Shortly after my son Brad posted the Get Lost Letter report on my web site it occurred to me that some Readers might have trouble grasping the enormous importance of the fraudulent gun number I wrote about.


These few extra ideas might be of some help


(click here  for exhibits)


We see on page one of my Get Lost Letter report I wrote “I specifically refer to the 1968 Los Angeles County Grand Jury Hearing and the 1969 Sirhan B. Sirhan trial. Gun #H53725 does not appear in either of those transcripts. Why not”


The fact is gun ID number H- five three seven two five (#H53725) indeed DOES NOT exist anywhere in the 1969 Sirhan Trial Transcript !! Why wasn’t the serial number of the gun both spelled out as well as written numerically - as I demonstrated above?  Wouldn’t that precaution have blocked those fraudsters? 


But that’s not all concerning that super enormous subterfuge


What we see written on page 3104 in the Sirhan Trial Transcript  is #H58725 , that is H five eight seven two five !!! Again, that subterfuge was designed to look like an innocent typographical error. I assure you it was not a typographical error.


It’s a piece of garbage


 #H58725 could not have been an error because the torn gun label with the number H53725 was deliberately withheld from the trial judge and jury.


How the false gun number tricked us all


It is important that the Reader see the inner workings of that amazingly brilliant fraud . Read my  “Different gun number”  Report and carefully examine the many exhibits I included - specifically Sirhan Trial Transcript, pages 3103-3104.


Next examine Sirhan Trial Transcript, pages 3690-3692, specifically page 3691, lines 24-26.  This is what we see:


    “Q     And what I am handing you now bears Serial number C675755, does it not?

      A      Yes, it does.” 


Technically, the Sirhan Trial Transcript records not one but TWO  false serial numbers for the Sirhan gun. Page 3104 records the wrong serial number (H58725) and page 3691 records yet another wrong serial number (C675755).


I suspect those jerks checked their brains at the door that day


Since the torn gun label has the handwritten gun number H53725 written on it why I ask  was it deliberately hidden away from the trial judge and the jury under 75-A for Identification Only in a little sealed cellophane bag?  That ruse prevented the trial judge and jury from seeing it.


However, the Argonaut Insurance envelope that contained the incriminating writing (about RFK having to be killed)  that was selectively removed from that little cellophane bag and quickly admitted into evidence under Peo. Exhibit 75. The judge and jury were allowed to examine Peo. Exhibit 75 – but not 75-A for Identification Only.  I invite the Reader to examine these exhibits  in my “Different Gun Number” Report.


Another thing that deserves some explaining


What in the blazes did Judge Loring have to do with the Sirhan trial evidence? Judge Walker was the trial judge – not Judge Loring.


Loring had nothing whatsoever to do with the Sirhan trial evidence. He should have minded his own business and played golf instead.


Interestingly, and for the record, they all got cold feet and never even attempted to put in use that crooked Judge Loring Court Order.  (William Harper received the Sirhan evidence bullets in 1970  for examination purposes without the Judge Loring Court Order and on later dates I also received the Sirhan  bullets for examination purposes  - also without Loring’s court order). 


I should point out neither Harper nor I were left alone with the Sirhan evidence bullets at any time. A court clerk remained with Harper at the court house in 1970  during his examinations. And a law enforcement officer as well as California State archive staff  closely monitored the bullets in the examining room when I examined the Sirhan bullets.


The staff at both locations were very observant during examinations.


It is important to note the Judge Loring Court Order was never lifted it just quietly faded away. 


Someone should have been skewered for that diabolical stunt – better yet, an arrest  should have been made on the charge of aggravated and felonious stupidity.


I could not resist writing about the Judge Loring Court Order caper because it is an exquisite example of the abuse of power.


Realistically, I think that sort of thing very rarely happens in our courtrooms.  We must keep in mind these abuses occurred while SUS was in charge.


Rose Lynn Mangan,         January, 5, 2016