Experiment proves no bullet penetrated the limo windshield

[Charles Collins]

Dulles and Specter discussed the Commission viewing the windshield during the Robert Frazier testimony.

Mr. DULLES - May I just ask a question of you, Mr. Specter, and possibly of the witness.
I assume that the windshield we are now discussing is the windshield that was exhibited to the Commission several weeks ago and which members of the Commission examined?
Mr. SPECTER - It was, Mr. Dulles, and we can establish that, of record, through another Commission Exhibit which is 351, which was the number given to the windshield and we have a reproduction here through the photograph.

Mr. DULLES - You don't have the windshield here today, though?
Mr. SPECTER - No, we do not.
Mr. DULLES - It would be the same windshield that the Commission saw.

Anyway, I'm not sure what the point in this is. Other than the typical quibbling and demands by the conspiracy crowd.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/frazr2.htm

Thanks Steve. That testimony from Robert Frazier was apparently taken on May 13, 1964. A little over a week after the date Hosty said that he saw the windshield in the WC hearing room. It seems the windshield was no longer there on May 13,1964.

I was asked for my source and responded. Then the quibbling and demands continued as usual.

[Michael Capasse]

The date that Hosty specified in his book for this encounter with the windshield was May 5, 1964. Google AI isn’t always correct. Here’s a link to an FBI report confirming the May 5, 1964 date of Hosty’s testimony.

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files%20Original/H%20Disk/Hosty%20James%20P%20Jr%20SA/Item%2021.pdf

The FBI report also specifies the names of the people in the room for Hosty’s testimony.

The point I am trying to make is that the windshield was and still is available for inspection. I cannot state with any certainty how long the windshield remained in the hearing room. But the fact that Hosty said it was sitting on the desk there on May 5, 1964; and that it had been entered into evidence weeks earlier suggests to me that it was most likely there long enough for many witnesses and others to see. If you think otherwise, that’s fine with me.

 "...most likely there long enough for many witnesses and others to see."
  "Amos! Get your finger out of that glass and come over here and sit down!"

[Michael T. Griffith]

Another sad case of denial.

Bullet Holes in the Limousine and Extra Bullets in Dealey Plaza

Lecture by Doug Weldon on JFK Limo Windshield Coverup

I guess St. Louis Dispatch journalist Richard Dudman was seeing things when he reported seeing an obvious hole in the limo's windshield. Other witnesses, including Dallas police officers Stavis Ellis and Bobby Hargis and medical student Evalea Glanges, also reported seeing a hole in the windshield, with some describing it as big enough to put a pencil through.

But, of course, they were all "mistaken." They mistook a crack for a circular hole that was large enough to put a pencil through. Of course. You bet.

You see, a hole in the windshield destroys the lone-gunman shooting scenario.

BTW, there was also a clear round bullet mark in the chrome above the windshield. Photos prove that dent was not there before the assassination.

And then there are the corroborated credible reports of missed shots landing in Dealey Plaza, two of them confirmed by photographic evidence, but WC apologists dismiss all of them as "mistaken."

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

[Gerry Down]

You see, a hole in the windshield destroys the lone-gunman shooting scenario.

No it doesn't.

A bullet fragment exiting JFK's head could have made a hole through the windshield. As it happens it only had enough force to crack the windshield but not actually break through the windshield.

[Benjamin Cole]

The JFKA research community has done some good work, but unfortunately has a tendency to believe select witnesses, and has a near-compulsion to subscribe to "opposite of the WC" explanations of nearly everything.

So "JFK was shot from the front" has become the mantra of some.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

You see, a hole in the windshield destroys the lone-gunman shooting scenario.

No it doesn't.

A bullet fragment exiting JFK's head could have made a hole through the windshield. As it happens it only had enough force to crack the windshield but not actually break through the windshield.

Yes.
And the needed deflection of the slug (or major remnant) inside jfk's head precludes that head-shot coming from Oswald.
But the needed deflection fits ok with a shot from SSA Hickey.

[Royell Storing]

You see, a hole in the windshield destroys the lone-gunman shooting scenario.

No it doesn't.

A bullet fragment exiting JFK's head could have made a hole through the windshield. As it happens it only had enough force to crack the windshield but not actually break through the windshield.

   The above begs the question of why the alleged same ammo/same rifle: (1) Explodes JFK's head upon contact, vs (2) Passing through the bodies of JFK and Connally like a hot knife through butter.