If a CT could come to accept the "SBT," would he or she remain a CT?

[Jack Nessan]

I think this is preposterous. Consider:

-- There's the Tague wounding.

-- There's the shot that five witnesses saw strike the street early in the shooting.

-- There's the 7.65 mm shell that we now know was found in Dealey Plaza within a week after the shooting and placed in an FBI evidence envelope (FBI Field Office Dallas 89-43-1A-122).

-- There's the deformed bullet that a Navy chief petty officer found in the limousine and handed to Dr. James Young at the autopsy.

-- There's the bullet that struck the grass on the south side of Elm Street near a manhole cover, about 350 feet from the TSBD. The hole made by the bullet was even photographed, and the picture appeared in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on 11/23/63.

-- There's the bullet that stuck the middle of the sidewalk on the north side of Elm Street, creating a 4-inch long and 1/4-inch deep dug-out mark in the sidewalk. Dallas resident Eugene Aldredge saw the dug-out mark and assumed, logically enough, that the mark had surely been noticed by law enforcement officials and would be discussed in full in the Warren Commission's report. When he realized the mark apparently had been "overlooked," he immediately contacted the FBI and told them about it. Incredibly, the FBI said it could not be a bullet mark because it could not have come from the sixth-floor window!

-- There are the seven blur episodes in the Zapruder film.

-- There are reactions to at least six shots in the Zapruder film.

-- There are at least four gunshot impulses on the DPD dictabelt recording that was made during the assassination by a patrolman in Dealey Plaza with his mic left on.

For more info, see

"Extra Bullets and Missed Shots in Dealey Plaza"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WRwhDQ9HMydf5pICsHwgtkoNKw0YSO8T/view

"The HSCA's Acoustical Evidence: Proof of a Second Gunman in the JFK Assassination"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KvdvH8gTqFgMn-2vTI5ppg_egWxRKg9U/view

"Reactions to Six Shots in the Zapruder Film"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nnp3Vch_KMOB_qufAhlQOCLTTS9jqNV0/view

I present more evidence on the six shot reactions in my book A Comforting Lie: The Myth that a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy.

I think this is preposterous. Consider:

A whole lot of bluster, but the question is can you prove there was a third shot?
 
-- There's the Tague wounding.

Wounding? Really, wounding? He said this mark on his cheek occurred on the second shot if even then.
 
-- There's the shot that five witnesses saw strike the street early in the shooting.

In these statements all the shots are accounted for, three shots hit JFK and JBC, one shot hits the ground. Where is the shot that supposedly caused Tague's "wounding" in these statements?


-- There's the 7.65 mm shell that we now know was found in Dealey Plaza within a week after the shooting and placed in an FBI evidence envelope (FBI Field Office Dallas 89-43-1A-122).

So, there are no chain of custody or authenticity problems with this fantasy story, it just must be true. Thanks for laugh
 
-- There's the deformed bullet that a Navy chief petty officer found in the limousine and handed to Dr. James Young at the autopsy.


So, there are no chain of custody or authenticity problems also with this story, it just must be true. Again, thanks for laugh

 
-- There's the bullet that struck the grass on the south side of Elm Street near a manhole cover, about 350 feet from the TSBD. The hole made by the bullet was even photographed, and the picture appeared in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on 11/23/63.

Hole? Proof of anything?

 
-- There's the bullet that stuck the middle of the sidewalk on the north side of Elm Street, creating a 4-inch long and 1/4-inch deep dug-out mark in the sidewalk. Dallas resident Eugene Aldredge saw the dug-out mark and assumed, logically enough, that the mark had surely been noticed by law enforcement officials and would be discussed in full in the Warren Commission's report. When he realized the mark apparently had been "overlooked," he immediately contacted the FBI and told them about it. Incredibly, the FBI said it could not be a bullet mark because it could not have come from the sixth-floor window!

Relate this to the assassination.
 
-- There are the seven blur episodes in the Zapruder film.

Zapruder is a two shot witness

 
-- There are reactions to at least six shots in the Zapruder film.

Given that Zapruder is a two shot witness, that would be really hard to believe.

 
-- There are at least four gunshot impulses on the DPD dictabelt recording that was made during the assassination by a patrolman in Dealey Plaza with his mic left on.


Already debunked a long time ago. Maybe you just haven’t heard.

 
For more info, see
 
"Extra Bullets and Missed Shots in Dealey Plaza"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WRwhDQ9HMydf5pICsHwgtkoNKw0YSO8T/view
 
"The HSCA's Acoustical Evidence: Proof of a Second Gunman in the JFK Assassination"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KvdvH8gTqFgMn-2vTI5ppg_egWxRKg9U/view
 
"Reactions to Six Shots in the Zapruder Film"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nnp3Vch_KMOB_qufAhlQOCLTTS9jqNV0/view
 
I present more evidence on the six shot reactions in my book A Comforting Lie: The Myth that a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy.
  [/b]

Give me a break. These works of fiction are a lot of things, but information is not one of them. Giving a title to drivel doesn’t make the drivel any more believable. 

The question has been answered. You have not proven there even was a third shot.

 
 

[Michael T. Griffith]

This discussion is surreal. SBT believers are still in denial about hard physical evidence that proves the SBT never happened: the front JFK shirt slits, the rear coat and shirt holes, and the tie.

There was a reason that the WC did not publish FBI Exhibit 60, the FBI crime lab photo of the front shirt slits, in the Commission's volumes. Anyone can see that the slits are below the collar band. Any bullet exiting the slits would have had to tear through the middle of the tie knot. No bullet exiting the slits could have magically weaved around the body of the tie knot and nicked the knot's left edge (and then magically readjusted its course to head toward Connally's right armpit).

There was also a reason that the WC did not publish usable photos of JFK's tie. Harold Weisberg obtained high-quality photos of both sides of the tie. The first thing he noticed was the stunning fact that there was no hole through the tie. There was a small nick on the tie knot's left edge, but no hole beneath the nick and no hole anywhere else in the tie. This proves that no bullet exited the throat, since the tie knot was about 1/2 inch in depth/thickness and was neatly centered between the ends of JFK's collar.

 

[Lance Payette]

This discussion is surreal. SBT believers are still in denial about hard physical evidence that proves the SBT never happened: the front JFK shirt slits, the rear coat and shirt holes, and the tie.

There was a reason that the WC did not publish FBI Exhibit 60, the FBI crime lab photo of the front shirt slits, in the Commission's volumes. Anyone can see that the slits are below the collar band. Any bullet exiting the slits would have had to tear though the middle of the tie knot. No bullet exiting the slits could have magically weaved around the body of the tie knot and nicked the knot's left edge (and then magically readjusted its course to head toward Connally's right armpit).

There was also a reason that the WC did not publish usable photos of JFK's tie. Harold Weisberg obtained high-quality photos of both sides of the tie. The first thing he noticed was the stunning fact that there was no hole through the tie. There was a small nick on the tie knot's left edge, but no hole beneath the nick and no hole anywhere else in the tie. This proves that no bullet exited the throat, since the tie knot was about 1/2 inch in depth/thickness and was neatly centered between the ends of JFK's collar.

You are talking about very specific forensic evidence. As I used to suggest to Sandy Larsen, take your theory to the Journal of Forensic Sciences, , https://www.aafs.org/journal-forensic-sciences, and see if it survives the peer-review process. It won't, but at least then you can write an article for Jim DiEugenio as to how even the Journal is in lockstep with the LN narrative.

[Tom Graves]

There's the Tague wounding.

Griffith,

IIRC, more than half of the fatal head-shot bullet was never recovered.

It's quite possible that James Tague was nicked by a fragment thereof, or by a piece of curb that was broken off by said fragment.

[Michael T. Griffith]

You are talking about very specific forensic evidence. As I used to suggest to Sandy Larsen, take your theory to the Journal of Forensic Sciences, https://www.aafs.org/journal-forensic-sciences, and see if it survives the peer-review process. It won't, but at least then you can write an article for Jim DiEugenio as to how even the Journal is in lockstep with the LN narrative.

We both know you guys would just ignore it, just like you did when the Journal of Forensic Sciences published Don Olson and Ralph Turner's detailed article on the photographic evidence that JFK was hit just before Z190:

Don Olson and Ralph Turner, “Photographic Evidence and the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,” Journal of Forensic Sciences, 16:4, October 1971, pp. 399-419

Even when the HSCA's photographic evidence panel confirmed that the Zapruder film and the Willis slides prove JFK was hit at or before Z190, you guys still refused to face facts on this issue because Connally was clearly not hit until Z234 at the earliest.

You don't have to be a forensic expert to figure out that if there was no hole through the tie, then no bullet exited the throat nor exited the shirt slits because the tie knot was neatly centered between JFK's collar and was directly over the shirt slits. This, of course, explains why no metallic traces were found around the shirt slits, and it explains the fact that Dr. Carrico and one of the Parkland nurses confirmed that the nurses made the shirt slits when they were hurriedly cutting away JFK's clothing. It also explains why two other Parkland doctors said the throat wound was visible before JFK's shirt and tie were removed--no wound at the level of the shirt slits would have been visible with the shirt and tie still on.

You don't have to be a forensic expert to see that JFK's tie was centered between the collar, that the shirt slits were just below the interior collar band and parallel with the bottom half of the ends of the exterior collar band, and that any bullet exiting the shirt slits would have had to tear through the middle area of the tie knot. But there was no hole through the tie, only a small nick on the tie knot's left edge made by the Parkland nurses, which is why Dr. Carrico said he didn't see any nick in the tie nor slits in the front of the shirt until after the nurses began hurriedly cutting away JFK's clothing.

The SBT was a farse from the moment it was concocted.

[Tom Graves]

We both know you guys would just ignore [the physical evidence of the front JFK shirt slits, the rear coat and shirt holes, and the "nick" in tie which allegedly prove that the SBT is false], just like you did when the Journal of Forensic Sciences published Don Olson and Ralph Turner's detailed article on the photographic evidence that JFK was hit just before Z190.

Did Olson's and Turner's analysis involve taking a look at the limo's passengers' conscious reactions to the sounds of the alleged "just-before-Z190" shot, or did most, if not all, of those witnesses (including "hit" JFK) conveniently disappear from Zapruder's view behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, gosh-darn-it? 

[Tim Nickerson]

Did Olson's and Turner's analysis involve taking a look at the limo's passengers' conscious reactions to the sounds of the alleged "just-before-Z190" shot, or did most, if not all, of those witnesses (including "hit" JFK) conveniently disappear from Zapruder's view behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, gosh-darn-it?

https://ia601208.us.archive.org/0/items/nsia-OlsonDon/nsia-OlsonDon/Olson%20Don%2005_text.pdf

It's rather weak sauce. Of course Griffith would embrace it.