A correction - and the irrefutable proofs of fraud

Reader, please note

In my Parthian Shot Report I wrote that Officer Wolfer testified at both the Grand Jury and in his deposition in Wolfer v Blehr that he marked the four test bullets in GJ5B with his initials. That was only partially correct.

Here is the background of the documents which lead to the major discovery of the switching of GJ5B test bullets:

Attorney Barbara Warner Blehr had sent a letter to Los Angeles City official Muriel Morse in which Blehr tried to block Wolfer’s promotion to head the LAPD Crime Lab. Wolfer promptly followed by filing a lawsuit against Blehr (Wolfer v. Blehr #C8080).

The serious consequences

Wolfer’s deposition in Wolfer v. Blehr took place on 9 - 20- 71 at which time he (Wolfer) stated under oath that he marked the four test bullets in GJ5B with his initials. (see Plain Talk Ten including exhibits)

Three months earlier (6 – 29 – 71), Wolfer met with some of the city’s top brass and clearly stated that he crimped the noses of the four test bullets in GJ5B prior to firing the gun into the water recovery tank.

Unquestionably, Wolfer’s deposition in Wolfer v. Blehr (9-20-71) in which he stated he marked his initials on the four GJ5B test bullets coupled with the statements he made in his transcribed interview with the city’s top brass (6-29-71) wherein Wolfer stated that he crimped the noses of GJ5B test bullets forever LOCKS IN A WATERTIGHT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE FOUR GJ5B TEST BULLETS THAT WERE AT ONE TIME IN WOLFER’S HANDS. (again, see Plain Talk Ten including exhibits)

The fact is when those two SEPARATE legal documents are compared with Examiner Patrick Garland’s 1975 Evidence Inventory for GJ5B we see the irrefutable proof that the four test bullets in GJ5B were not crimped and were not marked with Wolfer’s initials. However, there is no time line which tells us when the switching took place.

Additionally, it must be remembered that GJ5B test bullets were ABSENT in the Sirhan trial. The fact is they were not in evidence at the trial. Can someone tell me why?

A big question

And, not to forget, Wolfer testified to firing eight test bullets into the water recovery tank with one bullet skipping the basket. And that four of the test bullets were placed in evidence with the Grand Jury on 6-7-68 with the other three (better) test bullets (Peo 55) being stipulated into evidence at Sirhan trial (2-24-69). However that is at odds with what the records show - that two different gun numbers were actually used for the allegedly same test bullets (GJ5B four test bullets and Peo 55 three test bullets). Clearly, Wolfer described only ONE test firing and not the two test firings we see in GJ5B and Peo 55. How to explain that?

There is positively no doubt in my mind that Wolfer did not violate Crime Lab regulations and procedures in the Sirhan case – and he did not lie.

The GJ5B test bullets substitution cannot be dismissed as a contradiction – the records conclusively prove that SUS was in charge and it was SUS who was engaging in an enormous and ongoing cover-up in the substitution of ballistics evidence – not Wolfer. One must ask where did SUS get such enormous power that it could reach its tentacles into a court of law ? (the Sirhan trial and the Judge Wenke court)

Wolfer opened up a can of worms with his lawsuit – but that was not to be permitted

Which lead to Wolfer’s decision to drop the lawsuit as the only expedient thing to do – after all Wolfer couldn’t possibly hope to put out all the fires that were starting up all around him. – ( actually Harper’s fires.)

The two gladiators

Wolfer was plagued by his less than stellar ballistics work in the Jack Kirschke case - which, by the way, Harper vigorously challenged. There is positively no doubt in my mind that SUS used Wolfer’s ballistics work in Kieschke case bullets to hang over his head and more importantly, to shut his mouth about the fraudulent Sirhan ballistics evidence that was dumped in his lap. (Harper confidentially shared many of these details with me)

Harper and Wolfer were not always adversaries

The fact is, Harper and Wolfer once had great respect for each other, but that changed in the Kirschke case when they were on opposite sides. Unfortunately, it became bitter.

It is most fortunate that Harper gave me his Sirhan/Kennedy records when he closed down his lab. They contained the copies of Wolfer’s deposition in Wolfer v. Blehr #C8080 and the Sirhan, Kirschke & Terry Inquiry where I discovered the switching of the GJ5B test bullets and the many other frauds I discovered over the years

Wolfer’s Grand Jury testimony did not include his initials on GJ5B

At the time I wrote The Parthian Shots report I wrote it, as I frequently did, by writing it completely from memory, without any files or records in front of me. Then, a few days later after my son Brad posted Parthian Shots on my web site – I immediately saw an error.

Therefore, a correction is in order

Wolfer did make the statement that he placed his initials on the four GJ5B test bullets while under oath at the Wolfer v. Blehr deposition on 9-20-71 – and not, as I had mistakenly written at his Grand Jury testimony.

In the greater scheme of things we are all but small specks - and speaking for myself I never let that stand in the way of asking questions way over my head. And when I saw these sneaky cover-ups - I didn’t turn a blind eye. My only regret is that Harper is not at my side.

Does Justice have a conscience? When I put this question to my son Brad, he answered “no, mercy does”

No matter how powerful the cover-up - the switched bullets and the two test guns will not stay silent.

Rose Lynn Mangan 5 – 7 - 15