition for the M-C. They based this on the idea of the M-C leaving characteristics on the cartridges due to the operation of the bolt. In essence they claimed that the bolt left distinguishing marks on the cartridges, thus, they could tie them to the alleged murder weapon. The problem with this claim is that the evidence didn’t support it. In fact, the evidence showed the opposite of what the WC claimed. By now you shouldn’t have expected anything else.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/pages/WH_Vol26_0243a.jpg
The extractor and ejector marks on C6 as well as on C7, C8, and C38 did not possess sufficient characteristics for identifying the weapon which produced them. There are also three sets of marks on the base of this cartridge which were not found on C7, C8, C38, or any of the numerous tests obtained from the C14 rifle. It was not possible to determine what produced these marks...Another set of follower marks were found on C8...These marks were not identified with the C14 rifle... (CE 2968, June 2, 1964 letter from J. Edgar Hoover to J. Lee Rankin)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0243a.htm
Quote off
This letter illustrates that the marks found on the cartridges could NOT be identified or associated with any particular rifle, therefore, this confirms that the WC’s claim is an outright fabrication.
The WC could not show how LHO obtained the ammunition. That is important and would have been a disaster in a court of law. How can you claim that LHO killed JFK with ammunition that you can’t show he purchased? How can the notion of someone else giving him the ammunition be ruled out when how he obtained it can’t be shown for sure? It cannot of course.
We again see that not only is there no supporting evidence for the WC’s claim, but that the actual evidence shows the opposite it true. This means that the WC’s conclusion is false, therefore, it is sunk.
i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/untitled-13_zpscd8557b9.png
(Note: This is the second-part look at the 6.5 mm ammunition allegedly used in the JFK assassination. For the first-part see #318.)
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. They further claimed that the assassination of JFK required superior marksmanship by LHO.
For LHO to display superior marksmanship he would have needed to practice on a regular basis, but as we have seen already in this series there is simply no evidence showing that he ever did practice with any rifle let alone the alleged murder weapon.
Another factor in achieving superior marksmanship is the quality of the rifle used and as we have seen in this series the Mannlicher-Carcano (M-C) (Commission Exhibit (CE) 139) was of very poor quality and in very poor condition. A final ingredient is the ammunition.
Was the ammunition allegedly used in good, reliable condition? That is the focus of this post.
******************************************
On the day of the alleged assassin’s death the New York Times published this about the Dallas Police Department’s (DPD) assessment of the assassination and what would be needed to accomplish it.
Quote on
Officers starting a canvass of . . . outlets observed that the odd-sized ammunition—a little smaller than ordinary .30-caliber—might provide an important clue. The assassination, they said, involved excellent marksmanship that could only have come from regular practice recently, and this in turn would have required sizable quantities of the special ammunition. (New York Times, November 24, 1963, p. 2, column 1)
Quote off
This illustrates that the DPD, and the WC, stated that the assassination required excellent marksmanship, and that to attain this level LHO needed to practice regularly. Unfortunately for the WC they never provided any evidence showing that he did this.
Then it states that he would have required copious amounts of the special ammunition needed for all this practice, but again there is zero evidence for LHO purchasing any ammunition.
The issue of age came up in regards to the ammunition as critics had charged that the ammunition had last been made during World War II. Here is what the WC had to say about this issue.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0335b.gif
Speculation. – Ammunition for the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository had not been manufactured since the end of World War II. The ammunition used by Oswald must, therefore, have been at least 20 years old, making it extremely unreliable.
Commission finding. – The ammunition used in the rifle was American ammunition recently made by the Western Cartridge Co., which manufactures such ammunition currently. In tests with the same kind of ammunition, experts fired Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle more than 100 times without any misfires. (WC Report (WCR), p. 646)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0335b.htm
Quote off
Despite the WC’s claim that the ammunition was recently made they provided no evidence to support this claim. In fact, their own volumes of exhibits had evidence to the contrary.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/pages/WH_Vol26_0049b.gif
On March 23, 1964, Mr. R. W. Botts, District Manager, Winchester-Western Division, Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation, Braniff Building, advised [that] the Western Cartridge Company, a division of Olin Industries, East Alton, Illinois, manufactured a quantity of 6.5 M/M Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition for the Italian Government during World War II. At the end of the war the Italian Carcano rifle, and no telling how much of this type ammunition, was sold to United States gun brokers and dealers and subsequently was distributed by direct sales to wholesalers, retailers, and individual purchasers. (CE 2694, p. 12)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0049b.htm
This FBI document confirms that the M-C ammunition was manufactured DURING World War II and not close to 1963 as the WC claimed. This is further corroborated by the letter researcher Stewart Galanor received in July 1965 from an executive at the ammunition manufacturer (see letter to Stewart Galanor from Olin/Winchester Western Division WWD, dated 7/14/1965 and can be found in Mark Lane’s Rush To Judgment, Appendix VII, p. 411).
This means that the ammunition would have been nineteen-years old at the minimum by the time of the assassination. So how reliable could this stuff have been? To add insult to injury we find this comment by Marina Oswald in a FBI document.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0404b.gif
Oswald did not have any ammunition for the rifle to her knowledge in either Dallas or New Orleans, and he did not speak of buying ammunition. (CE 1403, p. 778)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0404b.htm
Quote off
Marina Oswald’s statement in this FBI interview is supported by the fact that the WC produced zero evidence showing that LHO purchased or possessed any ammunition before the assassination. Since she had said this to the FBI on December 16, 1963, the WC members should have been perplexed by these questions and comments during her testimony.
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 141 is an envelope that contains a bullet.
Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever seen bullets or shells like that that your husband had?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think Lee's were smaller.
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 145 is a small cardboard box containing two bullets, .38 caliber.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you recognize those as appearing to be the size of the bullets that your husband had for the pistol?
Mrs. OSWALD. It is hard for me to tell, because I don't understand about this. I never looked at them, because I am afraid.
Mr. RANKIN. But you have seen bullets like that, have you, in your husband's apartment or rooming house, or in the Neely apartment or at Mrs. Paine's?
Mrs. OSWALD. At Mrs. Paine's I never saw any shells. On Neely Street, perhaps it is similar--New Orleans. It looks like it. If they fit Lee's pistol, then they must be the right ones.
Mr. RANKIN. Now, do you recall your husband having any ammunition around the house at any time?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. And where do you remember his having it in the places you lived?
Mrs. OSWALD. On Neely Street, in Dallas, and New Orleans.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether that was rifle ammunition or rifle and pistol ammunition?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was for the rifle. Perhaps he had some pistol ammunition there, but I would not know the difference.
Mr. RANKIN. Did you observe how much ammunition he had at any time?
Mrs. OSWALD. He had a box of about the size of this.
Why were the WC members not curious about or interested in what caused these changes from her December 16 interview with the FBI? Clearly they both can’t be correct. Generally the words and recollections closer to the event are more accurate, thus, the FBI interview is what should be used. This is backed up by the fact that there is no evidence to support the claims by Marina Oswald. We have seen previously in this series that both the DPD and the FBI failed to locate any evidence that confirmed their claim that LHO purchased ammunition.
So what was left for the WC to do? Make an absurd claim of course.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0108b.gif
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0109a.gif
Examination of the cartridge cases found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building established that they had been previously loaded and ejected from the assassination rifle, which would indicate that Oswald practiced operating the bolt. (WCR, pp. 192-193)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0108b.htm
Quote off
The WC would claim that LHO practiced by operating the bolt only since they couldn’t support the claim that he had purchased ammunition for the M-C. They based this on the idea of the M-C leaving characteristics on the cartridges due to the operation of the bolt. In essence they claimed that the bolt left distinguishing marks on the cartridges, thus, they could tie them to the alleged murder weapon. The problem with this claim is that the evidence didn’t support it. In fact, the evidence showed the opposite of what the WC claimed. By now you shouldn’t have expected anything else.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/pages/WH_Vol26_0243a.jpg
The extractor and ejector marks on C6 as well as on C7, C8, and C38 did not possess sufficient characteristics for identifying the weapon which produced them. There are also three sets of marks on the base of this cartridge which were not found on C7, C8, C38, or any of the numerous tests obtained from the C14 rifle. It was not possible to determine what produced these marks...Another set of follower marks were found on C8...These marks were not identified with the C14 rifle... (CE 2968, June 2, 1964 letter from J. Edgar Hoover to J. Lee Rankin)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0243a.htm
Quote off
This letter illustrates that the marks found on the cartridges could NOT be identified or associated with any particular rifle, therefore, this confirms that the WC’s claim is an outright fabrication.
The WC could not show how LHO obtained the ammunition. That is important and would have been a disaster in a court of law. How can you claim that LHO killed JFK with ammunition that you can’t show he purchased? How can the notion of someone else giving him the ammunition be ruled out when how he obtained it can’t be shown for sure? It cannot of course.
We again see that not only is there no supporting evidence for the WC’s claim, but that the actual evidence shows the opposite it true. This means that the WC’s conclusion is false, therefore, it is sunk.