Post: #101

(03-05-2017 08:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  2. The government's account is absolutely spot on and corresponds with the science and forensics. The first shot went through Kennedy and Connally (radius/ his forearm). Its appearance is PRECISELY what would be expected after traversing human tissue (this is the so-called "magic bullet").

Apart from the fact the bullet -- CE399, that is, that which the Warren Commission holds is the "first shot" -- had no tissue remains on it, no bloodstains, and not one microscopic striation from passing through two suited men and thus about six or seven layers of clothing, counting the layers on entry and the layers on exit (suitcoat and shirt in each case).

The lack of tissue and bloodstains you can probably explain from some idiot washing the bullet off; can't explain the lack of etching from clothing because you can't wash off scratches.

And that's before we get to the fact that the chain of custody for CE399 is essentially false. Not one of the people who testified before the Warren Commission could positively identify CE399 as the bullet that was found at Parkland Hospital on the day.

http://www.jfklancer.com/hunt/phantom.htm

This is significant because the Warren Commission did delve significantly into the chain of custody. This bullet forms part of the ballistic database for the assassination: had Oswald been taken to trial this would likely have resulted in that evidence being inadmissible.

The bullet is indeed a magic bullet - not because it passes through two people, but because it does so while remaining as unblemished as the Virgin Mary's hymen, appears to have been conjured into existence by parties unknown, and is not positively ID'ed by anyone as being the bullet that magically appeared on Connally's gurney at Parkland Hospital.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #102

It's not unblemished at all. It has the precise physical characteristics of the Carcano bullet that would have gone through human tissue in exactly the same way, as is described. Watch the video.

Post: #103

(03-05-2017 11:13 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  It's not unblemished at all. It has the precise physical characteristics of the Carcano bullet that would have gone through human tissue in exactly the same way, as is described. Watch the video.

You mean the PBS video which has been taken to pieces for its misleading and sometimes flat out wrong conclusions?

Note in particular these two points:

Quote:Misleading omission: NOVA seems to refer to the Edgewood Arsenal skull shooting experiments, and then implies that these support the Commission's theory.

Comment: Dr. Gary Aguilar and Kathleen Cunningham have discussed these in detail. In particular, they point out that these experiments (supposedly using the official entry site) actually destroyed the faces of the skulls. Furthermore, the actual movies shown on NOVA (of exploding skulls) also show destruction of the anterior skull. Of course, since JFK's face was intact, we (not surprisingly) have another paradox.

Misleading: CE-399 entered JBC's thigh and then fell out, but not before depositing a small metal fragment. (On the X-ray, the fragment is 3.5 mm x 1.3 mm.)

Comment: The wound was no more than 1 cm deep, while the bullet was 3 cm long. The only site from the bullet for lead to extrude into the wound is from the tail. (NOVA shows the bullet entering the thigh nose first.) So how does the lead get under the skin, when the tail of the bullet is at least 2 cm outside of the skin? Dr. Tom Shires, who worked on the thigh wound, claimed that it looked like a tangential hit – or else a large fragment had stopped in the skin and then had subsequently fallen out. Dr. Malcolm Perry told Harold Weisberg that the hole in Connally's skin was too small to be caused by a bullet. Arlen Specter shrewdly avoided this entire issue.

Misleading omission: NOVA assumes, without any proof – or even any discussion – that CE-399 actually flew over Dealey Plaza that day.

Comment: Their own interviewee, Josiah Thompson, is the reigning expert on this question, but NOVA did not discuss the chain of possession of CE-399 with him. (Thompson confirmed to me, via e-mail, that he was not asked.) If CE-399 is the wrong bullet, then the entire program immediately becomes hapless and hopeless. In fact, Thompson's original pursuit of this issue (in Six Seconds in Dallas) was more recently renewed with the assistance of Dr. Gary Aguilar. The critical witness at Parkland Hospital (who actually handled the bullet) clearly did not recognize CE-399. On the contrary, the bullet he saw had a pointed nose, like the four bullets from World Wars I and II that NOVA displayed. John Hunt has also incisively highlighted serious problems with the timeline for receipt of this bullet (or perhaps even two different bullets) in Washington, DC. If the producers knew that Thompson had shattered the provenance of CE-399, and they nonetheless deliberately avoided this issue, then they are hypocrites. On the other hand, if they did not know this fundamental fact, then they are amazingly ignorant.

As said: a magical bullet that doesn't fit Connally's own injuries shows up on the floor of Parkland Hospital. A magical bullet that doesn't have striations from clothing entries and exits. And a chain of custody which suggests that the bullet the Warren Commission looked at was not even the one that is meant to have caused all these injuries.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #104

If evidence got switched, yes, no one knows nor will anyone ever know. So who cares.

I'm going on the law of parsimony more than anything (Occam's razor). What's more, you'd have to be able to set up a magic bullet at the scene that forensics experts in examining with ballistics produced EXACTLY the same bullet 50 years later. I find the odds of that nearly impossible. I find that with what we have, the story is clear:

Oswald did it. It's by far the most complete explanation, everything is possible, it makes sense and the bullet fits, the video fits, he fits, he was there, he killed a guy on his way out, etc. If you have any other conclusion, there is absolutely no proof, it's just crazy speculation.

I never understand why so many people try to assign absolutely fantastic explanations or motives to common things possible to ordinary joes when the explanation that is simple is so obviously the most likely. That's precisely this case.

Why he did it, as I said, or who put him up to it --- entirely different questions. Again, we won't ever know.

Post: #105

(03-06-2017 02:57 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  If evidence got switched, yes, no one knows nor will anyone ever know. So who cares.

This is no longer a question of evidence being switched. It is a matter of evidence being outright manufactured. A bullet could not physically have come from Connally's wound. The bullet that is said to have thus come forth does not bear a single striation of clothing on it. And to top it off, the guy who testified to the Warren Commission that it was the same bullet by saying his signature was on the bullet did not in fact leave his mark on it at all - and those who did etch their signatures into CE399 could not identify it as the bullet that came out of Connally's wound.

It renders every test intended to duplicate the ballistics of the single bullet invalid since they are attempting to duplicate a flight that did not happen in reality; they are duplicating CE399's damage when it's pretty clear CE399 was not fired over Dealey Plaza on the day.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #106

Post: #107

This thread be like:

Post: #108

(03-05-2017 08:22 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  You guys can go on and on about WHY Oswald did it and who put him up to it, but we'll never know. The fact of the matter is that these are undeniable, scientifically proven facts, in my estimation as shown by other (to follow in the link):

1. Oswald was the shooter. It has been shown time and again that it is easy to get off the three rounds. Two shots hit, 1 missed. 3 casings were immediately found, 2 bullets and the reported 3 (missed 2nd shot) have been as well. Not many know that Oswald actually killed a Dallas police officer as he left the Depository and fled --- he was clearly there and left, guilty. Photos even show him in the depository window. The simplest, and reported explanation is the correct one, as is in this case.

2. The government's account is absolutely spot on and corresponds with the science and forensics. The presumed first shot went through Kennedy and Connally (radius/ his forearm). Its appearance is PRECISELY what would be expected after traversing human tissue (this is the so-called "magic bullet"). Clearly from behind. The presumed final/3rd shot has a calvarial pattern among other things that, given parsimony, is clearly from behind as well.

How do I know this? NOVA digitally reconstructed the scene at Dealey Plaza, got two ballistics experts, shot the exact same bullets through the exact same gun. Examined all the x rays of the head and forensic pathologists all confirmed it.

It is staggering and leaves NO doubt that the official government story is in fact exactly what happened:

Oswald shot 3 times, the first went through President Kennedy and then hit Connally, missed the 2nd time, then hit JFK one final time with a bullet to the back of the head. There is absolutely no question. Go check the special. I'm leaving out details to not ruin it for those who haven't seen it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/cold-case-jfk.html

Why? Who put him up to it? I don't know.

The above conclusions are clear though; crystal.

JFK had crossed way too many red lines, which compelled the deep state to take him out:
-controlling secrecy/breaking down the CIA
-purging the mob with AG Bobby K.
-blocking the Israeli nuclear program and threatening to outlaw their lobby
-looking at the Fed's debt-based fractional reserve system
-de-escalating the Vietnam War and pushing for detente with the Soviets.

Any one of those red lines might have been fatal on its own...

So it's ironic that a half century later, the PBS Nova program in question was funded by the largest military-industrial firms: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, along with the David H. Koch Fund for Science...

There are no Nova episodes or PBS documentaries on any controversial topic where they don't veer from the official version, none. Even more so in the past decade or two. They even have a fluff piece on the Clintons.



Very timely new video of Ron Paul, on the subject of the Obama wiretapping scandal, where he drops major truth bombs, including the statement that "80% of Americans now believe that Kennedy was assassinated by insiders and probably the CIA was involved"!

I think the percentage is smaller among younger Americans, who are more trusting of government in general and of institutions like PBS.



Dr. Paul was making the point that the deep state doesn't need to leave paper trails in carrying operations like the wiretapping or taking out JFK. He talks about JFK at the 1:20 mark. The video from James Corbett is worth watching, he makes a good point about the wiretapping scandal and the surveillance state.

Post: #109

In september of 1969, after the end of his presidential term in Janaury 1969 (but before his death in January of 1973), Lyndon B Johnson gave an interview to the famous american journalist Walter Cronkite.

Lyndon B Johnson (who history is showing to the most likely candidate behind the Kennedy assassination) admitted publically in this interview that the warren commission (which he himself set up) to investigate the Kennedy assassination did not reveal who really was behind it all.

After the interview was filmed, Johnson wanted this part taken out, which is was. It was only made public 2 years after his death.

Notice his nervous body language as he shifts in his chair at minute 0:34

Post: #110

Jack Ruby, the man who shot Oswald 2 days after the assassination ensuring there would never be a trial by jury with evidence, himself strongly hinted that Lyndon B Johnson was behind it all.

Here are 2 seperate occasions where he made those statements.

Post: #111

(03-03-2017 08:48 PM)robreke Wrote:  The area right behind the fence at the top of the grassy knoll (where conspiracists think another shooter was) is a wide open lot that is contingent with a railroad yard. It's very open. That edge of the fence is right on top of the knoll. Unless someone was concealed in a car backed up to the fence or concealed in some other way, it seems it would have been easy to see a guy with a rifle in that area. Also, rifles are very loud. The area from the top of the knoll to the killshot is, maybe 30 to 50 yards tops. The rifle report would have been VERY loud and obvious to anyone standing on the knoll or even across the street. It would have been very evident where it came from. 30 or 50 yards is practically right on top of the target in terms of shooting with a rifle. So, unless the shooter on the knoll was concealed in some way and using a silencer of some sort, I don't see how people wouldn't have immediately turned around and seen some guy hanging the barrel of a rifle over the fence or even noticed him before hand getting set up. Perhaps the shrubbery was denser in the early 60's. I don't know.

The theory that Jim Garrison put foward in a court of law in his case against Clay Shaw was that there were at least 2 men (maybe more) behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll. A shooter and a spotter. One was dressed as a police officer and the other as a secret service agent. They made anyone coming near that area go away to ensure that they would not be disturbed. According to the documentary "the Men who killed Kennedy" they might have been highly trained French (Corsican ?) assassins who used a silencer and very modern new type of "exploding" bullet for the fatal head shot.

2 witnessses saw these men behind the picket fence on the grasy knoll. One was Lee Bowers who was in a railroad tower with an excellent view of the fence. He died in a mysterious car accident with no witnesses on 9th August 1966. The other was a deaf mute called Ed Hoffman:

Here are their video testimonies:

Ed Hoffman






Lee Bowers

Post: #112

(03-08-2017 12:05 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  According to the documentary "the Men who killed Kennedy" they might have been highly trained French (Corsican ?) assassins who used a silencer and very modern new type of "exploding" bullet for the fatal ahead shot.

This is part of the reason I keep concentrating on the ballistics and the physics of the bullets fired, and probably why I have to abandon my much-loved Mortal Error theory.

To wit: if it was a modern type of exploding bullet that took JFK's head off, where is the debris from that bullet in JFK? Where are the unexplained fragments in his head? In the case of the Mortal Error theory, where are the fragments of .223 frangible, the ammo loaded into the Secret Service's AR-15 left in JFK's head?

Frangible rounds and normal rounds have different compositions. The rounds from Oswald's rifle were lead sheathed in copper. They're relatively soft metals, malleable, more likely to ricochet, open to damage on impact - it's one of the reasons the lack of any striations from clothing on CE399 makes me think it's not a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle. Frangibles are made by a different process and usually with different materials -- tin, copper, zinc, tungsten, put together so as to be subject to brittle failure on striking a hard target.

I'm surprised to learn, per Wikipedia, that one of the reasons they're made like this is offer improved safety for specialized combat simulation training involving firing at an array of multiple steel targets in various directions encountered while moving through a maze. Frangible bullets are also used in reduced ricochet, limited penetration loads intended to reduce risk to friendly forces and innocent persons during close quarters military or police actions in urban areas, aboard ships, or in hazardous material environments like oil platforms and chemical or nuclear plants. To me that would explain why the Secret Service AR-15s were loaded with .223 frangible on the day of the assassination; if there was going to be any shooting it'd be in an urban area with lots of civilians around.

And it might be noted that rifles used with silencers also use a different type of ammunition: cold loaded, i.e. less powder to propel the bullet. The bullet has to travel slower than the speed of sound -- 343 m/s, well below the muzzle velocity of Oswald's Carcano at about 700 m/s -- or else it creates a miniature sonic boom that makes the silencer pointless. Less velocity, less range, less kinetic energy. And the reduction in sound is marginal: forget what you've seen in the movies, silencers reduce the noise from 160 decibels (jet engine) down to about the 120-130 range (jackhammer).

This is also why I like Stephen Hunter's theory that the kill shot was done with the same bullet as Oswald's rifle carried, but loaded into a different rifle cartridge and therefore fired at a much greater velocity. It solves the problem of different types of bullet fragments giving the game away - because it's still a copper and lead bullet and therefore can still be blamed on Oswald.

It also solves the difference in resulting damage: the mechanism of bullet disintegration varies with the energy transfer at the time of impact -- the greater the velocity of the bullet, the greater the kinetic energy it transfers to the target on impact and therefore the greater the damage, i.e. the reason the top of JFK's head was blown clean off.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #113

So apparently six shooters fired at the president that day.
Their names are:

Dallas Deputy Sheriff Harry Weatherford
Jack Lawrence, a U.S. Air Force expert
Nestor "Tony" Izquierdo, an anti-Castro Cuban recruited by the CIA
Roscoe White, a Dallas police officer with ties to the CIA
Malcolm "Mac" Wallace
Frank Sturgis, later complicit in the Watergate robbery

Quote:Six shooters who participated in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, including three with ties to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), were named by a prominent critic of the Warren Commission Report (WCR).WCR critic/researcher Dr. James Fetzer of Madison, WI, and Chairman of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, revealed the names of five of those who appear to have been shooters, where he has identified the sixth separately:

(1) The first shot that hit, which struck Kennedy in the back, appears to have been fired from the top of the County Records Building by Dallas Deputy Sheriff Harry Weatherford. He used a 30.06 to fire a Mannlicher-Carcano (MC) bullet fitted with a plastic collar known as a sabot, which hit JFK 5.5" below the shoulder just to the right of the spinal column. This was a shallow wound with no point of exit.
(2) Jack Lawrence, a U.S. Air Force expert, who had gone to work for the automobile dealership that provided vehicles for the presidential motorcade just a few days before the assassination, fired the shot that passed through the windshield and struck JFK in the throat from the south end of the Triple Underpass.
(3) Nestor "Tony" Izquierdo, an anti-Castro Cuban recruited by the CIA, fired the shot that hit JFK in the back of the head after the limousine was brought to a halt. He fired three shots with two misses using a Mannlicher-Carcano, which were the only unsilenced shots fired, from the Dal-Tex Building, which housed a uranium mining corporation, Dallas Uranium and Oil, that was a CIA front.
(4) Roscoe White, a Dallas police officer with ties to the CIA, fired from the grassy knoll adjoining the motorcade route, but seems to have "pulled his shot," Fetzer said, "because it would have hit Jackie, so his shot went into the grass." His son subsequently discovered his diary, but gave it to the FBI and it has not been seen since.
(5) Malcolm "Mac" Wallace, who shot from the Dallas Book Depository, may have murdered a dozen people for Lyndon B. Johnson. "Mac" appears to have fired from the west side of the book depository at Texas Governor John Connally in the mistaken belief he was Sen. Ralph Yarborough, whom LBJ despised. Wallace's fingerprint was found on one of the boxes in the "assassin's lair" in the book depository from which Oswald allegedly fired.
(6) Frank Sturgis, later complicit in the Watergate robbery, who also appears to have been connected to the CIA, is said by Fetzer to have fired from the north end of the Triple Underpass the shot that entered Kennedy's right temple. Sturgis is known to have ties to Meyer Lansky, a notorious crime syndicate kingpin, and confessed his role to a New York City Gold Shield Detective when he was arrested attempting to kill Marita Lorenz.
In his interview with the Santa Barbara "Independent," Fetzer said "there were shooters at six different locations," with a total of up to 10 shots fired, three of which missed. He asserted JFK was hit four different times: in the back from behind, in the throat from in front, and twice in the head after the driver had brought the car to a halt to make sure he would be killed. Another shot missed and injured bystander James Tague, while "one or more shots hit Connally."

Source: http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2013/12/...-tied.html

Post: #114

A high quality photo of the inside of the limousine waiting for Kennedy to arrive in Dallas





3 high quality photos showing how everyone was sat inside the limousine

Post: #115

But who shot Pac and Biggie?

Post: #116

...





A still frame from the film made by Marie Muchmore of the assassination.
It shows that the red rear brake light of the limo is fully lit, indicating the limo made a full stop.





Important side note - the person with the headscarf on the right of the above photo is known as the "babushka lady". The only witness in all of Dealey Plaza who has never been postively identified. She seems to be holding either a camera or taking a film. No photo or film has ever emerged from the angle she is standing.






After the assassination everyone either falls to the floor or runs away...but babushka lady just keeps standing there in the exact same place holding her camera like nothing happened.

Post: #117

Anyone who's really interested should read "on the trail of the assassins." This was the final book written by garrison in the late 80s. He didn't hold back on this book because he felt that enough time had passed and no one would be endangered by its release. I've been reading it since this thread started, and it's very good. It doesn't focus on what happened in "zapruder frame 318" or stuff like that. It focuses on people and what they were up to, how they were connected, etc.

They highlight the staggering number of witnesses who never testified at the warren commission. The lack of police follow up. Evidence missing. Inconsistencies.

How many people were aware that the deputy director of the CIA that Kennedy fired over the bay of pigs, was the brother of the mayor of Dallas at the time of the shooting?

How come Oswald was interrogated for12 hours with no recording or transcript made? How come he has no legal counsel? In cases like this you provide the person with counsel whether they want it or not.

How did jack ruby get access to the basement of the police department, to kill Oswald? Why would he do it knowing it would guarantee he would spend the rest of his life in prison?

Don't focus on things like frangible 223 ammo. That's something that can't be proven. Instead ask why his brain was removed during autopsy, not replaced, and then disappeared from the national archives.

Most importantly, read the book. If anything, it's a great cloak and dagger kind of story. It's also the only book based on a firsthand official investigation written by a guy who talked to the people involved. A guy the government tried to intimidate into silence.

Post: #118

(03-08-2017 03:03 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Anyone who's really interested should read "on the trail of the assassins." This was the final book written by garrison in the late 80s. He didn't hold back on this book because he felt that enough time had passed and no one would be endangered by its release. I've been reading it since this thread started, and it's very good. It doesn't focus on what happened in "zapruder frame 318" or stuff like that. It focuses on people and what they were up to, how they were connected, etc.

They highlight the staggering number of witnesses who never testified at the warren commission. The lack of police follow up. Evidence missing. Inconsistencies.

How many people were aware that the deputy director of the CIA that Kennedy fired over the bay of pigs, was the brother of the mayor of Dallas at the time of the shooting?

How come Oswald was interrogated for12 hours with no recording or transcript made? How come he has no legal counsel? In cases like this you provide the person with counsel whether they want it or not.

How did jack ruby get access to the basement of the police department, to kill Oswald? Why would he do it knowing it would guarantee he would spend the rest of his life in prison?

Don't focus on things like frangible 223 ammo. That's something that can't be proven. Instead ask why his brain was removed during autopsy, not replaced, and then disappeared from the national archives.

Most importantly, read the book. If anything, it's a great cloak and dagger kind of story. It's also the only book based on a firsthand official investigation written by a guy who talked to the people involved. A guy the government tried to intimidate into silence.

Yes, it's an excellent book.

I believe Garrison's conclusion was that Oswald was 100% employed by the US intellgence agencies, and was inside the texas school depository at the moment of the assassination, but did not fire any shots.

This would explain:

- how he lived a playboy lifestyle on a minimum wage salary with no savings.
- how he gave up his US citizenship to go to the Soviet Union to become a communist and then was readmitted entry back into the USA with his Soviet wife Marina and given his citizenship back with no questions asked.
-how he was working at a US base for U2 spy planes in Japan.
-why his wife Marina claimed he would disappear for many weeks at a time despite having 2 daughters with her.
-why there are no notes of any of his arrest interviews.
-why his tax returns showing where he earned his money are still confidential today.
-why he was hanging out with rich and influential men like Clay Shaw and George de Mohrenschildt.
-why they sent 30 police cars and knew exactly where to find him when they arrested him, despite no one knowing he had allegedly shot the president. yet.
-why after his arrest he claimed he was just a patsy.


When he was arrested, he was only charged with the murder of police officer J. D. Tippit. He was not actually charged with murdering the president until the next day.

Here is an interview with him shortly after his arrest.
If you see him as a government agent who has been duped into a trap, this interview makes a lot more sense, especially the phrase at minute 0:16 saying "i ask someone to come forward to give me legal assistance".






Notice at minute 0:37 someone in the crowd shouts out "nobody said what ?" at least 2 times very loudly in an aggressive tone and Osawld makes an annoyed face at minute 0:41. He knows its a trap.

He knows they want him to say the phrase "no one has said I shot the president" but Oswald doesn't fall for that trap....he distinctly said "i have not been charged with that."

Keep in mind Oswald is only 24 years old when all this happened.


Another interesting thing...during that interview Jack Ruby is in the crowd which is confirmed in another video, but he only shot Oswald 1 or 2 days later.

Post: #119

(03-08-2017 03:31 PM)Mercenary Wrote:  -why after his arrest he claimed he was just a patsy.


When he was arrested, he was only charged with the murder of police officer J. D. Tippit. He was not actually charged with murdering the president until the next day.

Here is an interview with him shortly after his arrest.
If you see him as a government agent who has been duped into a trap, this interview makes a lot more sense, especially the phrase at minute 0:16 saying "i ask someone to come forward to give me legal assistance".






Notice at minute 0:37 someone in the crowd shouts out "nobody said what ?" at least 2 times very loudly in an aggressive tone and Osawld makes an annoyed face at minute 0:41. He knows its a trap.

He was duped? He just went up to the depository on a day in which the president was rolling around in a motorcade? Then he shot a policeman leaving the scene?

He was duped???

Post: #120

I wouldn't say Oswald lived a playboy lifestyle except for his time in Russia. Most of the time he appeared to be scraping by. They sort of touched on the subject matter in the book. They said you don't want your guys going from wearing threadbare hand me downs, to wearing custom made suits. Part of maintaining cover was not having major changes to your lifestyle. I always wondered why he never had a car. I thought that would make his life a lot more difficult and inconvenient especially in most of these places where public transportation was lacking. The only reason he wouldn't have had a car, is because he was told to not buy one. Not even a piece of shit that someone of his meager means could have acquired on his wages. I think they did that to make sure they could catch up with him and hang him out to dry.

The most poignant observation in the book even applies to the wikileaks dump yesterday. He said that when an agency is permitted to operate in total secrecy with minimal or no checks and balances, it ultimately breeds a culture of carelessness and incompetence.

Post: #121

(03-08-2017 04:49 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  He was duped? He just went up to the depository on a day in which the president was rolling around in a motorcade? Then he shot a policeman leaving the scene?

He was duped???

Do your homework.
He was an official employee of the book depository already and had a normal job moving and stacking books for a few weeks.
He did not shoot the policeman until way later in the day in a totally different part of Dallas....if he shot him at all, which he probably didn't.



Garrison claimed on the day of the assassination Oswald was told (by the intelligence agencies he probably worked for) to wait in the book depository for an important phone call, which never came.

Post: #122

This is what make people like me annoyed by all the conspiracy crap:

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/tip.htm

So the guy knows who killed Tippit, but "He won't say"

Is all that stuff possible? Yes, but it's just not likely, especially when people who supposedly "know" won't say a gosh darn thing about it. The odds are overwhelmingly these are made up stories for ... you choose the reason.

(I just followed up on the Helen Markham testimony and of course that has "holes" too ... I'm quite sure almost every testimony in the history of man isn't completely accurate to the events, it's the whole point of lawyers telling you to NEVER give a statement to police, the only thing than can happen is bad to you if you are implicated in something)

Post: #123

(03-09-2017 01:17 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  This is what make people like me annoyed by all the conspiracy crap:

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/tip.htm

So the guy knows who killed Tippit, but "He won't say"

Is all that stuff possible? Yes, but it's just not likely, especially when people who supposedly "know" won't say a gosh darn thing about it. The odds are overwhelmingly these are made up stories for ... you choose the reason.

(I just followed up on the Helen Markham testimony and of course that has "holes" too ... I'm quite sure almost every testimony in the history of man isn't completely accurate to the events, it's the whole point of lawyers telling you to NEVER give a statement to police, the only thing than can happen is bad to you if you are implicated in something)

Agreed and fair enough. The flawed nature of human testimony can be established from the fact you have varying testimonies about the number of shots they heard fired, from three up to about nine. Which is why I focus on the physical evidence which can't be easily manipulated, i.e. ballistics.

Tippit's murder is a separate issue, I might add: the principal evidence against him is eyewitness identification, one of the least reliable forms of identification, if the person is not familiar to the identifier and the opportunity for viewing is short. It can apply even if the opportunity for viewing is long: look up the case of Beck, an innocent man claimed to be a swindler by about five separate women when Beck had in fact been in custody the entire time they were swindled. That case, and many others, have led courts to instruct juries to be very, very careful when it comes to eyewitness identification.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #124

Logging this one for later thought and summarisation. Long, and maybe the math/physics types here can look into it for errors, but it goes into an aspect of the assassination that doesn't seem to have been looked into before, in relation to the third, head-exploding shot: obliquity of the shot and what that does to the energy of the shot.

http://garyrevel.com/jfk/PHYSICS_Proof_J...llShot.pdf

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #125

Devil's advocate post here. Vincent Bugliosi, the famous attorney, is certain Oswald acted alone. He proves some pretty convincing, legalistic evidence as to why it was Oswald:


Here's the "53 pieces of evidence for Oswald killing Kennedy" including witnesses:

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/ind...085.0;wap2

Among some of the compelling witness testimony is # 11 on the list, which is a witness who saw a man, resembling or actually Oswald, shooting from the 6th floor of the building, including the kill shot, so he says. (he provides many others) Here's # 11:

11. After the first and second shots rang out in Dealey Plaza, a motorcade witness, Howard Brennan, sitting on a short concrete wall directly across the street from the sixth-floor window, looked up and actually saw Oswald in the window holding his rifle. Only 120 feet away from Oswald, he got a very good look as he watched, in horror, Oswald (whom he had seen in the window earlier, before the motorcade had arrived) take deliberate aim and fire the final shot from his rifle.29 At the police lineup that evening, Brennan picked Oswald out, saying, “He looks like him, but I cannot positively say,” giving the police the reason that he had since seen Oswald on television and that could have “messed me up.”30 However, Brennan signed an affidavit at the Dallas sheriff’s office within an hour after the shooting and before the lineup saying, “I believe that I could identify this man if I ever saw him again.”31 On December 18, 1963, Brennan told the FBI he was “sure” that Oswald was the man he had seen in the window.32 And he later told the Warren Commission that in reality at the lineup, “with all fairness, I could have positively identified the man” but did not do so out of fear. “If it got to be a known fact that I was an eyewitness, my family or I…might not be safe.”33 Although Brennan did not positively identify Oswald at the lineup, he did say, as we’ve seen, that Oswald looked like the man. And we know Brennan is legitimate since the description of the man in the window that he gave to the authorities right after the shooting—a slender, white male about thirty years old, five feet ten inches—matches Oswald fairly closely, and had to have been the basis for the description of the man sent out over police radio just fifteen minutes after the shooting.