[Ben Holmes]

Mike Skotnicki Wrote:

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Wrote:Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”

Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”

Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

The fact that the dog did not bark when you would expect it to do so while a horse was stolen led Homes to the conclusion that the evildoer was a not a stranger to the dog, but someone the dog recognized and thus would not cause him to bark. Holmes drew a conclusion from a fact (barking) that did not occur, which can be referred to as a “negative fact,” or for the purpose of this discussion, an expected fact absent from the record.

I include the above for those who don't recognize a cultural reference to dogs not barking - now, on to the dog that didn't bark:

Dex Olsen Wrote:I will assume the DPD, as remiss as they may have appeared, tested but didn't find any nitrate on that jacket's sleeves or else we would have heard about it LOUDLY and CLEARLY.

Dex makes a point that I've not seen noted before in any of the literature or evidence... This is just one of those examples of evidence that should have existed, but doesn't.

The jacket MUST HAVE HAD nitrates on the right sleeve. A quick Google search reveals that yes, this is an ordinary procedure for police, to check the clothing for gunpowder residue. (Indeed, the Warren Commission did examine JFK's shirt in their attempt to prove that the hole in the shirt & tie was caused by a bullet - testing failed to show this.)

Since the jacket clearly did not have any gunpowder - if the jacket actually belonged to Oswald (and that's greatly in doubt) - it would merely be yet another bit of evidence showing his innocence.

If the jacket did have gunpowder residue - then you have a silence from the Dallas Police Department and the Warren Commission that is, quite frankly; completely unbelievable.

If the jacket wasn't tested - this would simply be another example of the incompetence of the Dallas Police Department... and the question would be raised why believers accept so uncritically everything the DPD said.

Other examples of incompetence include:

• Failure to photograph the paper bag in situ.
  Failure to document the finding of the jacket (we have no idea who found it!)
  Failure to turn over all the evidence to the FBI (Only two shells were turned over on 11/22/63)
  Failure to photograph the alleged palm print on the rifle.
  Failure to turn over all of the 'Backyard' Photos for the investigation. (133-C wasn't 'found' until Dec 1976!)
  Failure to protect the alleged perp from being murdered by Jack Ruby.
  Failure to document proper chain of custody on much of the evidence.

Believers cannot explain their dogmatic acceptance of the Dallas Police statements & evidence gathering... and that fact tells the tale.