Oswald Never Took a Rifle Into the Depository: Evica Makes the Case

[Charles Drago]

Did Oswald Take Any Rifle to the Depository?

by George Michael Evica

The Warren Commission did establish (or seemed to have established) that a folded blanket had once rested on the floor of Ruth and Michael Paine’s garage (at least Marina and the Paines thought so, and the police allegedly found such a blanket). The Commission was unable to place a rifle in that blanket except for Marina’s testimony about seeing the stock (or the barrel) of a rifle when she peeked – but then Marina was an incredible witness and admittedly could not recognize a rifle. Mrs. Paine testified she did not “see” the blanket in her crowded garage any earlier than October 7th, 1963. Ruth Paine also testified that the rifle she allegedly saw in Oswald’s possession had a sling unlike the one on the CE 139 rifle. Michael Paine tried to help; he testified that on some unspecified date before November 22nd, 1963, he remembered “moving about this package [in his garage] which, let’s say, was a rifle, anyway it was a package wrapped in a blanket.” But Paine didn’t help Marina’s credibility much:

“I have read … that Marina looked in the end of this [garage] package and saw the butt end of a rifle. Now I didn’t remember that it was something easy to look into like that. I thought it was well wrapped up.” (italics added)

The Warren Commission seemed to have discovered an ill-identified “rifle” (which could not be placed in the Oswald’s possession during their various moves) in an alleged package/blanket allegedly in the Paine garage – but not before October 7th, 1963.

The Commission did establish that Lee Harvey Oswald was present at the Paine’s residence, Thursday evening, November 21st, but could not place him in the Paine garage. It also could not establish whether he left the Paine residence on Friday morning, November 22nd, with a paper bag, a rifle, or anything in his hands. To suggest that Oswald might have taken a rifle in a paper bag, the Commission took testimony from four witnesses. The Commission’s intention was to suggest that Oswald might have (1) stolen the paper-bag materials from the Depository; (2)constructed the paper gun-case at the Paine house on Thursday night; (3) dismantled the rifle (thereby saving himself only a few inches in length but increasing the time necessary to prepare for the assassination when he would be forced to re-assemble the rifle; (4) placed the rifle in his home-made bag; (5)transported it to the Depository, and (6) carried it to the sixth floor of that building. The Commission was unable to establish as fact any one of these six sequential speculations. (emphasis added by Drago)

Had the Commission been able to establish Oswald’s possession of the CE 139 Mannlicher-Carcano through the evening of November 21st, or the fact of that possession any time on the 22nd, its “reconstruction” of possibilities could have been accepted as circumstantial evidence for the transportation of the Mannlicher-Carcano to and into the Depository on November 22nd. In fact, the Commission neither established Oswald’s possession of any rifle through November 22nd nor his transportation of any rifle on November 22nd. Its four paper bag/rifle transportation witnesses offered abundant material for the counter argument that Lee Harvey Oswald did not transport the rifle to or into the building, could not have borrowed the paper bag materials, and did not take those materials to the Paine house. Two of those witnesses testified on March 11th, 1964 – the only two alleged to have seen Oswald with his “bulky” package – that it was too short for even a disassembled Carcano. The difference in lengths given was significant: the CE 139 rifle (dismantled, according to F.B.I. agent Frazier), 35 inches; Oswald’s alleged package, about 28 inches.

The Warren Commission was unable to place any rifle in Oswald’s possession and was even unable to argue persuasively that Oswald might have transported a package containing a rifle to (or into) the Depository.


Did Oswald Possess a Rifle Inside the Depository?

Was Lee Harvey Oswald in possession of a rifle or a short or long package inside the Depository on November 22nd, 1963? No testimony was elicited, either by the Commission or by its investigators and staff members, in answer to that question; it was not, it seems, asked. The Commission tried neither to establish how Oswald got any rifle from the Depository’s first floor to the sixth floor nor to determine whether it was possible to transport a weapon. The Commission could have asked the Depository’s first-floor workers, but it seems to have avoided asking them any questions about Oswald’s possible rifle-carrying trip. Why?

The Warren Commission was unable to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald (1) took delivery of a rifle; (2) possessed a rifle; (3) practiced with a rifle; (4) transported a rifle to the Depository; and (5) carried a rifle to the Depository’s sixth floor.

And, of course, it was unable to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald ever fired a rifle on November 22nd, 1963. (emphasis added by Drago)

[Mark Stapleton]

Did Oswald Take Any Rifle to the Depository?

by George Michael Evica

The Warren Commission did establish (or seemed to have established) that a folded blanket had once rested on the floor of Ruth and Michael Paine’s garage (at least Marina and the Paines thought so, and the police allegedly found such a blanket). The Commission was unable to place a rifle in that blanket except for Marina’s testimony about seeing the stock (or the barrel) of a rifle when she peeked – but then Marina was an incredible witness and admittedly could not recognize a rifle. Mrs. Paine testified she did not “see” the blanket in her crowded garage any earlier than October 7th, 1963. Ruth Paine also testified that the rifle she allegedly saw in Oswald’s possession had a sling unlike the one on the CE 139 rifle. Michael Paine tried to help; he testified that on some unspecified date before November 22nd, 1963, he remembered “moving about this package [in his garage] which, let’s say, was a rifle, anyway it was a package wrapped in a blanket.” But Paine didn’t help Marina’s credibility much:

“I have read … that Marina looked in the end of this [garage] package and saw the butt end of a rifle. Now I didn’t remember that it was something easy to look into like that. I thought it was well wrapped up.” (italics added)

The Warren Commission seemed to have discovered an ill-identified “rifle” (which could not be placed in the Oswald’s possession during their various moves) in an alleged package/blanket allegedly in the Paine garage – but not before October 7th, 1963.

The Commission did establish that Lee Harvey Oswald was present at the Paine’s residence, Thursday evening, November 21st, but could not place him in the Paine garage. It also could not establish whether he left the Paine residence on Friday morning, November 22nd, with a paper bag, a rifle, or anything in his hands. To suggest that Oswald might have taken a rifle in a paper bag, the Commission took testimony from four witnesses. The Commission’s intention was to suggest that Oswald might have (1) stolen the paper-bag materials from the Depository; (2)constructed the paper gun-case at the Paine house on Thursday night; (3) dismantled the rifle (thereby saving himself only a few inches in length but increasing the time necessary to prepare for the assassination when he would be forced to re-assemble the rifle; (4) placed the rifle in his home-made bag; (5)transported it to the Depository, and (6) carried it to the sixth floor of that building. The Commission was unable to establish as fact any one of these six sequential speculations. (emphasis added by Drago)

Had the Commission been able to establish Oswald’s possession of the CE 139 Mannlicher-Carcano through the evening of November 21st, or the fact of that possession any time on the 22nd, its “reconstruction” of possibilities could have been accepted as circumstantial evidence for the transportation of the Mannlicher-Carcano to and into the Depository on November 22nd. In fact, the Commission neither established Oswald’s possession of any rifle through November 22nd nor his transportation of any rifle on November 22nd. Its four paper bag/rifle transportation witnesses offered abundant material for the counter argument that Lee Harvey Oswald did not transport the rifle to or into the building, could not have borrowed the paper bag materials, and did not take those materials to the Paine house. Two of those witnesses testified on March 11th, 1964 – the only two alleged to have seen Oswald with his “bulky” package – that it was too short for even a disassembled Carcano. The difference in lengths given was significant: the CE 139 rifle (dismantled, according to F.B.I. agent Frazier), 35 inches; Oswald’s alleged package, about 28 inches.

The Warren Commission was unable to place any rifle in Oswald’s possession and was even unable to argue persuasively that Oswald might have transported a package containing a rifle to (or into) the Depository.


Did Oswald Possess a Rifle Inside the Depository?

Was Lee Harvey Oswald in possession of a rifle or a short or long package inside the Depository on November 22nd, 1963? No testimony was elicited, either by the Commission or by its investigators and staff members, in answer to that question; it was not, it seems, asked. The Commission tried neither to establish how Oswald got any rifle from the Depository’s first floor to the sixth floor nor to determine whether it was possible to transport a weapon. The Commission could have asked the Depository’s first-floor workers, but it seems to have avoided asking them any questions about Oswald’s possible rifle-carrying trip. Why?

The Warren Commission was unable to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald (1) took delivery of a rifle; (2) possessed a rifle; (3) practiced with a rifle; (4) transported a rifle to the Depository; and (5) carried a rifle to the Depository’s sixth floor.

And, of course, it was unable to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald ever fired a rifle on November 22nd, 1963. (emphasis added by Drago)

Evica's hypothesis works fine for me, Charles.

One wonders how many of the WC's 'established facts' of the case were merely elaborate constructions of fiction, subsequently accepted without question by the public and researchers alike (and zealously protected by our dear friends in the MSM).

Moreover, I just can't see LHO doing it. It's a big jump from handing out pamphlets in the street to carting a lethal weapon, whether disassembled or not, into a building which the President's motorcade would soon closely pass by. Oswald wasn't an idiot, quite the opposite actually, and he would have been aware of the massive risk involved in agreeing to such an undertaking.

I think the only thing Oswald took to work that day was his lunch.

p.s. one wonders what would have transpired had he impulsively decided to take a sickie that day.

[Charles Drago]

One wonders how many of the WC's 'established facts' of the case were merely elaborate constructions of fiction

Mark,

It was Evica who first understood the assassination as a dramatic construct. We worked closely on this hypothesis, which I have come to accept without reservation.

So the quick answer to your question above is: All of them.

[Ray Mitcham]

Did Oswald Take Any Rifle to the Depository?

by George Michael Evica

The Warren Commission did establish (or seemed to have established) that a folded blanket had once rested on the floor of Ruth and Michael Paine�s garage (at least Marina and the Paines thought so, and the police allegedly found such a blanket). The Commission was unable to place a rifle in that blanket except for Marina�s testimony about seeing the stock (or the barrel) of a rifle when she peeked � but then Marina was an incredible witness and admittedly could not recognize a rifle. Mrs. Paine testified she did not �see� the blanket in her crowded garage any earlier than October 7th, 1963. Ruth Paine also testified that the rifle she allegedly saw in Oswald�s possession had a sling unlike the one on the CE 139 rifle. Michael Paine tried to help; he testified that on some unspecified date before November 22nd, 1963, he remembered �moving about this package [in his garage] which, let�s say, was a rifle, anyway it was a package wrapped in a blanket.� But Paine didn�t help Marina�s credibility much:

�I have read � that Marina looked in the end of this [garage] package and saw the butt end of a rifle. Now I didn�t remember that it was something easy to look into like that. I thought it was well wrapped up.� (italics added)

The Warren Commission seemed to have discovered an ill-identified �rifle� (which could not be placed in the Oswald�s possession during their various moves) in an alleged package/blanket allegedly in the Paine garage � but not before October 7th, 1963.

The Commission did establish that Lee Harvey Oswald was present at the Paine�s residence, Thursday evening, November 21st, but could not place him in the Paine garage. It also could not establish whether he left the Paine residence on Friday morning, November 22nd, with a paper bag, a rifle, or anything in his hands. To suggest that Oswald might have taken a rifle in a paper bag, the Commission took testimony from four witnesses. The Commission�s intention was to suggest that Oswald might have (1) stolen the paper-bag materials from the Depository; (2)constructed the paper gun-case at the Paine house on Thursday night; (3) dismantled the rifle (thereby saving himself only a few inches in length but increasing the time necessary to prepare for the assassination when he would be forced to re-assemble the rifle; (4) placed the rifle in his home-made bag; (5)transported it to the Depository, and (6) carried it to the sixth floor of that building. The Commission was unable to establish as fact any one of these six sequential speculations. (emphasis added by Drago)

Had the Commission been able to establish Oswald�s possession of the CE 139 Mannlicher-Carcano through the evening of November 21st, or the fact of that possession any time on the 22nd, its �reconstruction� of possibilities could have been accepted as circumstantial evidence for the transportation of the Mannlicher-Carcano to and into the Depository on November 22nd. In fact, the Commission neither established Oswald�s possession of any rifle through November 22nd nor his transportation of any rifle on November 22nd. Its four paper bag/rifle transportation witnesses offered abundant material for the counter argument that Lee Harvey Oswald did not transport the rifle to or into the building, could not have borrowed the paper bag materials, and did not take those materials to the Paine house. Two of those witnesses testified on March 11th, 1964 � the only two alleged to have seen Oswald with his �bulky� package � that it was too short for even a disassembled Carcano. The difference in lengths given was significant: the CE 139 rifle (dismantled, according to F.B.I. agent Frazier), 35 inches; Oswald�s alleged package, about 28 inches.

The Warren Commission was unable to place any rifle in Oswald�s possession and was even unable to argue persuasively that Oswald might have transported a package containing a rifle to (or into) the Depository.


Did Oswald Possess a Rifle Inside the Depository?

Was Lee Harvey Oswald in possession of a rifle or a short or long package inside the Depository on November 22nd, 1963? No testimony was elicited, either by the Commission or by its investigators and staff members, in answer to that question; it was not, it seems, asked. The Commission tried neither to establish how Oswald got any rifle from the Depository�s first floor to the sixth floor nor to determine whether it was possible to transport a weapon. The Commission could have asked the Depository�s first-floor workers, but it seems to have avoided asking them any questions about Oswald�s possible rifle-carrying trip. Why?

The Warren Commission was unable to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald (1) took delivery of a rifle; (2) possessed a rifle; (3) practiced with a rifle; (4) transported a rifle to the Depository; and (5) carried a rifle to the Depository�s sixth floor.

And, of course, it was unable to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald ever fired a rifle on November 22nd, 1963. (emphasis added by Drago)

Evica's hypothesis works fine for me, Charles.




One wonders how many of the WC's 'established facts' of the case were merely elaborate constructions of fiction, subsequently accepted without question by the public and researchers alike (and zealously protected by our dear friends in the MSM).

Moreover, I just can't see LHO doing it. It's a big jump from handing out pamphlets in the street to carting a lethal weapon, whether disassembled or not, into a building which the President's motorcade would soon closely pass by. Oswald wasn't an idiot, quite the opposite actually, and he would have been aware of the massive risk involved in agreeing to such an undertaking.

I think the only thing Oswald took to work that day was his lunch.

p.s. one wonders what would have transpired had he impulsively decided to take a sickie that day.

George Evica says "

Ruth Paine also testified that the rifle she allegedly saw in Oswald's possession had a sling unlike the one on the CE 139 rifle" Where is this testimatony to be found?

[Phil Dragoo]

In a memorandum that the Warren Commission suppressed from its Report and from its twenty-six volumes of published evidence, J. Wesley Liebler, the commission counsel responsible for this section of the Warren Report, stated that "the fact is that not one person alive today (including Marina) ever saw that rifle in the Paine garage in such a way it could be identified as being that (Oswald's) rifle."

Michael Kurtz, The Crime of the Century

George Michael Evica is of course thoroughly correct.

Together with Gil Jesus' work, Lee Oswald didn't order, pay for, receive, practice with, pose with, store, transport, use, or conceal the prop planted in the Kabuki stage.

Frazier indicated a too-short parcel, itself no doubt a fictive construct.

The Life "backyard photo" is a crude forgery--a "watermark" attaches an absurd chin. Fifteen anomalies. Marina's memory of "looking through" a reflex camera helpfully provided by the so-helpful Robert.

The blanket nor the bag(s) presented oil or indentation--how could they.

The weapon had to have its bolt lubricated and its sight shimmed before it could be test-fired.

Sherry Fiester, Enemy of the Truth, reveals late developments in interpreting the NAA test indicate the samples could come from one or three or five bullets--"experts" at the time had no idea of composition of jacketed vs. unjacketed ammunition.

The "partial palm print"--it is to laugh--materializing as it did in a post-mortem seance worthy of Harry Houdini.

Lee Oswald was the Man Who Wasn't There on the stair where Warren chapter and verse requires him to be.

Again, Sherry Feister demonstrates a credible, current forensic analysis indicating Lee Oswald--absent a joystick/drone capability--could not have administered the coup de grace had he wanted to--which, Church Lady, Bugliosi, Posner, Dulles and the Wall Street Tabernacle Choir chant he did (for unfathomable reasons).

In Barry Krusch, Impossible: The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald, is demonstrated the serially broken "chain of evidence" of the two or three "hulls" given to Dallas PD from the pocket of the boss cop, and/or to the FBI, having not been photographed in place--only after "reconstructing" their original position.

CE 399: The Shroud of Turin looks more credible. For humans to believe in the supernatural we require either extraordinary proof or an Extraordinary Divinity.

Gerald Ford to the contrary notwithstanding, the back wound was found to be shallow, at a steep down angle, terminating at the first joint of Hume's finger--let alone getting transfers at six stations along the way, being mugged at two, yet possessing the impossible integrity the Commission failed to duplicate in its trials with cadaver wrists and anesthetized goats.

Forty saw a two- to three-inch avuncular wound at the president's occipital exuding cerebral and cerebellar tissue from the right hemisphere as a result of an entry at the right temple (in layman's terms).

Axial and concentric fracturing is concentrated there, as is the stream of metal particles, two phenomena now understood as characteristic of gunshot wounds to the head--just like the visible backspatter at 313.

A mist of miniscule droplets in a rapidly appearing and disappearing spray from the entry wound.

The slight forward motion followed by the dramatic rearward thrust--I remember when Geraldo played the film in 1975--it was a shock, a realization.

Angleton set up Oswald as seen in John Newman, Oswald and the CIA--and as acknowledged by Lopez, Hardaway and Fonzi in their frustration with CIA gatekeeper Joannides--awarded for using DRE to create the legend of the "commie" and still a protected icon of "national security" today.

The shrieking fairies ashamed of their own names will never wash their Macbethian stains--marrooned in a shell of denial, the last refuge of scoundrels

From NSAM 263 to the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, a murder, a lie, we're all gonna' die

[Jim Hackett II]

Oswald isn't recreated in the window. Accurate to reality for once do I find the Confuseum. But I have to ask;
'Who was in the window but was left out of Mr. Dunkel's magic recreation'?
Matched to go with the Confuseum's magik-bullets?
Shoot around the corner magik Pb lead alchemy?
Nah....doubt abounds :nono:

The fable falls even by their own words:
[from Phil Dragoo's post ]
"J. Wesley Liebler, the commission counsel responsible for this section of the Warren Report, stated that "the fact is that not one person alive today (including Marina) ever saw that rifle in the Paine garage in such a way it could be identified as being that (Oswald's) rifle."

From outside the commission, the refutation of the LN Fable is even stronger.
Even the commission members couldn't stand by their own conclusions, therefore why should anyone else? Why so? See "Breach of Trust" and even "Accessories After the Facts" or Walt Brown's "Warren Omission".

Knowing that it was a fixed case even before the murder, how can it be mistaken research conclusions when Mr. Gil Jesus and Mr. George Evica write that LHOswald didn't:

from Phil Dragoo's post:
"order, pay for, receive, practice with, pose with, store, transport, use, or conceal the prop planted in the Kabuki stage."
(great imagery)

John Armstrong in H & L did fine work on both the rifle and the money order records fable(s). Exposed as bullsh*t. I find this part of his book particularly strong.

George O'Toole found strong indications that Wesley Frasier was lying about many "facts" to the WC in his testimony.

So I conclude, no Oswald rifle, no Oswald paper bundle and no Oswald paper bag.
More Fable of Ed Lansdale's cover and deception crews.

I do think there was an Oswald coke involved later in the domino room.

[David Josephs]

Mrs. RANDLE. He was carrying a package in a sort of a heavy brown bag, heavier than a grocery bag it looked to me. It was about, if I might measure, about this long, I suppose, and he carried it in his right hand, had the top sort of folded down and had a grip like this, and the bottom, he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it.

Mr. BALL - You say he had the package under his arm when you saw him?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - You mean one end of it under the armpit?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he had it up just like you stick it right under your arm like that.
Mr. BALL - And he had the lower part--
Mr. FRAZIER - The other part with his right hand.
Mr. BALL - Right hand?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - He carried it then parallel to his body?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right, straight up and down.
Representative FORD - Under his right arm?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - How much of that back seat, how much space did it take up?
Mr. FRAZIER - I would say roughly around 2 feet of the seat.
Mr. BALL - From the side of the seat over to the center, is that the way you would measure it?
Mr. FRAZIER - If, if you were going to measure it that way from the end of the seat over toward the center, right. But I say like I said I just roughly estimate and that would be around two feet, give and take a few inches.


Rather tries to suggest that Frazier might have missed the few inches sticking up as Oswald carried the rifle and walked away... I guess he never read the testimony...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMl4fLOCZPI


Mr. FRAZIER - I said from where I noticed he had it cupped in his hands. And I don't see how you could have it anywhere other than under your armpit because if you had it cupped in your hand it would stick over it.
Mr. BALL - Could he have carried it this way?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir. Never in front here. Like that. Now, that is what I was talking to you about. No, I say he couldn't because if he had you would have seen the package sticking up like that
From what I seen walking behind he had it under his arm and you couldn't tell that he had a package from the back.

[Jim Hackett II]

After intake and digesting I'll post more substantively.

At the outset: (only read about 50 pages at this point)

For many a year I have tried to explain the right temporal entry and right occipital/parietal exit wound in terms of a "shooter" location.
TSBD out just by contradictions of Parkland Hospital Press Conference data.
Grassy Knoll and fence - eliminated by the lack of any left side of head damage to the President and no shrapnel wounds to the First Lady.

It to me is a given that Only Parkland Memorial Hospital medical data is reliable. Bethesda NH sullied everything Humes-Boswell-Finck signed off on. Denial of a right rear exit wound is the last straw for me. Let alone the deceptive photos of the President's remains. "Who washed his hair?"

Too I remember the live news broadcasts of Nov. 22, 1963 repeatedly noting witnesses reporting both south knoll and north knoll and the triple overpass shooters. Then the TSBD was inserted into the story.

The south knoll would fit the wounds we know of. I.E. entry throat and entry right temple.
This idea fits with Tosh Plumlee's info too. The sewer map found!?!?

It is a crying shame when one cannot rely on official government pronouncements of lies to seek truth.
We and I should not have to do this work 50 damn years later, the government should have done all this for us and me. IT SHOULD DO SO NOW!

I must exercise caution with Ms. Fiester's position reouth knoll shooter because it fits with my own preconceived notions of the November Coup.
I note that Miss Dixie Dea pointed me to the idea of the south knoll in 2001.
Thanks Dixie RIP Dixie.
However there is no single researcher I agree with completely - except Fletcher Prouty.
I already disagree with a part of Ms. Fiester's views. I won't throw the baby out with the bath water until that baby deserves to be tossed out too, IF that develops to be the case.