Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)  (Read 34827 times)

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6008
Re: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)
« Reply #28 on: February 11, 2022, 03:21:12 PM »
Richard you are right in that not all the Miller pictures show this detail. I think those are later copies that lost resolution as this one seems to match the early one published in the following Post magazine on Dec 14. The other pictures I have seen also don’t show that vertical blur in the middle of the door just behind it. The resolution of this picture appears just good enough to show that vertical blur which I believe is actually the antenna of an accompanying motorcycle cop. And to your point, when ruling out reflections from people near the limo, in all the higher resolution photos I have of the limo from Love field to before arriving in Dealey Plaza, I didn't see a sign of an abrasion or mark around that spot.

Charles also hit the nail on the head regarding Washington. I can see a mark in the Washington garage in the better FBI and Secret service photos. In fact in a high resolution picture at Parkland I copied from Robin Unger I also see it. It just seems interesting that it appears to show up after Dealey Plaza but not before.

Yes, it seems clear that it wasn't present before the assassination.  Given that some copies of that same photo don't show the damage that leaves the aftermath photos to confirm if it is an anomaly or possible product of the assassination.  Can you post the FBI/Secret Service pictures that you reference?  Thanks.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)
« Reply #29 on: February 11, 2022, 04:30:20 PM »
Richard you are right in that not all the Miller pictures show this detail. I think those are later copies that lost resolution as this one seems to match the early one published in the following Post magazine on Dec 14. The other pictures I have seen also don’t show that vertical blur in the middle of the door just behind it. The resolution of this picture appears just good enough to show that vertical blur which I believe is actually the antenna of an accompanying motorcycle cop. And to your point, when ruling out reflections from people near the limo, in all the higher resolution photos I have of the limo from Love field to before arriving in Dealey Plaza, I didn't see a sign of an abrasion or mark around that spot.

Charles also hit the nail on the head regarding Washington. I can see a mark in the Washington garage in the better FBI and Secret service photos. In fact in a high resolution picture at Parkland I copied from Robin Unger I also see it. It just seems interesting that it appears to show up after Dealey Plaza but not before.

This is getting more and more intriguing….   Thumb1:

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6008
Re: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)
« Reply #30 on: February 11, 2022, 04:50:40 PM »
It always seemed bizarre to me that they continued to use that car after the assassination.  You have to wonder what LBJ thought sitting in the same seat where his predecessor had been murdered.  I think even RFK rode in the car. 

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)
« Reply #31 on: February 11, 2022, 05:27:08 PM »
It always seemed bizarre to me that they continued to use that car after the assassination.  You have to wonder what LBJ thought sitting in the same seat where his predecessor had been murdered.  I think even RFK rode in the car.

The car should have been preserved for history. LBJ wasn’t smart enough to realize this. Like the war in Vietnam, he wasn’t smart enough to avoid the tragedy that it evolved into under his watch. Reading a book by Clint Hill titled “Five Presidents,” Clint relates that the Secret Service had limited resources and that it would have taken several years to design and build another limo to replace it. It seems obvious to me (in hindsight) that LBJ should still have done what ever was necessary to preserve the limo.

Offline Brian Roselle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
Re: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)
« Reply #32 on: February 11, 2022, 05:41:56 PM »
Richard,

I'm not sure I can post the pictures I've found in the format I would like, so I decided to drop them in a pdf with the photos aligned in time. Hopefully this will display and additionally allow some direct zooming in on your screen.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tsj1RnCbMm5rbo_JtdcAc7RY-M8jVttT/view?usp=sharing

I dug around and found versions of the photos that do not readily show the mark, and aligned beside versions of the ones that do. It appears to me to be a function of the resolution and lighting of the photos. If its a mark, I think this would suggest a very shallow surface mark that needs good lighting to visually bring out.

I'm not totally sure on the source of the last couple of sets. I think the last set, with the jump seats moved may be from the FBI or Secret Service. I'm pretty sure the next to last set are FBI versions. One of those appears to perhaps have an inspector with a lab coat in the front seat. I wonder if this could be Frazier looking at the windshield.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)
« Reply #33 on: February 11, 2022, 05:54:04 PM »
Richard,

I'm not sure I can post the pictures I've found in the format I would like, so I decided to drop them in a pdf with the photos aligned in time. Hopefully this will display and additionally allow some direct zooming in on your screen.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tsj1RnCbMm5rbo_JtdcAc7RY-M8jVttT/view?usp=sharing

I dug around and found versions of the photos that do not readily show the mark, and aligned beside versions of the ones that do. It appears to me to be a function of the resolution and lighting of the photos. If its a mark, I think this would suggest a very shallow surface mark that needs good lighting to visually bring out.

I'm not totally sure on the source of the last couple of sets. I think the last set, with the jump seats moved may be from the FBI or Secret Service. I'm pretty sure the next to last set are FBI versions. One of those appears to perhaps have an inspector with a lab coat in the front seat. I wonder if this could be Frazier looking at the windshield.

Great work! This does appear to be something that should have interested the investigators. Wow!

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11351
Re: Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)
« Reply #34 on: February 12, 2022, 11:48:10 PM »
We have all seen the Murray photo of the detectives looking at the concrete surrounding manhole cover on the south side of Elm Street. They were investigating what appeared to be a mark left by a bullet that grazed the concrete. This area is inline with the position of James Tague who was grazed on the cheek by a piece of this bullet or a piece of the concrete curb adjacent to him. That curb was apparently also hit by a part of the bullet, which apparently skipped from the manhole area to that curb.

Except Tague said that he wasn't hit by the first shot.