[Mark Ulrik]

Garry Puffer Wrote:It isn't at all about “lining up.” David Josephs lists 4 differences, and I concur with these four.

1: Sling ring hangs under the rifle while the 6th floor rifle’s ring is on the side
2: The Metal extension under the barrel is not on the BYP image
3: The Metal cap at the end of the stock is not in the BYP image
4: A Metal/shiny object is seen in the BYP but not on the 6th floor rifle

Ah, OK, now I get where you're coming from, but I have to disagree with David. He doesn't take into account that the rifle in the BYP is rotated clockwise, exposing more of the top and less of the bottom to the camera. The muzzle is also tilted somewhat toward the camera, which is relevant if anyone should get the dubious idea to compare measurements of individual rifle parts with other photos.

1) It doesn't look like a sling swivel to me (no closed loop). I think it's part of a knot used to attach the improvised sling. You'll see what I mean if you examine the same area in 133B & C.

2) I have no idea what David means here, as the metal extension is clearly there. Perhaps it's slightly more obvious in this composite I made:


  carcano.png (Size: 47.81 KB / Downloads: 160)

3) The metal cap isn't clearly seen in the BYP, but the screws are. They appear lower than in the NARA image due to the aforementioned rotation.

4) It's just light reflected off the part of the forearm that's forward of the barrel band.

Garry Puffer Wrote:Me:
Oddly enough, the two rifles were NOT certified as the same by the FBI expert, which we would have expected. True enough, he did not specify any differences, but he didn't. Nevertheless, his not seeing the differences which seem so obvious is a troubling matter for those of us who do see differences, I admit.

From David Josephs:

The FBI’s photographic expert, Agent Shaneyfelt, was asked specifically about his opinion as to whether the 6th floor rifle and the BYP rifle were the same:
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I compared the actual rifle with the photograph, Exhibit 133A, and with the photographs that I prepared from Exhibit 133A, as well as the other simulated photograph and the photograph of the rifle, attempting to establish whether or not it could be determined whether it was or was not the ....I found it to be the same general configuration. All appearances were the same. I found no differences. I did not find any really specific peculiarities on which I could base a positive identification to the exclusion of all other rifles of the same general configuration. I did find one notch in the stock at this point that appears very faintly in the photograph, but it is not sufficient to warrant positive identification.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ctka.net/2015/JosephsBYP.pdf">http://ctka.net/2015/JosephsBYP.pdf</a><!-- m -->

I see nothing troubling here. It would be kind of optimistic to hope for a positive ID of the rifle with the BYP being as grainy as they are. Unless LHO had access to more than one Carcano, however, it seems likely that it's the same as the TSBD rifle.