plain talk ten plain talk ten plain talk ten plain talk ten plain talk ten plain

J’ Accuse

borrowed from Emile Zola

Plain Talk Ten contains the charge of switching/substituting GJ5B bullets , additionally I include my impression of P/D Sur-Reply

********************

Today I make a fresh new charge that the four test bullets in GJ5B evidence envelope were SWITCHED BULLETS just as I discovered - some seventeen years ago - also happened with the switching of the Kennedy and Goldstein bullets.

# 1 - This discovery of the switching of GJ5B test bullets also goes back many years, however, without verifying documents in my hands I was unable to publish my findings before now.

Here is what I searched for: Wolfer deposition in Wolfer v. Blehr #C8080 and Wolfer statements under oath in meeting with LAPD top brass (6-29-71) in response to Blehr

charges.

********************

# 2 - On February 22, 2012 Sirhan attorneys Pepper/Dusek filed their SUR-REPLY on the issue of actual innocence. I will briefly state the reasons why I believe this latest court filing cannot succeed.

While re-examining records related to P/D newest and fantastic charge I came across a document which in the past I scarcely paid any attention to. Now it grew really big legs. The document I refer to is a two page TEST FIRINGS report. (source SUS records)

Who needs a chain of custody?

But first, let us take a quick review of Iver Johnson .22 cal revolver, serial number H53727- I assure the reader this is going somewhere.

Serial #H53725 first appears in the official records when Rafer Johnson turned over the pantry scene gun to Sgt Calkins at Rampart Headquarters at approximately 2:00 a.m., 6-5-68. Calkins noted the gun was a .22cal, Iver Johnson revolver with serial number H53725 - the model of the gun was not quite specific - which most likely was due to the heady excitement of the moment.

But then something most unusual happened :

The Los Angeles County Grand Jury received the pantry scene gun - now GJ7 - in evidence on 6-7-68. Inexplicably, no serial number for GJ7 was ever recorded in the LACGJ transcript record. Nor was an evidence tag made out for GJ7- this is factually reported in the Trapp/Howard Memorandum. But then who was paying any attention to such foolishness.

Then we see in confidential documents that gun #H53725 was transferred to SUS on Aug. 24, 1968 - it was just a harmless prank and it didn’t really hurt anyone.

If you really wanted to be a nit-picker you’d ask how was it possible to transfer #H53725 to SUS in Aug of ‘68 without breaking Judge Alarcon’s court order?

I will present documented proof that it was impossible for serial #H53725 gun to have been admitted into evidence with the Los Angeles County Grand Jury on 6-7-68:

Carefully examine the PROPERTY CARD dated June 5, 1968 ,DR NO. 68 521 466 and there you will see that H53725 was taken out on June 5, 1968 along with the 8 expended cases by LAPD officer Moser, 6167, SID. Officer Moser returned these two items on the same day after fingerprint tests were performed.

Now examine officer Wolfer’s removal of same items on 6-5-58 . Note, Wolfer did not return these items and did not sign his name for that transaction.

Next examine the PROPERTY TRANSFER RECORD wherein ser H53725 along with 8 expended cases were transferred to SUS.

Compare all of the above with LAPD Property Report. There you have it.

Gun H53725 was never admitted into evidence in the LACGJ on 6-7-68 !!!!!!

Finally, it was a stand-in-gun which was admitted into evidence in LACGJ on 6-7-68

Without a recorded serial number for the gun in LACGJ official records , how to connect Iver Johnson .22 cal rev., serial number H53725 to the Sirhan case ?

The answer is found in the information on the Los Angeles Police Dep’t Crime Lab Test Shot evidence envelope which became GJ5B

GJ5B contains four test bullets fired on 6-5-68 from Iver Johnson .22 cal revolver, with the serial number H53725 and hand printed on the top left of this evidence envelope is the following: “VICTIM: Kennedy, Robert “ (I immediately smelled a GIANT RAT) (see enclosed photo)- and I’ll tell you why:

GJ5B contains four test bullets fired from gun #H53725 (remember H53725 somehow got lost on its way to the Grand Jury.)

So , I ask - What could be worse???? By some strange coincidence those four test bullets in GJ5B were SWITCHED - just like the Kennedy neck bullet (Peo. 47) was SWITCHED and the Goldstein bullet (Peo. 52) was SWITCHED.

But there’s still another surprise. GJ5B, now suffering from this debilitating bullet- switching malady, went into hiding. Those little rascals just didn’t feel up to making the trip to the Sirhan trial. So they didn’t go.

This tells us that Sirhan gun #H53725 was not the only gun firing bullets in the pantry - due to the fact that none of the victim bullets matched #H53725 test bullets in GJ5B .

Why else would you switch the four test bullets in GJ5B fired from gun #H53725 ?

Could the answer be that H53725 gun contained blanks ? I do not make that charge since I do not have proof. Still, that might be a reason for switching the test bullets in GJ5B.

It will be remembered, there were two separate evidence envelopes (GJ5B and Peo. 55) with two different gun numbers (H53725 and H18602) with each envelope containing a different set of test bullets. Who could keep track of them all?

Let us now examine the official “gold standard” for identifying Sirhan ballistics evidence (Patrick Garland’s Evidence Inventory dated 1975).

Garland, one of the 1975 seven panel members also served as the group’s court administrator. Garland reports the following identification engravings (markings) on GJ5B (the four test bullets allegedly test fired from gun H53725):

Note, No ID (no initials) and no crimping of the bullet noses are reported on the four test bullets in GJ5B.

Contents:

D .22 LR HP Copper coated, No ID, “D” on nose.

E .22 LR HP Copper coated, No ID, “E” on nose.

F .22 LR HP Copper coated, No ID, “F” on nose

G .22 LR HP Copper coated No ID, “G” on nose.

But that is not what Wolfer stated in his deposition in Wolfer v. Blehr #C8080 (that he marked his initials on the four test bullets that went to the Grand Jury)

I should point out that the newly engraved panel identification letters which were engraved on the noses of the four GJ5B bullets by the panel members are as follows: PI (panel Identification ) “D”, “E”, “F” and “G” - thus GJ5B now received PI markings “ D”,“E”, “F”, “G” on its nose.

Let us now turn our attention to what Garland records about the id markings on the three test bullets in Peo. 55 evidence envelope (allegedly fired from the Jake Williams gun serial number H18602) :

(note, the initials “DW” and “ on crimped nose” now appears on each Peo. 55 test bullet)

A .22 LR HP Copper coated “DW” on crimped nose.

B .22 LR HP Copper coated “DW” on crimped nose.

C .22 LR HP Copper coated “DW” on crimped nose.

Note - Wolfer tells the following to LAPD top brass on 6-29-71:

“…I took the ends of the bullets and mashed the hollow point shut so I could fire it in the water tank without the bullets expanding or blowing up.” (see enclosed documents)

When we compare the ID markings on both sets of test bullets we immediately see Wolfer’s initials “DW” were engraved on ABC - the three test bullets in Peo. 55 envelope. .However, Wolfer’s initials “DW” were NOT engraved on the four test bullets in GJ5B.(DEFG) contrary to Wolfer’s deposed statement in Wolfer v. Blehr #C 8080. This is a serious matter due to the fact that it goes directly to the issue of the substitution of evidence.

And further, the bullet noses were NOT crimped (mashed shut) on GJ5B test bullets - contrary to Wolfer’s statements to Board of Inquiry on 6-29-71.

I must tell the reader Harper’s gift to me of his Sirhan research files is where Wolfer’s deposition in Wolfer v. Blehr #C8080 actually came from.

If not for Harper giving me those files we would not have Wolfer’s statements under oath about marking his initials on the four test bullets that went to the Grand Jury . (and we see in Garland’s evidence inventory test bullets DEFG do not have “DW” initials on them)

I am now going to speak plainly - for a long time I strongly suspected the Jake Williams gun - H18602- was a police “throw-away” gun because H53725 test bullets could not be matched with the victim bullets from the crime scene.- What to do? - Throw-away gun H18602 was just the ticket - and I suspect H18602 was also doing double-duty by standing in at the Grand Jury for the real pantry scene gun.

Doesn’t that explain why the date 6-5-68 was written on Peo. 55 envelope (with wrong serial number H18602 - instead of H53725) - with a date which in fact PREDATED by FIVE days -the date officer Lee removed H18602 gun from Property Division (6-10-68) !

Now that this case is before the court I cannot hold my tongue any longer. It is about time we all take a closer look at this rotten pile of junk that has for almost 44 years been masquerading as authentic evidence.

Another layer of deception

And that is what makes the story of the TEST FIRINGS report so interesting:

The serial number of the gun used on 6-11-68 for muzzle distance tests cannot be known with an absolute certainty. Here are my reasons :

The SUS records contains an official two page report of the muzzle distance tests conducted on 6-11-68. This official report is labeled “TEST FIRINGS”. What I soon discovered is that a photograph of the test gun- without a serial number- was placed in the records. And the two page “TEST FIRINGS” report also does not record the serial number of the test gun !! Why the smokescreen of substituting a photograph of the test gun - without a serial number- in the place of TEST FIRINGS report - also without a serial number for test gun?

This very thing happened before - when a photograph of the Lock, Stock ‘n Barrel receipt - instead of the original receipt - was entered into evidence in LACGJ .

Then there is proof that the “original” Lock, Stock ‘n Barrel receipt was in fact a fraudulently created document (see earlier ATF correspondence on my web site).

And to insure the fake Lock, Stock, ’n Barrel receipt still did not breath life, it was chemically burned . Once and for all that sucker was finished-off.

*********************************

On February 22, 2012 Sirhan attorneys William F. Pepper and Laurie D. Dusek filed their SUR-REPLY on the issue of actual innocence.

I found several serious errors P/D made about the ballistics evidence.

By far the most important error is found on p. 17; lines 3-7 wherein P/D continue to assert that K. neck bullet (Peo. 47) and the Goldstein bullet (Peo. 52) were substituted in the time frame of the trial:

“ 8. Therefore, the inescapable conclusion - speculation aside- on these facts is that, at least with respect to the neck and the Goldstein bullets, the evidence placed before the judge and the jury consisted of other bullets substituted for the actual bullets which were removed from the victims.”

My response to P/D charge is that while we do know above bullets were in fact switched, the fact remains there is no concrete evidence of when the bullet switching actually occurred - before trial or after trial?

However, this doesn’t deter P/D from telling the court - without any evidence what-so-ever - that the bullet-switching was in the trial time frame. That is simply not the case. There is no way of knowing with an absolute certainty when the Kennedy and the Goldstein bullets were switched prior to 1975.

What I found surprising was P/D newly added fantastic charge (page 17; lines 12-16)

“ 10. Wolfer also committed perjury when he testified that he conducted further tests using a weapon that was of an identical make and model to Petitioner’s pistol when as a matter of fact the pistol he used - H18602- was not an Ivar (sic) Johnson but a Richardson weapon.”(Can P/D mean Harrington & Richardson?)

I strongly suspect the source P/D relied on for their brand new charge - that Wolfer used gun id #H18602- “not an Ivar Johnson but a Richardson weapon” came from a one page document (by an unknown author) on my web site www.sirhansresearcher.com ; Part Seven, page 128.

It is most likely the author/researcher of the information P/D described, seriously erred by reporting serial H18602 and Richardson is one weapon- which of course, it is not.

It was an honest mistake by an unknown author.

In my opinion , P/D engaged in careless speculation. Why didn’t Pepper/Dusek supply the court with exhibits to support their fantastic new charge? At least allow the court to see for itself the basis of this brand new charge.

********************

It will be noted on the last page of the Trapp/Howard Memorandum we see the bullet markings “DW” appears on Peo. 55 test bullets. However, GJ5B envelope is not included in Trapp/Howard inventory, therefore, we have no information of what the ID markings were on those four test bullets in the year 1971.

It is unfortunate the Trapp/Howard evidence inventory makes no mention of GJ5B- ( I do not suggest anything sinister) - It would have provided us with a time-line of what markings appeared on GJ5B on the date of Trapp/Howard examination. In short, this tells me that , like Kennedy neck bullet and Goldstein bullet the date GJ5B four bullets were switched is not known. Garland’s 1975 evidence inventory is the first known date in the official records which reveals the SIX bullets were in fact switched bullets.

In the end , there can be no justification for tampering with the evidence. We see from the official records that it was on SUS’ watch when the bullets were substituted and evidence was destroyed . The Los Angeles Police Department is , in my opinion , innocent of the wanton and illegal acts committed by SUS.

I will briefly explain my reasons. Task force Special Unit Senator was formed almost immediately after the assassination. And, while it is true SUS recruited several hand-picked officers from LAPD to join them . LAPD was NOT in charge and not involved in the wrong-doing by SUS. The fact is LAPD was forced to take a back seat. I do not assign any blame to them.

It was criminalist William Harper who first alerted me to SUS’ playing fast and loose with the evidence in this case. But never in my wildest dreams did I think SUS would take such license.

Rose Lynn Mangan, Date: March 15, 2012 (Click here for exhibits)