WC Member's Views Confirmed By HSCA

[Rob Caprio]

I did post the proof. The same as how we know JFK was hit, because of his reactions. You ask for proof but seem exceptionally weak when asked to provide it.

I am sure you do get it. Only two shots and the idea there was a conspiracy becomes very remote. All the posting and conspiracy analyzing was just a waste of time. It appears you can't handle being asked to prove your thread about Sen Russell and his belief there was three shots. All the posting about Sen Russell and his three shot scenario but when asked to prove there were three shots you come up missing. The WC and the HSCA both questioned the number of shots and the medias influence on the witnesses. The same WC which Sen Russell was a member.

You have offered nothing that trumps what JBC and his wife said.

[Rob Caprio]

I can't show anything except the research.

To wit:

A) The FMJ head shot hit the hard bone of the skull nose-first causing the bullet to release all its energy inside the head

B) The CE399 FMJ bullet hit no heavy bone nose-first, thus retaining enough energy/velocity to arrive in the left thigh in near-original condition (as intended by FMJ design)

The skull is not thicker than a rib or radius bone, and yet we are told that the head shot exploded upon contact but the supposed magic bullet doesn't after hitting multiple bones. Sure.

[Rob Caprio]

Pretty sure FBI testers and Frazier used the actual weapon. It would be folly to not do so. And what are 'issues' to you lot does not automatically translate into what a trained marine would consider to be same.

And given the nature of what FMJ ammo is designed to do and is capable of, you are ignoring that aspect and simply whistling in the dark.

You're the one ignoring it as it is NOT meant to explode upon impact, but the head shot did. Russell was right not to believe in the SBT since it is fictitious.

[Andrew Mason]

You're the one ignoring it as it is NOT meant to explode upon impact, but the head shot did. Russell was right not to believe in the SBT since it is fictitious.

I want to be clear that I am not in any way endorsing your general view that Oswald did not fire all the shots.  But your points about the SBT are valid. The SBT was a theory that legal counsel to the WC developed to explain where the bullet that passed through JFK went.  There was never any actual evidence that it occurred and a great deal of evidence that conflicted with it.  There is even more conflict between the "second bullet SBT" that is now popular and the evidence - particularly the "first bullet hit JFK" evidence, the evidence that the first shot was after z186, and the overwhelming evidence that the last two shots were closer together.

[Jack Nessan]

Um, three spent shells found in the SN

And?------------- Explain why it is important.

Maybe this will help.

WC conclusion pages 110-111
It is possible that the assassin carried an
empty shell in the rifle and fired only two shots, with the witnesses
hearing multiple noises made by the same shot. Soon after the three
empty cartridges were found, officials at the scene decided that three
shots were fired, and that conclusion was widely circulated by the
press. The eyewitness testimony may be subconsciously colored by
the extensive publicity given the conclusion that three shots were fired.

[Jack Nessan]

"Proof" of a fact is determined by the trier of fact - it is whatever evidence that is considered by the trier of fact to be sufficient to establish a fact. You obviously do not consider the abundant evidence of 3 shots to be sufficient to convince you that there were 3 shots.  Others do, including all the members of the WC, HSCA. You appear to think that all that evidence is somehow wrong.
JBC did not say he was struck almost simultaneously with a second shot. He said he heard the first shot, realized it was a rifle shot and turned around to try to see JFK but could not as he had moved. As he turned back to turn to his left he said he felt being struck forcefully in the back by another shot. He says that as he lay back onto his wife he heard a third shot and felt the spray of brain matter over him.  Even though he did not hear three shots, he observed three shots.
It is certainly possible that JBC's back wound was caused by a bullet that had not passed through JFK. In fact, one can make a reasonable case that in order for the bullet to have missed his right lung as it did, it had to have been travelling at a very small angle to the direction of the car - almost from directly behind.  That means it struck him when the car was farther down Elm when the angle to the SN was very small.

Interesting, instead of just posting the proof for all to see this is what you decided was better information,  which is basically nothing more than an unfounded fervent belief. The WC was not certain about the number of shots and stated the reasons in their conclusions.

---------------------------------------

As usual you are quoting what a witness stated at a later time. Seems simple enough immediately after hearing the shot he just starts to make the turn he knows he is wounded.
JBC Hospital Interview 11/27
"I was sitting in the jump seat. I turned to my left to look in the back seat ? the president had slumped. He had said nothing. Almost simultaneously, as I turned, I was hit and I knew I had been hit badly."

In his statements JBC always thought the rifle shots were very close together
"were very, very brief span of time"
"Immediately after he heard the first shot"
"someone was shooting with an automatic rifle"
"rapidity of these two, of the first shot plus the blow that I took"

The only problem with father down the road, JBC was already wounded.

[Jack Nessan]

You have offered nothing that trumps what JBC and his wife said.

The question that was asked was answered.
R Caprio: "So you can't quote her saying that the same bullet hit both JFK and JBC. Got it."
-----------------------------------
What JBC stated was he cried Oh no no no after he was wounded.

What Nelly and Jackie stated was he cried out Oh no no no after the first shot and before the second. JBC never heard an additional shot just felt the pain. Where is the confusion. What more proof do you need.
----------------------------
The thread is about Sen Russell and three distinct shots. Prove the three shots. From where I stand if there is a difference between yourself , Chapman, and Mason only you three know what it is. Nothing but pure blind faith. Each with his own placement of a shot that never happened. If there was a third shot there would be no argument over where it happened, let alone being placed at all times and locations in the shooting sequence.