JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
A Dale Myers Analysis of the Renee Nicole Good Shooting would be Useful.
Joe Elliott:
--- Quote from: Gerry Down on January 23, 2026, 10:15:40 AM ---As far as I know, he has not done a 3D video of the Tippit killing, so is unlikely to do one of an incident outside the JFKA.
--- End quote ---
Hard to do a 3D video of the Tippit killing without film.
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: Joe Elliott on January 23, 2026, 04:03:57 AM ---A study by Dale Myers of the Renee Nicole Good shooting would be a big project. I do not know if the video is of good enough quality. I have not heard anything about such a project being undertaken.
But it would be useful to see a frame by frame representation would be the best way to see how close the car came to gazing the shooter.
Of course, if this ever happened, MAGA would join ranks with many CTers and say that Myer's analysis was no good.
--- End quote ---
The shooter put himself in front of the car on purpose and was able to move out of the way. Whether the car grazed him is not really a critical issue. It is not really a difficult issue either if one had the autopsy details.
The first bullet from the front appears to be travelling on a downward car left to car right path and struck the far right lower corner of the windshield:
If the shooter was in front of the car when he shot, the bullet would have passed to the far car left side and maybe grazed her left side if it struck her at all. If it did strike her farther to her right then he could not have been in front of the car when he fired. In any event, it did not likely strike her in the head as it was too low.
It is difficult to understand why the shots from the side were needed at all.
Joe Elliott:
--- Quote from: Andrew Mason on January 25, 2026, 05:04:23 PM ---The shooter put himself in front of the car on purpose and was able to move out of the way. Whether the car grazed him is not really a critical issue. It is not really a difficult issue either if one had the autopsy details.
The first bullet from the front appears to be travelling on a downward car left to car right path and struck the far right lower corner of the windshield:
If the shooter was in front of the car when he shot, the bullet would have passed to the far car left side and maybe grazed her left side if it struck her at all. If it did strike her farther to her right then he could not have been in front of the car when he fired. In any event, it did not likely strike her in the head as it was too low.
It is difficult to understand why the shots from the side were needed at all.
--- End quote ---
Agreed. When he was told to get some lunch "Big Boy", he immediately switched his phone from his right hand to his left, freeing up his gun hand, WALKED IN FRONT OF A VEHICLE WITH ITS ENGINE RUNNING, positioned himself on the driver's side, barely in front of the car (if at all) so he could say he was in front of the car, but far enough to the side to be pretty safe. And the first instinct, if you think a car is coming at you, is to step aside, not start firing your gun, unless you think you are already in a safe place and just want to kill.
With the engine running, he could have walked around the backside of the car to get in position. But that might not get him in position soon enough to justify shooting at her if the car starts to move too soon.
Also, he have his video, taken maybe 30 seconds before, where the victim says "I'm not angry at you". Like he was looking menacing, like getting his anger up, and she was scared of him enough to say "I'm not angry at you." I have met police occasionly, I never felt the need to tell them "I'm not angry at you." Never. That is a weird thing to happen within a minute of the same officer killing her.
Bill Brown:
--- Quote from: Joe Elliott on January 26, 2026, 03:58:21 AM ---Agreed. When he was told to get some lunch "Big Boy", he immediately switched his phone from his right hand to his left, freeing up his gun hand, WALKED IN FRONT OF A VEHICLE WITH ITS ENGINE RUNNING, positioned himself on the driver's side, barely in front of the car (if at all) so he could say he was in front of the car, but far enough to the side to be pretty safe. And the first instinct, if you think a car is coming at you, is to step aside, not start firing your gun, unless you think you are already in a safe place and just want to kill.
With the engine running, he could have walked around the backside of the car to get in position. But that might not get him in position soon enough to justify shooting at her if the car starts to move too soon.
Also, he have his video, taken maybe 30 seconds before, where the victim says "I'm not angry at you". Like he was looking menacing, like getting his anger up, and she was scared of him enough to say "I'm not angry at you." I have met police occasionly, I never felt the need to tell them "I'm not angry at you." Never. That is a weird thing to happen within a minute of the same officer killing her.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---And the first instinct, if you think a car is coming at you, is to step aside, not start firing your gun, unless you think you are already in a safe place and just want to kill.
--- End quote ---
Great point, Joe.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version