Impossible: The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald (41 page)

That would be a major problem indeed! According to the evidence of the bullet,
evidence that trumps any testimony to the contrary
, the only people who handled
this
bullet were Brian and Edward. And, if Andy, Charlie, and David actually
did
mark a bullet, then we can be sure that the bullet that they marked was
not this one
! That would mean that there were
two
bullets, one which was actually present at the scene of the crime, the other surreptitiously later introduced into evidence!

This is such a serious problem that even if we had what some might refer to as a “minor” gap in the chain of custody, that so-called
minor
gap would actually be a
major
gap:

The reason that one letter lost is a major gap is that the person who
first
found the bullet was Andy. Andy marked his bullet. Yet Andy’s initial is not on this bullet, is it? This means that this bullet was
not
the one found by Andy. So, even though there is a legitimate chain of custody following, that chain of custody is
irrelevant
, because we know that this bullet could
not
have been the bullet found by Andy — the bullet at the scene of the crime, and the only one that counts.

The problem would be even worse if we then went to David, and asked him if he carved his initials in the bullet, and he told us “No.” That would be a second problem, a case of
false identification
to go along with our previous case of
missing identification
. Where false identification was concerned, the initials would be forged, not the bullet, but the end result would be the same.

If we have either (or both) of these types of mal-identification, false or missing, this bullet would therefore not be admissible into evidence, and any case relying on this bullet would be finished.

A continuity error, a literal one, that could not be overcome. And for want of this nail, the kingdom would be lost — the nail in the coffin, so to speak.

Now that we have the basic concept in mind, let’s track the chain of custody for the Kennedy shells and live round. When we look at the testimony related to the
live round
alleged to have been found on the sixth floor, we can see that
the procedure was followed
as established. The first person considered to have possession was Lieutenant Day, who in testimony before the Warren Commission on April 22 stated that he marked the live round at the scene of the crime, just like it was supposed to be (4 H 258):
40

Now let’s find out if that same procedure was followed with the
empty
shells discovered.

David Belin, Assistant Counsel of the Warren Commission, had interviewed Day in Dallas just two weeks prior to his April 22 testimony (4 H 254), and in that interview Day told Belin that he had marked
all
the empty shells
at the scene
, in the same manner as he had marked the live round, following the standard operating procedure.

Day’s April 22 testimony, however, revoked that claim, with the astonishing new information that his name was
not
scratched on the third empty shell! (4 H 254):
41

In case this testimony left any doubt that the shells were not marked at the scene as required, Day reiterated the point (4 H 255):
42

So what happened? How was it that only
two
hulls were marked by Day, and how were any marked
at all
, if they weren’t marked at the scene?

Well, as the story went, Day claims to have put the three hulls in an envelope, and then he turned them over to Richard Sims, a homicide detective with the Dallas Police Department (DPD), without marking them at the time (4 H 253):
43

Of course, we know Day did
not
turn

3
hulls over to
Sims
of the DPD,

because the CSS form of November 22 clearly indicates that

2
hulls were turned over to
Brown
of the FBI.

Therefore, there should be a “B” on this bullet, and not an “S”, which is our clue to be on the lookout for future examples of BS.

We are already in major trouble with this testimony, but the trouble has only just begun . . .

So, when did Day supposedly mark the hulls? As the story goes, when two of them had been returned to Day at 10 pm — but then Day dropped another bombshell (4 H 254):
44