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