A long time ago, Corbett said that they didn't dust the rifle for fingerprints at the crime scene.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7uLMSs4KQ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 7:08:15 PM, John Corbett wrote:
"Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier both saw Oswald with the 38 inch package that morning."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
Neither witness said anything about the package being 38 inches long -------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:33:20 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
"Gil is speculating as to why Oswald went to Irving. He has no evidence to back up his speculation."

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/the-real-reason-oswald-went-to-irving-on-11-21/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: Gil: When I don't post for a few days, you cry, "Where's Gil " ?
Corbett: I don't recall ever writing that. I don't recall ever thinking that.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/BI_ZOaLh-30/m/29tla-YeCQAJ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots ? The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:08:20 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: According to Gil, and FBI report refutes the SBT. Oh, really. This is the report Gil cited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slausen+cutoff&view=detail&mid=A3348DA7B962513ECCB2A3348DA7B962513ECCB2&FORM=VIRE

The evidence determined that was a lie. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:12:17 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
There is no chain-of-custody issue with any of the forensic evidence. There is documentation that spells out every person who handled the evidence. Who found it. Whom they gave it to. Whom that person gave it to and so on. That is how chain of custody is
established.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/6XMI-cxztKo/m/SRkbS5adAAAJ

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 5:53:05 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

A long time ago, Corbett said that they didn't dust the rifle for fingerprints at the crime scene.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7uLMSs4KQ

I must not make many errors if you have to go back that far to find one.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 7:08:15 PM, John Corbett wrote:
"Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier both saw Oswald with the 38 inch package that morning."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
Neither witness said anything about the package being 38 inches long

The fact they didn't describe the package as 38 inches long doesn't mean they didn't see the
38 inch package. It just means their guesstimate of its length was wrong.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:33:20 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
"Gil is speculating as to why Oswald went to Irving. He has no evidence to back up his speculation."

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/the-real-reason-oswald-went-to-irving-on-11-21/

You are simply assuming things, Gil. The evidence shows he went to Irving to fetch his rifle
which he smuggled into work the next morning.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: Gil: When I don't post for a few days, you cry, "Where's Gil " ?
Corbett: I don't recall ever writing that. I don't recall ever thinking that.

That was a true statement. I didn't recall writing or thinking that.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/BI_ZOaLh-30/m/29tla-YeCQAJ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots ? The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4

You conveniently clipped out the context which made it clear I was referring to the single page
you cited, including your highlighted passage. My remarks were not addressing the full report.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:08:20 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: According to Gil, and FBI report refutes the SBT. Oh, really. This is the report Gil cited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slausen+cutoff&view=detail&mid=A3348DA7B962513ECCB2A3348DA7B962513ECCB2&FORM=VIRE

The evidence determined that was a lie. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:12:17 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: There is no chain-of-custody issue with any of the forensic evidence. There is documentation that spells out every person who handled the evidence. Who found it. Whom they gave it to. Whom that person gave it to and so on. That is how chain of custody

is established.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/6XMI-cxztKo/m/SRkbS5adAAAJ

You have produced no evidence that the DPD and prosecutors couldn't have documented chain of evidence. All you have done is they didn't produce something they had no legal obligation to
do so since the case wasn't going to trial. That doesn't prove they could not have done so if need
be.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 04:24:05 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 5:53:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

A long time ago, Corbett said that they didn't dust the rifle for fingerprints at the crime scene.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7uLMSs4KQ

I must not make many errors if you have to go back that far to find one.

You were caught lying just this week. You have a LONG HISTORY of
lying.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 7:08:15?PM, John Corbett wrote:
"Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier both saw Oswald with the 38 inch package that morning."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
Neither witness said anything about the package being 38 inches long

The fact they didn't describe the package as 38 inches long doesn't mean they didn't see the
38 inch package. It just means their guesstimate of its length was wrong.

The fact that they didn't say what you claimed they saw is proof that
you lied.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:33:20?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
"Gil is speculating as to why Oswald went to Irving. He has no evidence to back up his speculation."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://gil-jesus.com/the-real-reason-oswald-went-to-irving-on-11-21/

You are simply assuming things, Gil. The evidence shows he went to Irving to fetch his rifle
which he smuggled into work the next morning.

You are simply assuming things. The evidence doesn't show what you
claim it does.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 10:46:36?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: >> Gil: When I don't post for a few days, you cry, "Where's Gil " ?
Corbett: I don't recall ever writing that. I don't recall ever thinking that.

That was a true statement. I didn't recall writing or thinking that.

Your attempt to claim you simply forgot isn't a valid excuse. You
simply lied. And it was incredibly simple and quick to prove it.
Something YOU should have done.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/BI_ZOaLh-30/m/29tla-YeCQAJ >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots ? The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4

You conveniently clipped out the context which made it clear I was referring to the single page
you cited, including your highlighted passage. My remarks were not addressing the full report.

You're lying again. The context CLEARLY showed you referencing the
entire report.

You said: "Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK
and JBC were hit by separate shots."

You can lie all you want, but this is a CLEARLY ESTABLISHED lie on
your part. You showed no prior knowledge of the fact that the FBI
report quite clearly showed exactly what Gil said it did - and it was
*NOT POSSIBLE* to come up with the SBT given what the FBI Summary
report said.

You got schooled and spanked.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:08:20?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
According to Gil, and FBI report refutes the SBT. Oh, really. This is the report Gil cited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slausen+cutoff&view=detail&mid=A3348DA7B962513ECCB2A3348DA7B962513ECCB2&FORM=VIRE

The evidence determined that was a lie.

Dead silence... Notice that again, the ENTIRE report is being
referenced.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:12:17?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
There is no chain-of-custody issue with any of the forensic evidence. There is documentation that spells out every person who handled the evidence. Who found it. Whom they gave it to. Whom that person gave it to and so on. That is how chain of custody

is established.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/6XMI-cxztKo/m/SRkbS5adAAAJ

You have produced no evidence that the DPD and prosecutors couldn't have documented chain of evidence.

Not needed.

What is needed is for *YOU* to cite the evidence for your lying claim.

Gil correctly points out that such evidence is non-existent. You
lied.

All you have done is they didn't produce something...

All Gil has done is show that they COULD NOT produce what didn't
exist.

You claimed it *DID* exist.

You lied.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 4:53:05 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

A long time ago, Corbett said that they didn't dust the rifle for fingerprints at the crime scene.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7uLMSs4KQ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 7:08:15 PM, John Corbett wrote:
"Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier both saw Oswald with the 38 inch package that morning."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
Neither witness said anything about the package being 38 inches long -------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:33:20 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
"Gil is speculating as to why Oswald went to Irving. He has no evidence to back up his speculation."

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/the-real-reason-oswald-went-to-irving-on-11-21/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: Gil: When I don't post for a few days, you cry, "Where's Gil " ?
Corbett: I don't recall ever writing that. I don't recall ever thinking that.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/BI_ZOaLh-30/m/29tla-YeCQAJ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots ? The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:08:20 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: According to Gil, and FBI report refutes the SBT. Oh, really. This is the report Gil cited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slausen+cutoff&view=detail&mid=A3348DA7B962513ECCB2A3348DA7B962513ECCB2&FORM=VIRE

The evidence determined that was a lie. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:12:17 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: There is no chain-of-custody issue with any of the forensic evidence. There is documentation that spells out every person who handled the evidence. Who found it. Whom they gave it to. Whom that person gave it to and so on. That is how chain of custody

is established.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/6XMI-cxztKo/m/SRkbS5adAAAJ

This is Day, from Sneed's book No More Silence:

"We hadn't been in that area taking photographs and processing the hulls more than then minutes or so when Captain Fritz called me back to the opposite corner of the building from where the shooting occurred, diagonally across and close to the freight
elevators, where they had found the rifle. It was laying flat stuck down in the crack between some boxes. It had apparently not been located prior to that. No one had picked it up, so I'm reasonably sure that I was the next person who handled it after
Oswald. We made photos of that and then I picked it up.
"Through a casual examination, I didn't see any markings on it at that time. All I was trying to do was to get it up without destroying any fingerprints to see if there was a live round in it. I wasn't making a close examination on it there; there
just wasn't anyplace to do it.
"I had examined lots of rifles, picked them up and so forth, but I wasn't familiar with that particular gun. It appeared to be a cheap wartime gun with a telescopic sight and kind of a worn leather strap on it. There were a lot of those flooding into
the country for many years after the war. You could tell by looking that there could be no fingerprints on that strap. I'd been handling those for a long time, and you could tell just by looking at it that it was too rough to get any fingerprints. So I
picked it up by the strap, took fingerprint powder and tried to put it on the little knob on the bolt. It was just a small area; the chance of getting any fingerprints off of it were practically nil, but you couldn't do anything but try. I put powder on
the knob and examined it with the glass, but there was nothing visible at all. So I held the rifle by the strap in such a way that Captain Fritz could open the bolt. When he opened it, a live round fell out.
"Just looking at it I thought the chances were slim that we'd find any prints on the rifle itself. It had what we call a wartime finish on the barrel which would lift out of the stock. That type of surface didn't take prints well, nor did the wood
stock which was too coarse or rough. You've got to have a smooth, fairly clean surface before the ridges will leave an impression. If it's rougher than the ridges of the finger, you're not going to find anything there.
"At that time, just through casual observation, it didn't look too promising. It wasn't the place to try to do any fingerprint work since it's a rather lengthy process and we had other things to do. So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at
City Hall, store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and get to it when I could. I didn't have anything to wrap it up with at the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn't touch anything other than the strap. Besides, you
had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you're liable to smear them just from the wrapping."

So, all Day dusted was the bolt handle knob.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 7:15:53 PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 4:53:05 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

A long time ago, Corbett said that they didn't dust the rifle for fingerprints at the crime scene.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7uLMSs4KQ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 7:08:15 PM, John Corbett wrote:
"Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier both saw Oswald with the 38 inch package that morning."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
Neither witness said anything about the package being 38 inches long ------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:33:20 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
"Gil is speculating as to why Oswald went to Irving. He has no evidence to back up his speculation."

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/the-real-reason-oswald-went-to-irving-on-11-21/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Gil: When I don't post for a few days, you cry, "Where's Gil " ?
Corbett: I don't recall ever writing that. I don't recall ever thinking that.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/BI_ZOaLh-30/m/29tla-YeCQAJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots ? The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:08:20 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: According to Gil, and FBI report refutes the SBT. Oh, really. This is the report Gil cited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slausen+cutoff&view=detail&mid=A3348DA7B962513ECCB2A3348DA7B962513ECCB2&FORM=VIRE

The evidence determined that was a lie. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:12:17 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: There is no chain-of-custody issue with any of the forensic evidence. There is documentation that spells out every person who handled the evidence. Who found it. Whom they gave it to. Whom that person gave it to and so on. That is how chain of

custody is established.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/6XMI-cxztKo/m/SRkbS5adAAAJ

This is Day, from Sneed's book No More Silence:

"We hadn't been in that area taking photographs and processing the hulls more than then minutes or so when Captain Fritz called me back to the opposite corner of the building from where the shooting occurred, diagonally across and close to the freight

elevators, where they had found the rifle. It was laying flat stuck down in the crack between some boxes. It had apparently not been located prior to that. No one had picked it up, so I'm reasonably sure that I was the next person who handled it after
Oswald. We made photos of that and then I picked it up.

"Through a casual examination, I didn't see any markings on it at that time. All I was trying to do was to get it up without destroying any fingerprints to see if there was a live round in it. I wasn't making a close examination on it there; there just

wasn't anyplace to do it.

"I had examined lots of rifles, picked them up and so forth, but I wasn't familiar with that particular gun. It appeared to be a cheap wartime gun with a telescopic sight and kind of a worn leather strap on it. There were a lot of those flooding into

the country for many years after the war. You could tell by looking that there could be no fingerprints on that strap. I'd been handling those for a long time, and you could tell just by looking at it that it was too rough to get any fingerprints. So I
picked it up by the strap, took fingerprint powder and tried to put it on the little knob on the bolt. It was just a small area; the chance of getting any fingerprints off of it were practically nil, but you couldn't do anything but try. I put powder on
the knob and examined it with the glass, but there was nothing visible at all. So I held the rifle by the strap in such a way that Captain Fritz could open the bolt. When he opened it, a live round fell out.

"Just looking at it I thought the chances were slim that we'd find any prints on the rifle itself. It had what we call a wartime finish on the barrel which would lift out of the stock. That type of surface didn't take prints well, nor did the wood

stock which was too coarse or rough. You've got to have a smooth, fairly clean surface before the ridges will leave an impression. If it's rougher than the ridges of the finger, you're not going to find anything there.

"At that time, just through casual observation, it didn't look too promising. It wasn't the place to try to do any fingerprint work since it's a rather lengthy process and we had other things to do. So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at

City Hall, store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and get to it when I could. I didn't have anything to wrap it up with at the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn't touch anything other than the strap. Besides, you
had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you're liable to smear them just from the wrapping."

So, all Day dusted was the bolt handle knob.

I knew when I made the remark Gil has cited that Day had taken the rifle back to HQ to check
for fingerprints. I was unaware at the time that he had done a preliminary dusting at the scene
so technically, Gil is correct that I misspoke. What I find hilarious is that Gil has so few victories
that he has to keep digging up this one from years ago to score points. I'm not sure exactly
when I made that remark but I'm guessing it's from about ten years ago. If I want to find a goofy
statement from Gil, I don't have to go back more than a few days. Usually, just few hours.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

CORBETT IS A TOTAL WEASEL

GTFO YOU LYING CUNT
YOU AND DOYLE NEED TO GET A ROOM AND SUCK EACHOTHER OFF FOR QUITE CONSIDERABLE TIME

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:39:58 AM UTC-5, John Corbett wrote:

On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 7:15:53 PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 4:53:05 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

A long time ago, Corbett said that they didn't dust the rifle for fingerprints at the crime scene.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7uLMSs4KQ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 7:08:15 PM, John Corbett wrote:
"Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier both saw Oswald with the 38 inch package that morning."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
Neither witness said anything about the package being 38 inches long -------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:33:20 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: "Gil is speculating as to why Oswald went to Irving. He has no evidence to back up his speculation."

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/the-real-reason-oswald-went-to-irving-on-11-21/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Gil: When I don't post for a few days, you cry, "Where's Gil " ? Corbett: I don't recall ever writing that. I don't recall ever thinking that.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/BI_ZOaLh-30/m/29tla-YeCQAJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots ? The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:08:20 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: According to Gil, and FBI report refutes the SBT. Oh, really. This is the report Gil cited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slausen+cutoff&view=detail&mid=A3348DA7B962513ECCB2A3348DA7B962513ECCB2&FORM=VIRE

The evidence determined that was a lie. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:12:17 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: There is no chain-of-custody issue with any of the forensic evidence. There is documentation that spells out every person who handled the evidence. Who found it. Whom they gave it to. Whom that person gave it to and so on. That is how chain of

custody is established.

The evidence determined that was a lie: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/6XMI-cxztKo/m/SRkbS5adAAAJ

This is Day, from Sneed's book No More Silence:

"We hadn't been in that area taking photographs and processing the hulls more than then minutes or so when Captain Fritz called me back to the opposite corner of the building from where the shooting occurred, diagonally across and close to the

freight elevators, where they had found the rifle. It was laying flat stuck down in the crack between some boxes. It had apparently not been located prior to that. No one had picked it up, so I'm reasonably sure that I was the next person who handled it
after Oswald. We made photos of that and then I picked it up.

"Through a casual examination, I didn't see any markings on it at that time. All I was trying to do was to get it up without destroying any fingerprints to see if there was a live round in it. I wasn't making a close examination on it there; there

just wasn't anyplace to do it.

"I had examined lots of rifles, picked them up and so forth, but I wasn't familiar with that particular gun. It appeared to be a cheap wartime gun with a telescopic sight and kind of a worn leather strap on it. There were a lot of those flooding into

the country for many years after the war. You could tell by looking that there could be no fingerprints on that strap. I'd been handling those for a long time, and you could tell just by looking at it that it was too rough to get any fingerprints. So I
picked it up by the strap, took fingerprint powder and tried to put it on the little knob on the bolt. It was just a small area; the chance of getting any fingerprints off of it were practically nil, but you couldn't do anything but try. I put powder on
the knob and examined it with the glass, but there was nothing visible at all. So I held the rifle by the strap in such a way that Captain Fritz could open the bolt. When he opened it, a live round fell out.

"Just looking at it I thought the chances were slim that we'd find any prints on the rifle itself. It had what we call a wartime finish on the barrel which would lift out of the stock. That type of surface didn't take prints well, nor did the wood

stock which was too coarse or rough. You've got to have a smooth, fairly clean surface before the ridges will leave an impression. If it's rougher than the ridges of the finger, you're not going to find anything there.

"At that time, just through casual observation, it didn't look too promising. It wasn't the place to try to do any fingerprint work since it's a rather lengthy process and we had other things to do. So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at

City Hall, store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and get to it when I could. I didn't have anything to wrap it up with at the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn't touch anything other than the strap. Besides, you
had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you're liable to smear them just from the wrapping."

So, all Day dusted was the bolt handle knob.

I knew when I made the remark Gil has cited that Day had taken the rifle back to HQ to check
for fingerprints. I was unaware at the time that he had done a preliminary dusting at the scene
so technically, Gil is correct that I misspoke. What I find hilarious is that Gil has so few victories
that he has to keep digging up this one from years ago to score points. I'm not sure exactly
when I made that remark but I'm guessing it's from about ten years ago. If I want to find a goofy
statement from Gil, I don't have to go back more than a few days. Usually, just few hours.

I would say that you and Gil are both arguably correct, depending on how you frame the question.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 14 Oct 2023 04:39:56 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 7:15:53?PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 4:53:05?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

A long time ago, Corbett said that they didn't dust the rifle for fingerprints at the crime scene.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7uLMSs4KQ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 7:08:15?PM, John Corbett wrote:
"Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier both saw Oswald with the 38 inch package that morning."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
Neither witness said anything about the package being 38 inches long
------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:33:20?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
"Gil is speculating as to why Oswald went to Irving. He has no evidence to back up his speculation."

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://gil-jesus.com/the-real-reason-oswald-went-to-irving-on-11-21/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 10:46:36?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: >> > Gil: When I don't post for a few days, you cry, "Where's Gil " ?
Corbett: I don't recall ever writing that. I don't recall ever thinking that.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/BI_ZOaLh-30/m/29tla-YeCQAJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots ? The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:08:20?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
According to Gil, and FBI report refutes the SBT. Oh, really. This is the report Gil cited:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slausen+cutoff&view=detail&mid=A3348DA7B962513ECCB2A3348DA7B962513ECCB2&FORM=VIRE

The evidence determined that was a lie.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:12:17?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
There is no chain-of-custody issue with any of the forensic evidence. There is documentation that spells out every person who handled the evidence. Who found it. Whom they gave it to. Whom that person gave it to and so on. That is how chain of

custody is established.

The evidence determined that was a lie:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/6XMI-cxztKo/m/SRkbS5adAAAJ

This is Day, from Sneed's book No More Silence:

"We hadn't been in that area taking photographs and processing the hulls more than then minutes or so when Captain Fritz called me back to the opposite corner of the building from where the shooting occurred, diagonally across and close to the freight

elevators, where they had found the rifle. It was laying flat stuck down in the crack between some boxes. It had apparently not been located prior to that. No one had picked it up, so I'm reasonably sure that I was the next person who handled it after
Oswald. We made photos of that and then I picked it up.

"Through a casual examination, I didn't see any markings on it at that time. All I was trying to do was to get it up without destroying any fingerprints to see if there was a live round in it. I wasn't making a close examination on it there; there

just wasn't anyplace to do it.

"I had examined lots of rifles, picked them up and so forth, but I wasn't familiar with that particular gun. It appeared to be a cheap wartime gun with a telescopic sight and kind of a worn leather strap on it. There were a lot of those flooding into

the country for many years after the war. You could tell by looking that there could be no fingerprints on that strap. I'd been handling those for a long time, and you could tell just by looking at it that it was too rough to get any fingerprints. So I
picked it up by the strap, took fingerprint powder and tried to put it on the little knob on the bolt. It was just a small area; the chance of getting any fingerprints off of it were practically nil, but you couldn't do anything but try. I put powder on
the knob and examined it with the glass, but there was nothing visible at all. So I held the rifle by the strap in such a way that Captain Fritz could open the bolt. When he opened it, a live round fell out.

"Just looking at it I thought the chances were slim that we'd find any prints on the rifle itself. It had what we call a wartime finish on the barrel which would lift out of the stock. That type of surface didn't take prints well, nor did the wood

stock which was too coarse or rough. You've got to have a smooth, fairly clean surface before the ridges will leave an impression. If it's rougher than the ridges of the finger, you're not going to find anything there.

"At that time, just through casual observation, it didn't look too promising. It wasn't the place to try to do any fingerprint work since it's a rather lengthy process and we had other things to do. So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at

City Hall, store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and get to it when I could. I didn't have anything to wrap it up with at the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn't touch anything other than the strap. Besides, you
had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you're liable to smear them just from the wrapping."

So, all Day dusted was the bolt handle knob.

I knew when I made the remark Gil has cited that Day had taken the rifle back to HQ to check
for fingerprints. I was unaware at the time that he had done a preliminary dusting at the scene
so technically, Gil is correct that I misspoke.

No, he's correct that you LIED.

You made a statement of fact without ANYTHING in the evidence you
could point to that would lead a reasonable person to think that.

You simply INVENTED a "fact."



Logical fallacies deleted.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)