Plain Talk Fourteen, Plain Talk Fourteen, Plain Talk Fourteen, Plain Talk Fourteen, Plain Talk Fourteen, Plain Talk Fourteen, Plain Talk Fourteen, Plain Talk Fourteen
Click here for exhibits
Click here also for exhibits
The journey of the Weisel bullet is something to behold
Plain Talk Fourteen is about the falsification of the William Weisel records.
I make the charge that Officer Orozco’s Los Angeles Police Department Property Evidence Report for the William Weisel bullet is a fabricated fraud. And I present ample evidence to support my charge.
The Weisel bullet’s journey at best was a farcical chain-of custody which numbered a staggering total of seven separate transactions beginning with the operating room surgeon #1, to #2, to #3, to #4, to #5, to #6 before it was finally turned over to Officer Orozco #7 - all the while the Weisel bullet was UNMARKED - until it finally reached the hands of Officer Orozco at which time he engraved his initials “LMO” on the bullet base!
And what was the time and location where Officer Orozco engraved his initials on Weisel bullet base? Was the location Kaiser Hospital? Ramparts?
Here is that remarkable itinerary which I found in SUS reports on page 634:
“June 6, 1968 4867 West Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles
Dr. William Neal removed a slug from victim William Weisel.
Nurse Helen Lyum received the bullet from Dr. Neal and gave it to nurse Gail Adams. Adams gave it to Denyce Pine. Pine placed it in a locked cabinet. Nurse Donna J. Brown removed the slug from the cabinet and gave it to Officer Orozco.
56 1 slug, .22 caliber long, (marked “LMO” on base) from victim Weisel..”
The wrong date (6-6-68) is immediately apparent on both the above referenced SUS report and also on the LAPD Property Report filled out by Officer Orozco. The date 6-6-68 appearing on those documents is in fact false and misleading.
The correct date 6-5-68 is in fact officially recorded on a Kaiser Hospital Tissue Examination card which clearly bears William Weisel’s name, age and the information “bullet specimen”.
How to explain the following:
The Los Angeles Police Department Property Report for the Weisel bullet is incorrectly dated 6-6-68 at 5:25 P.M. !!!!! Then, further down in the report, and totally out of context the Schrade bullet suddenly appears without any foundational information in the upper boxes. (Weisel’s name alone appears in the upper boxes.)
In addition to the wrong date, I noticed the box ” Type of Property .22 cal slugs “. That is positively untrue. All that was left of Schrade’s bullet after striking the top of his head were a few (2?) small fragments which cannot be described as “slugs”. (see Bullet Worksheet for condition and WEIGHT of Schrade fragments)
Based on the above, I find Officer Orozco’s LAPD Property Report for the Weisel/Schrade “slugs” to be a giant hoax of truly monumental proportions.
The story gets worse
It will be remembered LAPD Officer/criminalist De Wayne Wolfer did NOT receive the Weisel bullet ! (Wolfer’s Log)
The record is clear, the Weisel bullet was unaccounted for in the first twenty four hours.
It appears most likely a decision was made early on to withhold the near pristine Weisel bullet from Wolfer and the best way to accomplish that was to mix Weisel bullet in with the badly damaged Schrade and Evans bullet . Thus it would be easy to tell Wolfer that the (three) victim bullets which hadn’t been turned over to him were too badly damaged for comparison purposes. That of course was TRUE with the exception of the near perfect Weisel bullet. But Wolfer had no way of knowing that.
The Weisel bullet could easily be hidden with the fragments of the Schrade bullet and the badly damaged Evans bullet. And the unsuspecting Wolfer would be none the wiser. He would believe ALL of the undelivered victim bullets were too badly damaged for comparison purposes. . Then, of course, he would move on with his investigation to more pressing matters. I should point out the photograph of the Weisel hospital Tissue Examination card was taken by me in the course of my examination of Sirhan evidence at the California State Archives in Sacramento, California. I do not believe a copy of that Tissue Examination card is in the Ten volume SUS Investigation Report.
And that leads me to ask - has anyone ever heard of such an extraordinary chain -of -custody in a hospital setting involving so many people with - technically - an UNMARKED bullet in each person’s hands?
The red ink caper
Then there is this to consider. The writing (containing the date 6-5-69) on the vial containing the Weisel bullet was written in red ink . There was another instance which I am aware of when writing in red ink on an item of evidence took place.. That is on Peo. Ex. 55 Evidence Envelope. In fact, someone (unidentified) made a notation on a diagram/chart in SUS records that it was unusual the writing on Peo. Ex . 55 was written in red ink. A copy of that diagram/chart is included elsewhere in this work.
And that made me wonder if “official” documents written in red ink were performing as understudies ? Did the “star” suffer from stagefright? - (then why the red ink on selective items of evidence?)
I will say this - of all my research papers wherein I reported (and supplied evidence) which proved wrongdoing and the outright falsification of Sirhan evidence - this report is one of the most disturbing. That is because it is just plain sinister. That accounts for the reason I worked on this segment for so many years. There were many starts and stops, then, lately, I thought - what the hell I’m 83 years old. What am I waiting for? And so, dear reader, I pass this headache on to you.
Again, where does one turn ? It is my opinion that Sirhan’s present attorneys simply do not understand the enormity of the rotten evidence in this case. If they did, they would ask crack crime labs to examine my research and provide them with a report. That IS something you can take to court - then, you will be assured there are no errors ,e.g., Harper charge, switched bullet at time of trial and the new “hybrid” gun in their latest court filing. (it is fair to say Sirhan attorneys - past attorneys included - just didn’t come close to my expectations)
When all is said and done, there is one truth - the Robert F. Kennedy case will never be closed. Rose Lynn Mangan June 20, 2012