Latest / The Lone Gunman Podcast : JFK Assassination / RRR W/Rob 5-31-26

Transcript

RRR W/Rob 5-31-26 · The Lone Gunman Podcast : JFK Assassination

0:07
Speaker 1: Random Research Ramblings with Robin, digging through the details.
0:14
Speaker 3: That's his job.
0:17
Speaker 2: Don't Dallas days and no reports. He breaks hit down
0:21
Speaker 2: in friendly shorts, Random research trambolins.
0:25
Speaker 1: With Robin.
0:32
Speaker 3: And what is up? Everyone? Welcome into some random research
0:35
Speaker 3: ramblings with Rob. You know I always try to start
0:40
Speaker 3: off these videos, you know, relaxing. Havn't trying to have
0:42
Speaker 3: a couple of coffee outside, relaxing on the deck. Muscafoos
0:48
Speaker 3: and neighbors love to ruin it all. Well, not so
0:54
Speaker 3: much them, but they're dogs. And I don't blame the dogs.
1:00
Speaker 3: Don't really know any better. It's the dogs only behave
1:03
Speaker 3: as well as the owners have trained them to behave.
1:09
Speaker 3: And whenever I either go outside or I'm already outside
1:16
Speaker 3: and they come outside, and all they want to do
1:20
Speaker 3: is run over to the fence and bark incessantly. And
1:25
Speaker 3: I have tried to be nice to the dogies. I tried.
1:30
Speaker 3: I've tried to meet them, pet them. They're just out
1:35
Speaker 3: of control. Man. Again, I blame this cafu's and neighbors.
1:41
Speaker 3: They're thirty somethings with no kids, two dogs, and they're idiots.
1:49
Speaker 3: And I don't like them. Yes, I am your grumpy
1:53
Speaker 3: old neighbor. I am the guy I had never wanted
1:57
Speaker 3: to become, but here I am anyway. So I had
2:04
Speaker 3: an idea in mind of what I wanted to talk
2:06
Speaker 3: to you guys about this week, but after talking to
2:11
Speaker 3: Joe about it, I think we're gonna save it for
2:14
Speaker 3: a little discussion on members only because it's hella interesting.
2:21
Speaker 3: So this week, I think I'm just gonna go through
2:24
Speaker 3: some of the listener emails that I get in here,
2:28
Speaker 3: because unlike quick Hits, we hardly ever address your emails
2:35
Speaker 3: on the show. And I try to the best of
2:40
Speaker 3: my ability to answer everybody that writes in, but sometimes
2:46
Speaker 3: things slip through the cracks. You know, I'll read them,
2:49
Speaker 3: i don't have time to answer right away, and then
2:51
Speaker 3: I forget, and you know, I'm a scafusa in that sense.
2:57
Speaker 3: But you know, it's a lot keep up with. And
3:02
Speaker 3: you know, I love the discussion and all of that,
3:05
Speaker 3: it's sometimes it's just a lot, you know, to keep
3:09
Speaker 3: up with. So I apologize, and I wanted to address
3:15
Speaker 3: some of the emails that have been coming in recently
3:17
Speaker 3: because they're really good and I appreciate each and every
3:21
Speaker 3: one of you guys. Out there listening and taking the
3:23
Speaker 3: time to actually send it in emails because you feel
3:26
Speaker 3: so strongly about some things on the show. So let's
3:29
Speaker 3: jump right in here. The first email we got here
3:33
Speaker 3: is from Julian. He is from Switzerland. We love our
3:36
Speaker 3: international listeners here, he says, please allow me to rebound
3:41
Speaker 3: on your latest show on the Oswald's signatures and to
3:44
Speaker 3: make a couple of humble contributions. Let's see. He says.
3:55
Speaker 3: He spends sixteen years in Russia. His wife comes there
4:00
Speaker 3: just like Oswald. In twenty eighteen he visited Minsk and
4:04
Speaker 3: was able to visit actually the Oswald's apartment in Minsk,
4:07
Speaker 3: which is pretty cool. I wonder if it's still bugged
4:12
Speaker 3: to the hilt, he says. He finally made a trip
4:16
Speaker 3: to New Orleans in Dallas on the trail of the scaffoozes,
4:22
Speaker 3: and he's been to pretty much every connected place with
4:25
Speaker 3: the case, which is cool. He says, so far, it's
4:31
Speaker 3: not bringing much resolution to the case. But as you say,
4:34
Speaker 3: it is interesting. I do say that a lot. It
4:37
Speaker 3: is interesting. It is to visit and actually see these
4:42
Speaker 3: places with your own two eyes, to walk on the
4:45
Speaker 3: same ground that these people walked on. In history and
4:50
Speaker 3: to actually see things with your own two eyes and
4:53
Speaker 3: be able to take in everything from the smells, the sounds,
4:58
Speaker 3: the colors, the sights, the movements, the gradients, the colors.
5:06
Speaker 3: I don't know, something is lost in translation when you
5:11
Speaker 3: just look at pictures of places, and I think it's
5:15
Speaker 3: really important to visit these places as much as possible.
5:20
Speaker 3: That's why I've you know, been to Dallas, have done
5:23
Speaker 3: that thing. I really want to go to New Orleans.
5:26
Speaker 3: I really want to experience New Orleans, not just for
5:31
Speaker 3: its own history, but the history, you know, with Oswald
5:38
Speaker 3: and the Cuban exiles and what was going on there
5:41
Speaker 3: in the sixties. And to go walk these same streets
5:45
Speaker 3: these guys walked, visit the same shops, see where they worked,
5:49
Speaker 3: see where they lived, and just really breathe it all in,
5:54
Speaker 3: take it all in, and it'd be awesome. All right,
5:57
Speaker 3: Enough about that, Let's get back to Julian as far
6:00
Speaker 3: as his contributions and thoughts. Here we go. Number one,
6:04
Speaker 3: you said the citizenship renouncement request is probably a Russian fake.
6:09
Speaker 3: If it is a fake, it is a US fake.
6:14
Speaker 3: It is allegedly a letter delivered by Oswald to the
6:16
Speaker 3: US Embassy in Moscow when he was there, not to
6:21
Speaker 3: the Russians. This is not to say that the Russians
6:25
Speaker 3: would be above such practice. By the way, I remember
6:28
Speaker 3: seeing somewhere after the Hunt note had been proven to
6:31
Speaker 3: be a fake by the KGB. Yeah, I mean, I'm
6:34
Speaker 3: just look and the course of doing the show, we
6:37
Speaker 3: do a lot of thinking out loud here and sometimes,
6:40
Speaker 3: you know, we skulfooze it up a little bit. But again,
6:45
Speaker 3: I can't research the providence of every letter, whether or
6:48
Speaker 3: not it was mailed to the US embassy or hand
6:52
Speaker 3: delivered by Oswald. I mean, you know, we're assuming things
6:58
Speaker 3: were mailed and not hand delivered. But if you say
7:02
Speaker 3: it was hand delivered by Oswald note, I guess it
7:04
Speaker 3: would be pretty hard for it to be a Russian fake.
7:07
Speaker 3: And that's a good thing to know. So duly noted,
7:10
Speaker 3: thank you number two. Regarding the Walker note in Russian,
7:14
Speaker 3: as a fluent Russian speaker reader, writer, I can tell you.
7:19
Speaker 3: I can tell you this even if Oswald was dyslexic,
7:22
Speaker 3: non native, even not very fluent, which is contradicted by witnesses,
7:27
Speaker 3: the language level of the note is really too bad.
7:31
Speaker 3: It seems impossible that someone who was immersed for more
7:35
Speaker 3: than two years with everybody around speaking only Russian, who
7:40
Speaker 3: reads books, periodicals and so on in Russian wrote this stuff.
7:45
Speaker 3: The calligraphy and spelling are very poor. This I can understand.
7:48
Speaker 3: But the grammar and even the sentence structures, it really
7:51
Speaker 3: looks like a two year old wrote it. So it's
7:55
Speaker 3: definitely not by Oswald. I even wonder if any fluent
7:59
Speaker 3: Russian speaker be able to come up with or propose
8:02
Speaker 3: such a piece of shit. To me, it looks more
8:05
Speaker 3: like the work of someone with some very crude knowledge
8:08
Speaker 3: of Russian. In Oswald's notebook there is some Russian, almost
8:11
Speaker 3: one hundred percent written by him, addresses, contacts, etc. Checking
8:16
Speaker 3: that versus the Walker note would be interesting. Maybe AI
8:19
Speaker 3: can check the calligraphy versus Marina and Ruth two. By
8:24
Speaker 3: the way, this note is the proof if it was
8:26
Speaker 3: still needed, that Ruth Payne was full of it during
8:30
Speaker 3: oral history, she said. Walker's note was by Oswald because
8:34
Speaker 3: he had not been able to write the Russian word
8:36
Speaker 3: pronounced clutched for keys, so he wrote keys in English.
8:44
Speaker 3: Anyone who checks the note second word the first page
8:47
Speaker 3: text can see for themselves that is written that what
8:50
Speaker 3: is written is not keys. It is the Russian word,
8:53
Speaker 3: but spelled wrong. Okay, but definitely in Russian. How can
8:57
Speaker 3: someone having lived for two years in Russia sharing an
9:00
Speaker 3: apartment and not know how to say keys. Of course,
9:03
Speaker 3: this has not proved that Oswald did not write the note,
9:07
Speaker 3: but it confirms that Ruth has been lying through her teeth. Well, look,
9:11
Speaker 3: I don't know about that, and I don't know one
9:18
Speaker 3: hundred about Oswald's Russian writing ability. Speaking Russian is one thing.
9:30
Speaker 3: Learning the language is one thing. Writing the language is
9:36
Speaker 3: something totally different, especially when it looks just like a
9:39
Speaker 3: jumble fuck of alphabet soup, you know, uh, you know,
9:46
Speaker 3: with backwards letters and letters that shouldn't be put together,
9:50
Speaker 3: and it's just it's just weird. So the fact that I,
9:57
Speaker 3: you know, if Oswald had a very poor writing style,
10:01
Speaker 3: because I don't know how often he really had to
10:03
Speaker 3: write in Russian, to be honest with you, I mean,
10:07
Speaker 3: you would think that if he's trying, if he was
10:10
Speaker 3: really that fluent in writing Russian, you would think that
10:13
Speaker 3: some of his correspondence to the Russian Ambassy or the
10:16
Speaker 3: Russian government would have been done in Russian. But they weren't.
10:23
Speaker 3: Now Marinas was, but Oswald's never was. So when you're
10:30
Speaker 3: talking about knowing how to maybe spell or write a
10:35
Speaker 3: couple words in Russian, that's one thing, right, But writing
10:40
Speaker 3: a note, a multi page letter in Russian, I could
10:46
Speaker 3: see where his it might look like a two year
10:49
Speaker 3: old wrote. Okay, I mean because how often is he
10:53
Speaker 3: practicing writing Russian? You know, learning the language verbally is
11:01
Speaker 3: a lot. It's a lot. Now, sure, sure you would
11:05
Speaker 3: pick up some things in your course of living there,
11:10
Speaker 3: but how often are you writing letters and notes, multi
11:13
Speaker 3: page letters? I don't know. So that to me, I
11:19
Speaker 3: can understand that the Walker note is probably written by Oswalt,
11:25
Speaker 3: like I said, If not, then I'm on the you
11:29
Speaker 3: know it was a fake by reefpaying type of thing.
11:32
Speaker 3: But continuing on here number three, there's a lot of
11:36
Speaker 3: Oswald administrative correspondents in Russian. Unlike the Walker note. It
11:44
Speaker 3: is really well written. And I concluded that Oswald was
11:47
Speaker 3: getting some help by Marina exactly. So when you're talking
11:50
Speaker 3: about administrative correspondence in Russian, likely Marina is helping him. Okay. Now,
12:01
Speaker 3: the whole reason for the Oswald letter is something else
12:05
Speaker 3: that I don't understand. Why wouldn't you just sit her
12:07
Speaker 3: down and say, look, babe, here's what I'm gonna do.
12:14
Speaker 3: This is what I need you to understand, okay, and
12:18
Speaker 3: just lay it out for and then tell it. Look,
12:21
Speaker 3: if you don't like it, there's the door. Keep your
12:25
Speaker 3: mouth shut. Look, you're my wife. Now, we're here in America,
12:31
Speaker 3: we have a child together. You're my wife. But I'm
12:35
Speaker 3: doing this, and here's what I want you to do
12:37
Speaker 3: if this happens. I don't know. Maybe he wrote a
12:43
Speaker 3: note to avoid the argument the inevitable argument number four.
12:50
Speaker 3: I can only strongly encourage you to feed AI with
12:52
Speaker 3: every possible Oswald document to determine based on documents that
12:57
Speaker 3: were irrefutably written by Oswald what he wrote, the Historic Diary, Passports,
13:01
Speaker 3: Mexican Tourist Card Applications Notebook. Look, I'm not doing all
13:09
Speaker 3: that shit. I got I got enough to do to
13:12
Speaker 3: keep up with to keep up with everything. That's why
13:16
Speaker 3: I said on the show. You know, some of you
13:19
Speaker 3: folks out there who have time. Everybody has access to chat, GPT,
13:25
Speaker 3: Open AI, Copilot, whatever AI you'd like to use, Google, Gemini,
13:33
Speaker 3: whatever to do this. You know, I simply do not
13:40
Speaker 3: have the time nor the inclination to do all of this.
13:44
Speaker 3: It would be a good project for someone who is
13:49
Speaker 3: looking for something to do, who maybe would like to
13:52
Speaker 3: put a presentation together. And if somebody out there wants
13:56
Speaker 3: to do that, hey, do it and we'll have you
14:01
Speaker 3: on the show and we can go step by step
14:04
Speaker 3: and show everybody what you found out. So again, I
14:09
Speaker 3: can't do it all, folks, but I encourage those out
14:12
Speaker 3: there with the time and inclination. If you'd like to
14:16
Speaker 3: do it, you have an open invitation to come on
14:18
Speaker 3: the show and share your findings. While you're feeding AI
14:28
Speaker 3: with fingerprints, why don't you check if the alleged mcwallas
14:31
Speaker 3: print from the sixth floor matches to mcwalla's prince. I
14:33
Speaker 3: really doubt it, but at least this would kill his
14:36
Speaker 3: bs for good. Well. I did try some fingerprint analysis
14:45
Speaker 3: just for shits and giggles in AI, and the problem
14:49
Speaker 3: with it is you don't have high quality scans of
14:59
Speaker 3: the original documents. You know what, The things you can
15:05
Speaker 3: find on the internet are copies, likely copies of copies
15:10
Speaker 3: of copies of copies. For instance, the unidentified fingerprint found
15:16
Speaker 3: in the sixth floor of the book depository that has
15:19
Speaker 3: been attributed to Mac Wallace. It's missing a little bit.
15:25
Speaker 3: What do I mean by that? Well, let me see
15:29
Speaker 3: if I can pull it up here and show everybody
15:33
Speaker 3: exactly what I'm talking about.
15:36
Speaker 2: M M.
15:42
Speaker 3: Okay, let me move that over here, let me close that,
15:48
Speaker 3: let me share my screen. Okay, let me blow this up. Okay.
16:06
Speaker 3: So this is the cleanest copy that I could find
16:10
Speaker 3: of the unidentified fingerprint found on the sixth floor that
16:17
Speaker 3: has been attributed to Mac Wallace. Now, as you can
16:23
Speaker 3: see here, let me scale it down a little bit
16:25
Speaker 3: so we can see the whole kind of the whole thing.
16:30
Speaker 3: This is as good as we're gonna get unless we
16:34
Speaker 3: have an actual like the original. And when you copy
16:40
Speaker 3: things like the original, it blacks out and blurs out
16:44
Speaker 3: a lot of information in this fingerprint. Okay, So when
16:50
Speaker 3: you're talking about working with these fingerprints, it is very
16:53
Speaker 3: very hard to figure things out, least for AI it is.
17:01
Speaker 3: So if you're comparing this right now, this is of
17:07
Speaker 3: course the mac Wallace fingerprints from his arrest. And I
17:12
Speaker 3: understand that this is not what Joan Mellon used. She well, yeah,
17:24
Speaker 3: she used his military fingerprints. But as you can see,
17:29
Speaker 3: these aren't bad fingerprints. Right, they're not horrible, I mean,
17:36
Speaker 3: but they're not the best. They're not horrible, but you
17:38
Speaker 3: can see you can see the loops and grooves and
17:44
Speaker 3: and lines and all of that right right there, prisoner's
17:51
Speaker 3: signature M Wallace. Right, you have individual tips and then
17:57
Speaker 3: you have four fingers taken simultaneously. So these aren't horrible versions.
18:06
Speaker 3: But even when I uploaded this and the print that
18:11
Speaker 3: I just showed you into AI, it could not conclusively
18:18
Speaker 3: prove anything. And I'll show you what I mean here.
18:25
Speaker 3: Let me pull that down real quick and stop my
18:31
Speaker 3: screen sharing, and I'll show you exactly what exactly what
18:43
Speaker 3: AI had to say about it. So let me share
18:48
Speaker 3: my screen with you again. And I'm sorry. I can't
18:56
Speaker 3: make this any larger than what it is. I don't
19:00
Speaker 3: think let me try something. I think that's as big
19:15
Speaker 3: as I'm going to be able to make it. Herees
19:21
Speaker 3: So I uploaded the prints and I said, in your opinion,
19:23
Speaker 3: do any of the fingerprints from the first image match
19:26
Speaker 3: the one unidentified print on the second image? It says
19:30
Speaker 3: I can make some visual observations, but I cannot reliably
19:33
Speaker 3: determine whether two fingerprints are a forensic match from these
19:36
Speaker 3: images alone. A proper fingerprint comparison requires examining ridge endings, bifurcations, islands, pores,
19:44
Speaker 3: orientation distortion, pressure effects, and multiple corresponding my initial points.
19:50
Speaker 3: At high resolution, the second image is a partial, heavily
19:55
Speaker 3: degraded print with significant ink saturation on the left side
19:59
Speaker 3: and missing details in several areas. Looking at only the
20:03
Speaker 3: visible pattern, the unidentified print appears to showy loop tighte
20:07
Speaker 3: with ridges flowing from one side, recurve and exit the
20:10
Speaker 3: same side. Several prints on the fingerprint card also appear
20:14
Speaker 3: to be loop patterns, particularly some of the index, middle
20:17
Speaker 3: and ring finger. The unidentified print does not immediately stand
20:20
Speaker 3: out as obviously inconsistent with the prints on the card. However,
20:24
Speaker 3: I do not see enough clear ridge detail to confidently
20:27
Speaker 3: say that any specific finger on the card matches the
20:30
Speaker 3: unknown print. If I had to give a purely visual,
20:35
Speaker 3: non forensic impression, the unknown print seems most broadly similar
20:40
Speaker 3: in pattern type to some of the central finger impressions
20:44
Speaker 3: rather than the thumbs, but that is nowhere near the
20:47
Speaker 3: level needed to identify a match. My assessment would be
20:50
Speaker 3: this is a definite match. Cannot determine this is not
20:54
Speaker 3: a definite match, cannot determine possible visual consistency with some
20:58
Speaker 3: prints on the card. Yes, forensic quality ID from these images.
21:03
Speaker 1: No, So.
21:07
Speaker 3: Again, I tried, folks, I tried, and that's what I got,
21:17
Speaker 3: which is not the greatest. So I think, while AI
21:24
Speaker 3: is fantastic as a tool, it's only as good as
21:31
Speaker 3: what you're giving it, you know, garbage in, garbage out,
21:36
Speaker 3: and you know from like I showed you with the
21:40
Speaker 3: unidentified print, unless there is a better copy out there,
21:46
Speaker 3: I don't know, I don't know's it's a mess, but
21:53
Speaker 3: I tried. Yeah, I just don't think you can do
21:58
Speaker 3: it without much clear better copies to feed into AI.
22:05
Speaker 3: With what's out there on the internet, it's garbage. And
22:11
Speaker 3: even doing the Oswalt fingerprints, you know, trying to match
22:14
Speaker 3: his fingerprints to the prints that were found on some
22:18
Speaker 3: of the boxes on the sixth floor, the bag, the rifle,
22:20
Speaker 3: the palm print. Horrible, horrible, horrible definition. And what do
22:31
Speaker 3: I mean by that? Well, let me show you what
22:34
Speaker 3: I'm talking about there, because I tried looking at that too,
22:40
Speaker 3: you know, but you'll see what I mean. I'm going
22:50
Speaker 3: to pull this up here, share my screen once more. Okay, now,
23:05
Speaker 3: look at this man, Like, all right, the top here
23:14
Speaker 3: is a Lee Harvey Oswald palm print from eleven twenty
23:18
Speaker 3: two to sixty three. And this is the commission exhibits evidence. Okay,
23:23
Speaker 3: you see what part they have circled here that they
23:25
Speaker 3: say that they found a palm print match with. Now
23:30
Speaker 3: what they allegedly say matched is this area circled right
23:35
Speaker 3: here on this bag. And I don't know about you,
23:45
Speaker 3: but this doesn't conclusively prove a goddamn thing to me.
23:50
Speaker 3: I can't see a match. I can't. I mean, this
23:53
Speaker 3: is garbage evidence, folks. The Oswald fingerprint, palm print and
24:00
Speaker 3: evidence and the warrant Commission is straight fucking garbage. Garbage.
24:07
Speaker 3: And that's not the only thing. Again we're looking here.
24:14
Speaker 3: This is a fingerprint. I mean, seriously, seriously, that's a
24:22
Speaker 3: fingerprint that they want to compare and say that it
24:25
Speaker 3: was this finger right here on the right hand. I mean, seriously,
24:34
Speaker 3: what the hell I mean? You can't see nothing garbage evidence?
24:45
Speaker 3: You want more? Here we go commissioned Exhibit six point
24:50
Speaker 3: forty two. Another palm print matches it to this. Now
24:56
Speaker 3: you can see a little bit of ridging here for sure,
25:02
Speaker 3: better than some of the other ones allegedly. Now the
25:10
Speaker 3: problem with me for this is it looks like this
25:14
Speaker 3: ridging is all over the sample. So are these fingerprint
25:19
Speaker 3: ridges or these ridges on the material that they dusted,
25:23
Speaker 3: because there's it looks to me like there's prints everywhere,
25:29
Speaker 3: even here. I mean, to me, this looks like a
25:35
Speaker 3: hot mess. And how they can say that that section
25:39
Speaker 3: right there matches this section right here, I don't know,
25:45
Speaker 3: straight garbage now here. We have a somewhat decent fingerprint, okay,
25:55
Speaker 3: And what this is on I don't know. Looks to
25:59
Speaker 3: be a maybe a box top or I don't know
26:02
Speaker 3: if this is a bag. I don't know what this is.
26:06
Speaker 3: But they say that this print right here matches it
26:11
Speaker 3: again blowing this thing up, I don't know, and again
26:20
Speaker 3: it looks like it's, you know, over top of other fingerprints.
26:26
Speaker 3: I don't know. I just don't trust the fingerprint evidence
26:30
Speaker 3: very much when it comes to the Oswald thing, because
26:33
Speaker 3: you you know, not only do they have to dust
26:36
Speaker 3: for prints and compare them to Oswald, they also have
26:41
Speaker 3: to compare him to Studebaker who collected the evidence, and
26:47
Speaker 3: some other guy in the lab named Lucy. So I
26:54
Speaker 3: don't know. I just don't know. I can't get behind
27:01
Speaker 3: a lot of this evidence. Again, here's another comparison of
27:08
Speaker 3: an ink right index finger impression of Lee Harvey Oswald.
27:14
Speaker 3: You know, okay if you say so, And they give
27:19
Speaker 3: you a ten point match from a latent fingerprint developed
27:21
Speaker 3: on the end of a cardboard carton, I mean, I
27:29
Speaker 3: just don't know. I don't know. I mean it looks good.
27:39
Speaker 3: Kind of the problem I have is when you get
27:42
Speaker 3: down here where this looks like a white X images
27:49
Speaker 3: where you see you have some problems here when comparing
27:54
Speaker 3: it over here to Oswald's fingerprint. I don't know. I
28:04
Speaker 3: just don't know about fingerprint evidence, folks. And again, here's
28:12
Speaker 3: another one. They give you a thirteen point match allegedly
28:16
Speaker 3: on the right is an ink left palm print from
28:19
Speaker 3: Lee Harvey Oswald. And this is a palm print layton
28:22
Speaker 3: developed on a cardboard carton. I have no idea how
28:26
Speaker 3: you can match that. To me, this looks like a
28:29
Speaker 3: total hot mess. I just don't get it. Here we
28:37
Speaker 3: have another one. This is commissioned Exhibit six fifty six.
28:42
Speaker 3: I mean this this fingerprint evidence. I mean, these obviously
28:46
Speaker 3: these are off boxes. It looks like dog shit. I
28:52
Speaker 3: mean to me, they're not very clear at all. But
28:56
Speaker 3: again I don't know if this is because these are copies,
29:01
Speaker 3: I don't know. I mean, this is more of their
29:05
Speaker 3: forensic evidence against Oswald. Commission Exhibits six seventy one. These
29:12
Speaker 3: are on the left of micro photograph of Oswald's leg
29:18
Speaker 3: hair Okay, okay, And on the right here we have
29:32
Speaker 3: a loose hair sample from Oswald. I can't even read it.
29:41
Speaker 3: I don't know what they're trying to say here about
29:45
Speaker 3: these being, you know, hairs from Oswald. Look at this
29:51
Speaker 3: racial determination of hairs. Caucasian people's hair looks oval, Groid
30:01
Speaker 3: hair looks flat, and mongoloid hair is round. Now, I
30:12
Speaker 3: thought mongoloid meant something else, but I'm guessing they mean
30:16
Speaker 3: like Asians or Spanish or both. I don't know. That's
30:26
Speaker 3: just my my stupidity thinking mongoloid means something something a
30:29
Speaker 3: little different. That kill me. And we have to here
30:34
Speaker 3: a microphotograph showing a match between orange yellow cotton fibers
30:38
Speaker 3: from the butt plate of a rifle and orange yellow
30:41
Speaker 3: cotton fibers from Oswald's shirt item see eleven. So again,
30:46
Speaker 3: on the left you see fibers from the shirt and
30:50
Speaker 3: on the right. This fiber from the rifle. And again
30:55
Speaker 3: I don't know what this proves or doesn't prove. I
31:00
Speaker 3: don't know what fibers look like under a microscope, and
31:04
Speaker 3: black and white. I mean, you could tell us that
31:07
Speaker 3: these are the same color and the same consistency or
31:12
Speaker 3: what have you. I don't know. I just don't know
31:14
Speaker 3: what to make of it. Here's another fiber from shirt,
31:21
Speaker 3: fiber from rifle. Now, these are gray black cotton fibers
31:27
Speaker 3: from the butt plate of the rifle on gray back.
31:29
Speaker 3: Gray black cotton fibers from Oswald's shirt. Again, I don't
31:37
Speaker 3: know what this means. I mean, you could size these,
31:39
Speaker 3: upsize them down to match diameter. I just don't know
31:44
Speaker 3: what any of us proves. I mean, like if I
31:46
Speaker 3: was a juror in court, I'd be like, I don't
31:49
Speaker 3: even know what I'm looking at here, Doctor Ajhideal. We'll
31:58
Speaker 3: get more into that on We'll get more into that
32:02
Speaker 3: on members only, so there's a sneak preview if you will.
32:08
Speaker 3: So yeah, I mean I did try to do some
32:10
Speaker 3: of this stuff. Again, it was not very fruitful. But
32:19
Speaker 3: maybe some of you guys out there can do better
32:21
Speaker 3: than me. I don't know Ashley sent a picture we're
32:26
Speaker 3: going to show on the show next Friday from Australia
32:31
Speaker 3: where he's streaming us live in one of his real
32:34
Speaker 3: estate house showings, which is awesome. Tiny, She's a prolific,
32:43
Speaker 3: prolific emailer to the show, and we love we love
32:46
Speaker 3: these things because she's very astute at her analysis. And
32:54
Speaker 3: she pointed something out in her email about one of
33:01
Speaker 3: the documents that Joe was showing on the show that
33:06
Speaker 3: he found at NARA concerning James Herbert Martin and what
33:12
Speaker 3: I didn't catch, but Tiny caught. Let me show you, guys.
33:19
Speaker 3: Let's see share, let me screen. Okay. So in the
33:31
Speaker 3: header of this memorandum, now this is in June twenty sixth,
33:35
Speaker 3: nineteen forty seven, and it says right here to the left,
33:40
Speaker 3: this is to the Director of the FBI, j Edgar Hoover,
33:45
Speaker 3: from the Special Agent in charge Kansas City, concerning James
33:51
Speaker 3: Herbert Martin's probation violation Attention Identification Division, now a civilian
34:07
Speaker 3: probation violation for a petty theft of attire and two
34:14
Speaker 3: student instruments from a local high school. One small thing here, Tiny,
34:26
Speaker 3: I think that they were originally it was a federal
34:34
Speaker 3: crime that they were accused of because they hijacked or
34:43
Speaker 3: stole an automobile and drove it across state lines. Was
34:49
Speaker 3: the original crime, and then this one was the probation violation,
34:57
Speaker 3: like a week or two before he was supposed to
34:59
Speaker 3: come off of probation where he ended up doing a
35:04
Speaker 3: civilian crime. But even if you're on federal probation and
35:10
Speaker 3: you get caught doing a civilian crime, they can still
35:16
Speaker 3: bust your ass, right, I mean, it's still a violation.
35:24
Speaker 3: So I think that's the reason that the FBI is
35:27
Speaker 3: involved here. But again, I don't think that it's newsworthy
35:34
Speaker 3: to the director of the FBI about a federal probation
35:40
Speaker 3: violation for a nonviolent crime. I agree with you there.
35:49
Speaker 3: It's interesting, sure as hell is interesting, Like why in
35:55
Speaker 3: the hell would j Edgar give a shit about James
35:58
Speaker 3: Herbert Martin this early on? Hard to say. Then we
36:07
Speaker 3: got an email from matt Cock. I'm not making this up, folks,
36:12
Speaker 3: that's his name. Uh, he says, Hey, my name is Matthew.
36:18
Speaker 3: And I heard you say you were looking for content.
36:20
Speaker 3: Ideas well, we always are what you got, Matthew, he says,
36:24
Speaker 3: I'm the one man Mickey Mouse operation. They created a
36:27
Speaker 3: three hour JFK assassination documentary about the assassination weekend called
36:33
Speaker 3: and the Truth Shall Make You Free American requiem that
36:39
Speaker 3: I currently have up on a Patreon page. It's part
36:43
Speaker 3: one or seven, depending on how you look at it,
36:46
Speaker 3: in a seven part series. I'm slowly working on on
36:49
Speaker 3: the JFK assassination that will eventually get into Watergate. I
36:53
Speaker 3: ran Contra at nine to eleven and what I'm gonna
36:57
Speaker 3: call echoes from Daly Plasm. I'm getting ready to make
37:01
Speaker 3: a push on social media and YouTube for it. I
37:03
Speaker 3: was wondering before I do that if you and Joe
37:05
Speaker 3: would be willing to review the film I made, like
37:08
Speaker 3: you guys do those book reviews and rate it. A
37:10
Speaker 3: good critical review from knowledgeable people would be helpful for
37:14
Speaker 3: myself because none of the people I know understand the case.
37:19
Speaker 3: I made it during COVID when we were all stuck
37:21
Speaker 3: inside and took a bunch of stock footage I had
37:24
Speaker 3: collected for a project that I was going to do
37:26
Speaker 3: that fell through. I taught myself basic editing and synchronized
37:30
Speaker 3: it into a summary of the weekend with news reports
37:32
Speaker 3: as narration and scored it with classical and theatrical music.
37:36
Speaker 3: If you're interested, I can put a free trial up
37:38
Speaker 3: so you guys can watch it and cancel within the window.
37:41
Speaker 3: So if you don't have to pay the seven bucks,
37:43
Speaker 3: I'll have it up for and it gives me a link. Anyways,
37:49
Speaker 3: keep on doing what you're doing. I enjoyed as a
37:50
Speaker 3: researcher that has over two hundred JFK related books in
37:53
Speaker 3: my bibliography and read a ton of documents. I really
38:00
Speaker 3: like it that you counter people's bullshit. My phone number
38:03
Speaker 3: is if you'd like to talk about the case or
38:06
Speaker 3: across from them in my bona fides in theories. Cool. Well, thanks, Matthew.
38:12
Speaker 3: We will check it out at our leisure and look
38:19
Speaker 3: for it in the future. We'll do kind of a
38:22
Speaker 3: review on it. Yeah, we'll do. Thank you for the email, Matthew.
38:33
Speaker 3: All right, next up, let's see. Oh this is when
38:37
Speaker 3: I actually was able to answer at some point. Oh
38:51
Speaker 3: wait a minute, now, hold on, okay, never mind that one.
39:13
Speaker 3: I'm sorry, folks. I got an email from Bill Brown,
39:19
Speaker 3: former guest on the show. He's going to be debuting
39:25
Speaker 3: a JD. Tippett website I think next month in June
39:29
Speaker 3: at some point, and it's going to have all of
39:34
Speaker 3: his research into the JD. Tippett killing on there, all
39:40
Speaker 3: the interviews he's done, all the posts he's made, and
39:44
Speaker 3: some original music. So when that comes out, I'll point
39:47
Speaker 3: everybody that way for sure you can check it out.
39:50
Speaker 3: So thank you, Bill, And here's a weird one to
40:03
Speaker 3: all at the Lone Cooming podcast. I'm a former Marine
40:06
Speaker 3: who served during the Cold War who is also the
40:08
Speaker 3: scholar of military history from that era. Three years ago,
40:12
Speaker 3: I researched and wrote an article concerning the military response
40:15
Speaker 3: to the assassination of President Kennedy in time for the
40:17
Speaker 3: sixtieth which was subsequently published in the fall of twenty
40:21
Speaker 3: twenty three edition of Cold War Times, the online magazine
40:26
Speaker 3: of the Cold War Museum. Mister Larry Hancock, a fellow
40:30
Speaker 3: Cold War scholar and good friend of mine, suggested I
40:33
Speaker 3: get in touch with you concerning the possibility may be
40:35
Speaker 3: interested in having a podcast on this little known JFK
40:39
Speaker 3: assassination topic. So I got some links here to check out,
40:46
Speaker 3: and hopefully we'll check this out and might have this
40:53
Speaker 3: guy on the show in the near future. So very cool.
40:59
Speaker 3: Nothing like some good Cold War talk. You know what
41:02
Speaker 3: I'm saying. Next to email from Kenneth, Hello, Rob, Hope
41:12
Speaker 3: all as well. I've been listening to the podcast New
41:14
Speaker 3: Orleans Unsolved. If you're not familiar with the show, investigates
41:17
Speaker 3: pedophiles operating in New Orleans area for many years. Like
41:22
Speaker 3: your show gets very complex, including homicides of young boys.
41:26
Speaker 3: Here's a link to the latest episode called New Orleans Unsolved. Now.
41:39
Speaker 3: I did try to listen to this. I just couldn't
41:43
Speaker 3: get into it. It's not really focused on you know,
41:51
Speaker 3: the old underbelly, the old, the old New Orleans underbelly
41:56
Speaker 3: of PDF files and all of that, murders and everything else.
42:06
Speaker 3: She seems the host seems like focused on certain cases
42:11
Speaker 3: and certain things that I have no idea what she's
42:14
Speaker 3: talking about to just to jump in. But maybe if
42:16
Speaker 3: you start from like episode one, I don't know. I
42:18
Speaker 3: try to listen to season two, episode forty three like
42:21
Speaker 3: he suggested, and I just I was lost. I couldn't
42:24
Speaker 3: get into it. It didn't grab my attention. But thanks
42:28
Speaker 3: for the heads up, Kenneth. Next up, James sends me
42:38
Speaker 3: an email, Hello, Big Bad Bob, thanks for today's research
42:42
Speaker 3: with Rob podcast. It included several excellent tips. I submitted
42:46
Speaker 3: a comment, but because of that link in it, YouTube
42:48
Speaker 3: deleted it. In addition to the excellent websites you mentioned,
42:51
Speaker 3: I find interesting new stuff here on the jfkboards dot
42:56
Speaker 3: net site. Greetings from Germany, James. Yeah, I mean, like
43:00
Speaker 3: I said, dude, there there's I've made the comment to
43:04
Speaker 3: drop links in the comments section to any any other
43:07
Speaker 3: interesting things, not not even realizing that they probably would
43:12
Speaker 3: never see the light of day because YouTube is not once.
43:15
Speaker 3: You flooding the comment section with links to go outside
43:18
Speaker 3: of YouTube, So I'm the idiot there. I'm this kafuza
43:22
Speaker 3: for saying to do it, but yes, thank you for that.
43:26
Speaker 3: I mean, you can find a lot of these boards sites,
43:34
Speaker 3: these these forums if you will, like the ed forum
43:38
Speaker 3: like JFK. I mean, there's just a ton of forums
43:43
Speaker 3: out there, and there's even more that have been lost
43:50
Speaker 3: to history and even going back to the nineties with
43:53
Speaker 3: like these these Google pages or I don't even know
43:58
Speaker 3: what they were back then, but there's all kinds of
44:02
Speaker 3: good stuff out there. So yeah, good, good to know.
44:08
Speaker 3: Thank you, James. There's one from Kate explaining what GP
44:16
Speaker 3: floor means. You rock. Thank you I got it though,
44:20
Speaker 3: we got it next show, I think, or maybe later
44:23
Speaker 3: in the same show, got it the double b merch ideas.
44:35
Speaker 3: I finally was able to get one up over on spreadshirts.
44:40
Speaker 3: So visit the store and you shall see. I got
44:45
Speaker 3: a Frasier and Fritz shirt up there from Brandon's suggestion.
44:52
Speaker 3: So check that out. Let's see. Okay, that's from never mind,
45:14
Speaker 3: that's from David Boiling. That's private, it's private, and the
45:31
Speaker 3: last one here will hit from Neil.
45:36
Speaker 2: Hi.
45:36
Speaker 3: I recently asked Doug Campbell whether or not any doubles
45:39
Speaker 3: were cited of Thomas Arthur Valet before Chicago, or was
45:42
Speaker 3: it just Oswald before Dallas? Can you help Happy Easter?
45:46
Speaker 3: Neil No, I can't help, And good luck finding anything
45:55
Speaker 3: about Thomas Arthur Valet double before Chicago. I'm not sure.
46:03
Speaker 3: I'm sure Doug told you to fuck off, probably and
46:10
Speaker 3: I got nothing. I'm not sure. Not a lot of
46:14
Speaker 3: information has come out of the whole Chicago plot, the
46:16
Speaker 3: type thing, other than from Abraham Bolden, and you know,
46:28
Speaker 3: I just don't know. I just don't know. All that
46:33
Speaker 3: stuff is kind of locked down tight. Good luck finding
46:36
Speaker 3: anything about anything. It wasn't very well done if you will.
46:43
Speaker 3: What wasn't very well documented and if it was, we
46:46
Speaker 3: don't have the document, so good luck on your journey
46:50
Speaker 3: Neil for that. But yeah, that'll do it. That's just
46:59
Speaker 3: some random research ramblings I had to talk about today.
47:03
Speaker 3: Nothing too exciting, nothing too crazy, just what I've been
47:07
Speaker 3: up to, some listener emails, and that's about it for
47:12
Speaker 3: this week. I was going to make a little excursion
47:16
Speaker 3: this week but or this weekend, but I had too
47:19
Speaker 3: much going on, man, too much going on. I might
47:22
Speaker 3: try to do it next weekend. I want to take
47:25
Speaker 3: you guys somewhere with me on the road, which I
47:30
Speaker 3: think will be a nice, cool little trip, but again,
47:34
Speaker 3: who knows what does that have to see how it goes.
47:41
Speaker 3: So with that being said, folks, this has been random
47:44
Speaker 3: research ramblings with Rob. Thank you for tuning in, Thanks
47:47
Speaker 3: for hanging out with me. It's always fun. Just an
47:50
Speaker 3: extra bullshit nonsense and whatever the hell right anyway, that's
47:57
Speaker 3: it for me until the next one. Thanks for hanging
48:00
Speaker 3: triple b out. I can I can't, no, there is
48:09
Speaker 3: how do I make my shoulders smaller? There? But now
48:13
Speaker 3: the chair is an away there? There you go, big
48:17
Speaker 3: bad Bob. You can see you by me, all right, folks.
48:20
Speaker 3: That's it for me.
48:25
Speaker 1: Sandor Research tramblings with Robin, digging through the details.
48:32
Speaker 3: That's his job.
48:34
Speaker 1: Small from Dallas days.
48:37
Speaker 3: And no reports.
48:38
Speaker 2: He breaks hit down in friendly shorts. Random research Trambolins
48:43
Speaker 2: with Robin