But you have to quote Hunt out of context to make this conclusion. He is explicitly talking of the WC hearing and the extraordinary fact that Specter did not ask the person who first found the bullet to identify it. Specter, hence the WC, "never" asked him to do that.
No, I simply have to quote Hunt, who said Tomlinson was *never shown* the bullet. He did not qualify it as *never shown by Specter*.
And remember the more important point:
Hunt never showed us the entire bullet either, in claiming JC Day's initials are nowhere to be found on the bullet. Why do you suppose that was?
Yes, it's a well known memo.
Except to Hunt, apparently, who did not mention it whatsoever in the article and especially not when claiming that Tomlinson was never shown the bullet.
Hunt is saying that the WC did not verify the chain of custody of CE-399 by asking the person who found it if he could identify it.
Tomlinson was asked that very question per the FBI memo.
Not when Specter interviewed him March -64, not ever never. Remember, it was the task of WC to investigate first and foremost the veracity of FBI's investigation of the assassination.
Hilarious. Now you're just making stuff up. It was never the task of the Warren Commission "to investigate first and foremost the veracity of FBI's investigation of the assassination" as you allege.
Here's the citation:
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/appendix-01.html
It was part of their task to
examine the evidence provided by the FBI:
The purposes of the Commission are to examine the evidence developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and any additional evidence that may hereafter come to light or be uncovered by federal or state authorities; to make such further investigation as the Commission finds desirable; to evaluate all the facts and circumstances surrounding such assassination, including the subsequent violent death of the man charged with the assassination, and to report to me its findings and conclusions.
It would have been easy for WC to send someone over at a later date when they had access to CE-399, but they didn't. "Never".
They decided early on to rely on the FBI and other agencies rather than hire their own investigative staff. They decided this in their first meeting as a commission:
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcexec/wcex1205/html/WCEX1205_0004a.htm (see the 4th and 5th paragraphs in particular on the page cited).
That means, in fact, that the FBI memos done for the Warren Commission, or at the behest of the Commission staff, in the investigation of the assassination, are in fact, Warren Commission documents -- as much so as any memo by Specter or Liebeler or Belin. With the FBI having shown the bullet to Tomlinson and asking him to identify it, sending a Warren Commission staff member like one of the aforementioned three to do the same thing is simply redundant as far as the Warren Commission was concerned. You are making a distinction without a difference.
In short, this memo might as well have "Warren Commission" as its letterhead:
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0215b.htm
(and note it IS assigned a Commission Exhibit number of CE2011).
And Hunt is therefore not being honest when he claims Tomlinson was never shown the bullet and also not mentioning this memo.
He is proud of his decades long service in the FBI. If he had been responsible for CE-399, the most famous bullet in the history of USA, the World, take it to Parkland and show it to Thomlinson and Wright, making notes, filing a report and send it back to HQ in Washington D.C., he would not remember it?.
Yes, that's entirely possible. How many decades after the assassination was he interviewed about this? I asked before, you never did answer. Do you remember everything you did the same amount of time ago?
The most important task in his career? He was still alert, with no sign of dementia or other old age brain impairment..
Wait, what? Showing a hospital orderly a bullet was the most important task of his career? How did you ascertain that? It seems like mere hyperbole to me. Do list the top five or top ten things in his career, and do tell me what methodology you utilized to determine this was "The most important task".
Or retract the claim, because you actually have no way of knowing what he did for the entirety of his career, and where showing a bullet to a hospital orderly would rank.
On top of that, there is no report of this interview to be found anywhere. All the similar files are found and all in chronological order with no gaps in the time line. Again. No files, no witnesses ....
I'm wagering this is also hyperbole. I doubt highly that every document except this one has been found, and released.
Odum has no conceivable reason to lie.
That's the LOGICAL FALLACY known as a strawman argument. Nobody suggested Odum was lying. Please try to rebut the points I make, not the ones you wish I made (apologies to JayUtah for stealing his line).
If you read Krusch's artikel on the twists and turns of among others, Lt Day, his behavior and contradictory recollections, there is ample evidence of foul play. How foul? Very.
Well then, it shouldn't take you long to expose said foul behavior here. Do post that "ample evidence of foul play" here. We'll wait.
No, you are simply wrong.
A simple assertion with no evidence provided in support. Curious that you would think that would be convincing. As I said originally:
So it reduces to you don't like the available evidence. And you're cherry-picking what you do accept. No big surprise there. We knew you were going to argue that going in.
Hank
