Reclaiming History (357 page)

^*
Oswald’s particular Carcano, serial number C2766 (stamped on the left side of the barrel), was manufactured at the Italian government’s arsenal at Terni, Italy (fifty miles north of Rome), sometime during the year 1940, a version of an older design. Its first name came from the designer of the weapon’s predecessor in 1880, the Austrian, Ferdinand Ritter von Mannlicher; the second name, from one of two men who modified the original into its 1940 form, M. Carcano. Soon after the assassination, many Italian people referred to the rifle as
il fucile maledetto
—that “cursed gun.” How the weapon was used from the time of its origin in 1940 to the time it made its way into history is not known, but because the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was the rifle of the Italian army, it is believed it was used during the Second World War before Italy’s surrender in September 1943, after which it returned to the military warehouse at Terni. FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier described Oswald’s Carcano thusly: “The stock is worn, scratched. The bolt is relatively smooth, as if it had been operated several times. I cannot actually say how much use the weapon has had. The barrel is not…in excellent condition. It was, I would say, in fair condition. In other words, it showed the effects of wear and corrosion…It is a surplus type of weapon.” (3 H 394, WCT Robert A. Frazier; Wheeler, “Cursed Gun,” pp. 62–65)

^*
At the London trial, I elicited from Oswald’s Marine squad mate in Santa Ana, Nelson Delgado, that the score on the range one gets during basic training (when Oswald fired as a sharpshooter) is extremely important because “that score is going to follow you throughout your military career. Your promotion is going to be based, in part, upon that.” But when you’re about to leave the military (as Oswald was when he only qualified as a marksman), there is no incentive to do well. I asked Delgado if he “got the impression that Oswald wasn’t even trying” when he shot for the record just before leaving the corps. Answer: “Yes.” Delgado said that during that period Oswald wasn’t even taking care of his rifle. I asked Delgado if he felt Oswald could have done better if he had tried during this last firing for the record and Delgado said he felt Oswald could have. (Testimony of Nelson Delgado, Transcript of
On Trial
, July 24, 1968, pp. 596–599; see also 11 H 304, WCT Maj. Eugene D. Anderson)
The Marine rifle ratings are marksman, 190–209; sharpshooter, 210–219; and expert, 220–250.

^*
Indeed, one rifleman got off three shots at the target in 4.1 seconds, less than 1.4 seconds per round, though he only had one hit. And on March 21, 1979, an HSCA marksman, firing at distances of 143, 165, and 266 feet, hit three of the three targets (though he missed the head portion of the target at 266 feet) in “less than 5 seconds for all three shots” (8 HSCA 184).

† Relevant to this issue, I asked Lutz at the London trial, “How does the recoil of the Carcano compare with the recoil of other military rifles?” Answer: “It is considerably less.” “Would that tend to improve the shooter’s marksmanship under rapid-fire conditions?” “Yes, it would.” (Testimony of Monty Lutz, Transcript of
On Trial
, July 24, 1986, p. 454)

‡ As indicated earlier, the reasonable assumption is that Oswald used the iron sights on his Carcano. But if he had, indeed, used his four-power scope, the first shot at approximately sixty yards would have appeared to him to be only fifteen yards away, and the second shot at eighty-eight yards, only twenty-two yards away.

^*
Owing to the differences in the automobiles, the reenactors were sitting ten inches higher than the president and governor were on the day of the assassination. This variance was accounted for by investigators in their calculations. (5 H 148, WCT Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt)

^*
For those who feel that any projection backward shows a presumption toward Oswald’s guilt, note that the trajectory could not be projected
forward
. Since we know from the entrance wounds to the backs of Kennedy and Connally that the bullet was traveling on a straight line downward, any such projection forward to a possible source would have the assassin lying on the pavement of Elm Street flat on his back in front of the limousine. Even were that the alleged case, the body of the presidential limousine would be in the way of any of his bullets.

† The pathology panel concluded from the X-ray evidence that although the bullet struck bone, it was undeflected and “proceeded in an essentially straight and forward path” to its point of exit (7 HSCA 176, 125–126).

^*
Remarkably, as late as 2004, Posner wrote that “it would take nearly 30 years [by Failure Analysis, as reported by Posner in his book in 1993] for science to establish the [single-bullet] theory as fact” (
Los Angeles Times
, August 29, 2004, p. R5). But the Warren Commission clearly established the single-bullet theory by the testimony of scientists back in 1964, and the HSCA did likewise with scientists in 1978. Actually, science was never required, as Posner suggests. Only common sense. A bullet passing through soft issue in Kennedy’s body and then exiting the body had nowhere else to go
but
to Governor Connally’s body, which was in perfect alignment with Kennedy’s body to be hit by the exiting bullet. No more than ten seconds of reflection is necessary to
know
this.

^*
The author devotes only one clause in one sentence to the reconstruction. And this clause actually suggests the opposite of a single-bullet conclusion. Also, buried as part of a caption for three photos in the photographic section, the author makes reference to the fact that there was a 1964 reconstruction (Posner,
Case Closed
, p. 327, photo section between pp. 320 and 321).

^*
The inside flap to Posner’s book declares that “after thirty years,
Case Closed
finally succeeds where hundreds of other books and investigations [i.e., the Warren Commission and House Select Committee on Assassinations] have failed—it
resolves
the greatest murder mystery of our time, the assassination of JFK.”

^*
The Zapruder film was not shown to the American public until 1976 (see later discussion).

^*
For those conspiracy theorists who say that the Zapruder film is a hoax and probably feel that they are the bold avant-garde in the conspiracy community, I am here to tell them that they really are just pikers in this regard. Author Bernard M. Bane writes that the assassination
itself
never even took place! “President Kennedy’s assassination was a hoax,” he writes, “masterminded by social engineers in furtherance of promoting social reform.” He doesn’t spell out how these people did it, but in his book
Is President John F. Kennedy Alive—and Well?
he answers his question with a confident yes. “So what has kept JFK from surfacing all these years, given that he is not being held against his will as in the case of a house arrest?…In order to implement a revisionist face-saving surfacing, he needs the cooperation of the powers that be, his erstwhile adversaries, which, not surprisingly, he is not getting.” (Bane,
Is President John F. Kennedy Alive—and Well?
pp. viii, 120–121) So there.

† Although the conspirators would be able to see that Zapruder was in a better position to film the assassination they knew was about to take place, Zapruder’s film, if they tried to alter it, would still have to be 100 percent consistent with films taken from less favorable vantage points, like the Nix and Bronson films. Moreover, how could the conspirators have known, in advance, that only Zapruder would be in the position he was in—that there wouldn’t be other spectators with motion picture cameras on the north side of Elm Street?
Indeed, since we know that in addition to the many motion picture cameras in plain view, there were many Dealey Plaza spectators taking still photographs, unless the conspirators had a helicopter hovering over Dealey Plaza with several telescopic sights trained tightly on everyone in the plaza, how could they possibly know which of the cameras took stills and which were the more dangerous (to them) motion picture cameras they had to seize?

^*
If it weren’t to frame Oswald, and the conspirator-forgers didn’t want something in the film to be known, they obviously (assuming, as the theorists contend, the conspirators had possession of the original film) would have simply destroyed the film rather than engage in the incredibly complex effort to alter it.

^*
These are additions or alterations to an image using computer technology to manipulate the pixels (i.e., colored dots) that make up the image.

† Alterationist David Lifton is satisfied that the original Zapruder film was processed and developed at the Kodak plant in Dallas, but believes a copy was altered at a supersecret Kodak facility in Rochester, New York, and thereafter passed off as the original (David S. Lifton, “Pig on a Leash, a Question of Authenticity,” in Fetzer,
Great Zapruder Film Hoax
, pp. 387–388, 413). Apart from the fact there is no evidence this was done,
surely Lifton has to realize that this altered copy could be immediately exposed as a forgery when it was ultimately compared with the out-of-camera original.

^*
How, indeed, would they know that presidential assistant David Powers, in the car right behind the president’s limousine, who had a movie camera and
did
stand up in his car to take home movies at various places along the parade route starting at Love Field, would not have taken any pictures on Elm Street during the assassination (Trask,
Pictures of the Pain
, pp. 37, 63, 369; Letter from Dave Powers to Richard Trask dated March 28, 1989)? If he had, why would they think they’d be successful in stealing his film so they could alter it to make it consistent with their altered Zapruder film?

^*
Little is known of Marguerite’s two younger sisters, except Pearl married and had already died at the time of the assassination, and Aminthe was married and living in Knoxville, Tennessee (8 H 96, WCT Lillian Murret; Armstrong,
Harvey and Lee
, p. 13).

^*
Oswald was a voracious reader of serious literature who had intellectual proclivities, and most who came in contact with him felt he was bright and spoke very well, but he was dyslexic. Throughout this biography, the reader can expect to see a great number of misspelled words and defective grammar by Oswald, which I’ve decided to quote as is, for historical accuracy.

^*
Dr. Mancuso continued to rent the house until 1944, when Marguerite obtained a judgment of possession against him. She then sold the home for $6,500 to a bank, which resold it to Dr. Mancuso. (WR, p. 670; CE 2197, 25 H 76)

† Though Marguerite is quite specific about this, her sons, though less specific, disagree. John said that “maybe once every two weeks,” Marguerite “would drop around” (11 H 20). And Robert said that later, when Lee was also at Bethlehem, “on weekends she came to the home to visit us” (Oswald with Land and Land,
Lee
, p. 35).

^*
Robert told the Warren Commission that he and John did not come home this Christmas of 1945 because Marguerite, Lee, and Ekdahl had been living in Boston and their stay there had included the Christmas holidays (1 H 278). Not only does this clearly conflict with John’s testimony (11 H 25), but we know from school records that Lee, Marguerite, and Ekdahl were back in Dallas at least as early as October of 1945 since Lee entered in the first grade on October 31, 1945 (CE 1874, 23 H 679).

^*
Ekdahl died shortly after the divorce proceedings, and there seems to be no record in the literature as to how Lee reacted to his death (Thomson, Boissevain, and Aukofer, “Lee Harvey Oswald—Another Look,” p. 122).

^*
Two snapshots given the Warren Commission by John Pic suggest the barrenness of the neighborhood. The only building visible, at some distance, is a small, low, single-story building that Pic said contained both the local grocery store and the laundromat. The photos show Lee, a dog named Blackie they had acquired, and a ten-year-old car belonging to Marguerite. (Pic Exhibit Nos. 54 and 55, 21 H 122; 11 H 30, WCT John Edward Pic) The kids all wanted Marguerite to get a new car because this one didn’t work. Marguerite would have the boys out on the street every morning waving down people to push the car to get it started so she could get to work. (11 H 77, WCT John Edward Pic)

† Somehow, at least to me, the story just doesn’t have the ring of truth to it, not only because there’s no corroboration, and no evidence that Lee had ever engaged in conduct designed to kill either of his brothers, but also because Marguerite’s ho-hum attitude about this most serious and dangerous of conduct is not too believable.

^*
Conspiracy theorists, as much dreamers as the young Oswald, have always believed that in later years Oswald became a rendition of the main character in the show he was fascinated by, a double (some even say triple) agent. The fact that they have no evidence to support this belief, and that millions of others were fascinated by the popular TV show, is not troubling to them.

^*
One wonders just how much pressure Marguerite was putting on Lee to go to school. Though she undoubtedly urged him to do so, we also know that Marguerite, who had since started selling insurance, would occasionally allow Lee to go with her during the day, but he found it too boring waiting for her in the car as she made her frequent stops (Siegel Exhibit No. 1, 21 H 485).

^*
“I was never told my son needed psychiatric treatment, believe me,” Marguerite would later tell author Jean Stafford (Stafford,
Mother in History
, p. 22).