17-04-2014, 12:08 AM
I have been following your work, Bob, on this topic (including the history behind the MC 91/38 and its ammo) with a great deal of interest in this, and the other forums that you have posted this matter. You are definitely on to something. I think that you are correct that none of the photos that are on the internet that purport to be of CE 399 in fact depict a MC 91/38 slug after being fired from an MC 91/38 rifle. The slugs that are shown may not even be the same bullet. However, I'm unwilling to jump straight from there to "Frazier perjured himself." These pictures might not be the same bullet(s) Frazier was talking about. Once you say that the government is deliberately misleading us, it is a stretch to rely on some of the stuff they give us to prove that other stuff was false.
I've been counting pixels as a measurement of actual size of the .gif photos that allegedly depict CE 399. Interestingly, in all of the .gif photos I have found (education website, jfk facts, etc) the scale is 13 pixels to 1 mm. .jpg pixels are harder to count as the colors of the pixels are "smeared." The bullets in the .gif photos are too short (in length) to be MC 6.5 mm ammo and too narrow too, if the ruler in the picture is the same distance from the camera lens as the bullet. If the bullet is closer to the lens it would be larger than the predicted measurements, if the bullet is father away it would be smaller.
That all begs the question why the FBI would slap a ruler in a photo and then place the bullet in such a way as to give us (or a jury) an inaccurate measurement of the bullet. Fortunately, there is a way to defeat such tomfoolery. I will reply to this thread on that topic later. I'm ready for dinner and don't have my notes handy.
BTW I'm delighted that Magda has figured out what was keeping me from contributing to this topic for the last couple weeks. Thank you!
I've been counting pixels as a measurement of actual size of the .gif photos that allegedly depict CE 399. Interestingly, in all of the .gif photos I have found (education website, jfk facts, etc) the scale is 13 pixels to 1 mm. .jpg pixels are harder to count as the colors of the pixels are "smeared." The bullets in the .gif photos are too short (in length) to be MC 6.5 mm ammo and too narrow too, if the ruler in the picture is the same distance from the camera lens as the bullet. If the bullet is closer to the lens it would be larger than the predicted measurements, if the bullet is father away it would be smaller.
That all begs the question why the FBI would slap a ruler in a photo and then place the bullet in such a way as to give us (or a jury) an inaccurate measurement of the bullet. Fortunately, there is a way to defeat such tomfoolery. I will reply to this thread on that topic later. I'm ready for dinner and don't have my notes handy.
BTW I'm delighted that Magda has figured out what was keeping me from contributing to this topic for the last couple weeks. Thank you!