CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility

[Michael Capasse]

Marina, however, was very explicit on page 231 of her HSCA testimony that he had disappeared with his rifle on "several occasions" for "several hours," saying he was "going to target practice or something like that" at a "practice range somewhere apparently." She clarified on page 255 that this was all "in Dallas."

My problem with Marina is she is an admitted liar. WC had major concerns over that.
She seems to take it all back in the 90's with a statement to the Assassination Review Board.
A look at her side thru the years has to be considered in the forum in which she feels safe enough to speak openly. 

https://jfk.boards.net/post/7364

There comes a lot of doubt because if it and brings out a major question, was Lee an FBI informant?

[Dan O'meara]

Ben Cole and I have articulated two tight, minimalist conspiracy theories – G2 (Cuba) and the Mafia respectively. I think we’re both talking about no more than five participants from conception through execution.

I know it’s fun to hypothesize elaborate conspiracies involving everyone but the kitchen sink, but this is just flat-out silly. Give it up, unless you acknowledge you’re just having fun and not trying to articulate a plausible theory.

This was a Presidential assassination. Anyone whose fingerprints were on it in any way was going to be executed. Every real-world conspiracy of any significance involves the minimal number of participants – and this would be true in spades of a Presidential assassination. And it sure as hell wouldn’t have involved an elaborate cover-up extending to Bethesda and beyond. This is just flat-out silly. Weird and fun, but flat-out silly.

Larry Hancock says Someone Would Have Talked – and he thinks someone did. That’s the problem with any conspiracy that isn’t the absolute minimalist scenario. Some of the people Larry thinks talked would not have been allowed anywhere near a Presidential assassination conspiracy unless the planners were Curly, Larry and Moe.

Forget all the “ideologically-oriented” conspiracies. Allen Dulles? Come on, this is science-fiction. Only the following had a real-honest-God motive for whacking JFK:

1. LBJ: perfect
2. The Mafia: perfect
3. Right-wing Texas oilmen: perfect
4. Those with an anti-Castro motive (which overlaps with 1-3 above): good, but somewhat more “ideological” than 1-3 above
5. Castro and/or his supporters: not nearly as strong, but plausible

There are only two plausible roles for Oswald:

1. Knows he’s a gunman in a pro-Castro conspiracy
2. Thinks he’s a gunman in an pro-Castro conspiracy

The key to the plausibility of any conspiracy theory is the implausibility of the SBT. The SBT is possible, but it is implausible for multiple reasons. If Oswald fired only two shots, it is entirely plausible that the rapid bang-bang heard by several witnesses was Oswald’s second shot and another from someplace like the Dal-Tex building or County Records building (as I believe) or the Grassy Knoll (as Ben suggests). I believe my two buildings are simply more plausible.

This is what I think we realistically have to work with. It is possible to construct a tight, highly compartmentalized, realistic conspiracy with any of the five candidates suggested above. Dan O’Meara suggested one with just LBJ, Byrd (who owned the TSBD building), Cason (president of the TSBD business), Bill Shelley, and a hitman other than Oswald; I thought it fell apart inside the TSBD, but it’s in the ballpark of what I’m talking about.

As Dan’s did, a tight, minimalist conspiracy could involve combinations of 1-4 above, but you’d have to make the connections in a tight, minimalist, plausible way.

Even with a tight, minimalist conspiracy, the trick is always to bring Oswald into it in a plausible way. LBJ and Oswald, the Mafia and Oswald, right-wing Texas oilmen and Oswald? Those are challenges. Pro-Castroites or anti-Castroites? Much easier. Of course, LBJ, the Mafia or Texas oilmen could have brought Oswald in via a contact in the pro- or anti-Castro community, but then we have to make a plausible connection between them and this middleman.

Anyway, if I were retained to construct a plausible conspiracy to sell to a jury or the court of public opinion, I believe I would have to work within these realistic parameters. The fact that even very prominent voices in the CT community can’t see that what they are peddling is science fiction is very puzzling. The fact that they pointedly ignore the far more realistic scenarios is not only puzzling but somewhat suspicious. The conspiracy-prone mindset does gravitate toward dark intrigue and unnecessary complexity, so this may be a large part of the explanation.

The last time we discussed this issue you were slightly hysterical and ended up storming off the forum.
This OP offers a far more level-headed and even-handed assessment of the theory I was putting forward.
I'm not sure why you think it falls apart inside the TSBD. If I have an area of specific focus in this case it is exactly what happened in the TSBD building around the time of the assassination and it is my research in this specific area that has led me to conclude that Oswald did not take the shots.

But you have squarely hit the nail on the head - Oswald's involvement.
If I were lazy or dishonest I would try to argue that Oswald was just a fortunate coincidence. The plot was underway and the lucky conspirators had the perfect patsy land in their lap...a traitorous Commie ex-Marine on whom to pin the assassination.
But Oswald was clearly involved IMO. I am convinced that after he left the TSBD that day he was heading for the border when Tippit intervened.
I can only offer wild speculation as to how Oswald could have possibly been manoeuvred into his position as willing participant and have to concede it is the weak point of the theory I am proposing.
It must be said that, to a large extent, Oswald outside the TSBD was a 'black box' of sorts. He lived alone and kept himself to himself so it's hard to do anything other than speculate.

The conspiracy I propose involves LBJ, Harold Byrd, Jack Cason, Bill Shelley and Jack Dougherty with Oswald as a patsy.
Georges De Morenschildt is also a person of interest.

[Dan O'meara]

I'm not sure how sloppy and unprofessional it was if the M-C was the weapon. First shot (I tend to believe) is a little low and to the right. Second shot, bingo. I mentioned long ago playing golf with a guy who had been a military sniper for 23 years and was now teaching counterterroism.. He greatly surprised me by saying he certainly could have made the shots "but not with that rifle."

John Orr's Mafia theory has 4.15 seconds between the back shot and the head shot. As you do, he notes the risk of JFK slumping out of view during that period. He explains this (with a photo on page 46 of his "Analysis of Gunshots in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963," http://www.mountainrivercabins.com/JohnOrrReport.pdf) by a tree blocking the line of site from the County Records Building. That doesn't sound like the level of professionalism I might expect from a Mafia pro, but perhaps the plan was to wait and see if Oswald got the job done, knowing that anywhere along Elm would be an easy shot for a Mafia pro. (FWIW, Orr has Oswald's first shot being the back shot, but exiting the limo rather than passing through JBC; the second shot is also by Oswald and causes JBC's wounds except the wrist wound; the third shot is the head shot by a Mafia pro in the CRB, a fragment from which causes JBC's wrist wounds; followed almost immediately by a fourth shot, also from Oswald, that hits the pavement left of the limo.)

Certainly, "squads" of gunmen violates my demand for plausibilty, but Oswald and a one-shot pro is at least in the ballpark. The theory that there was only one gunman - not Oswald - and that the shots were intentionally sloppy to make them plausibly attributable to Oswald and his M-C seems far-fetched.

I'm not sure how sloppy and unprofessional it was if the M-C was the weapon.

If the weapon really was the M-C it could not have been any more sloppy and unprofessional. What professional would use that rifle??!!
It is interesting to note that both witnesses who had a good look at the rifle while it was being used failed to notice a scope. Euins, in particular, as he goes into quite some detail about what he could see of the rifle and that he could only see the assassins bald spot as he lowered his head to the rifle to take the shot (indicating the head was tilted to the left indicating a left handed shooter. Perhaps).

[Lance Payette]

The last time we discussed this issue you were slightly hysterical and ended up storming off the forum.

I just reviewed that discussion, which extended over several threads over a period of months. No, I did not "storm off the forum" as a result of anything to do with your LBJ-Byrd theory. It seems to me, as I suggested back then, that the theory becomes progressively less plausible as we work our way down. LBJ and Byrd? OK, fine, plausible. Cason and Shelley? Why? Why would they risk execution by participating in the JFKA? Did Byrd have that sort of leverage over Cason and Cason over Shelley? Where is there any evidence that they benefitted in the slightest from their supposed participation? Dougherty - does he really seem like a plausible gunman? I also don't believe you emphasized at that time that you believed Oswald was actually involved, which was why I was making facetious (but exceedingly clever and humorous!)  remarks about Shelley having him in a headlock and administering noogies while some hitman did the deed. Flesh it all out and I'll listen, but on the surface it sounds less plausible to me than the Mafia or anti-Castro theories. Both of those merely required convincing Oswald he was part of a pro-Castro plot.

[Lance Payette]

My problem with Marina is she is an admitted liar. WC had major concerns over that.
She seems to take it all back in the 90's with a statement to the Assassination Review Board.
A look at her side thru the years has to be considered in the forum in which she feels safe enough to speak openly. 

https://jfk.boards.net/post/7364

There comes a lot of doubt because if it and brings out a major question, was Lee an FBI informant?

You quoted the portion of my post before I edited it to include what a mess her WC testimony was and how it got distinctly "better" at the HSCA. I'll have to look into her statement to the ARRB that "I absolutely believe that Lee Oswald was the informant on the arrest of Lawrence Miller and Donnell Whitter on November 18, 1963" because that's news to me.

[John Corbett]

I'm not sure how sloppy and unprofessional it was if the M-C was the weapon. First shot (I tend to believe) is a little low and to the right. Second shot, bingo. I mentioned long ago playing golf with a guy who had been a military sniper for 23 years and was now teaching counterterroism.. He greatly surprised me by saying he certainly could have made the shots "but not with that rifle."

It's a mortal lock that SOMEBODY made the shots with that rifle given that the only 2 recovered bullets and 3 recovered shells were fired by "that rifle".
There is ample evidence that somebody was Oswald.

John Orr's Mafia theory has 4.15 seconds between the back shot and the head shot.

Almost 5 seconds actually. Back shot at or about Z222. Head shot at Z313. 91/18.3 = 4.97.

As you do, he notes the risk of JFK slumping out of view during that period. He explains this (with a photo on page 46 of his "Analysis of Gunshots in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963," http://www.mountainrivercabins.com/JohnOrrReport.pdf) by a tree blocking the line of site from the County Records Building.

There is zero evidence any shot was fired from the County Records Building. Like all conspiracy theories, it is entirely speculation and no substance.

That doesn't sound like the level of professionalism I might expect from a Mafia pro, but perhaps the plan was to wait and see if Oswald got the job done, knowing that anywhere along Elm would be an easy shot for a Mafia pro.

Seriously? Does that actually make sense to you? Why do people feel compelled to dream up such bizarre scenarios when there is a simple and straight forward one that is supported by a body of evidence that screams "OSWALD DID IT".

(FWIW, Orr has Oswald's first shot being the back shot, but exiting the limo rather than passing through JBC;[/quote]

Now that's a real Magic Bullet scenario.

the second shot is also by Oswald and causes JBC's wounds except the wrist wound; the third shot is the head shot by a Mafia pro in the CRB, a fragment from which causes JBC's wrist wounds; followed almost immediately by a fourth shot, also from Oswald, that hits the pavement left of the limo.)

I guess when one doesn't limit oneself to scenarios that are supported by real evidence, anything is possible.

Certainly, "squads" of gunmen violates my demand for plausibilty, but Oswald and a one-shot pro is at least in the ballpark.

That one isn't even in Yellowstone Park.

The theory that there was only one gunman - not Oswald - and that the shots were intentionally sloppy to make them plausibly attributable to Oswald and his M-C seems far-fetched.

As do all theories which don't have Oswald firing all the shots in Dealey Plaza that day.

[Lance Payette]

I'm not sure how sloppy and unprofessional it was if the M-C was the weapon.

If the weapon really was the M-C it could not have been any more sloppy and unprofessional. What professional would use that rifle??!!
It is interesting to note that both witnesses who had a good look at the rifle while it was being used failed to notice a scope. Euins, in particular, as he goes into quite some detail about what he could see of the rifle and that he could only see the assassins bald spot as he lowered his head to the rifle to take the shot (indicating the head was tilted to the left indicating a left handed shooter. Perhaps).

Well, yes, no professional would use that weapon. I was merely saying that, considering the weapon, the back and head shots were pretty good. If Oswald was a patsy gunman, of course, then it would only make sense to have him use the weapon he actually owned and that would be easily traceable to him. Maybe he'd get lucky and actually accomplish the mission. If he didn't, then our Mafia pro in the County Records Building would do so with ammunition and on a trajectory plausibly attributable to the patsy. Where I actually like this scenario is that (1) it provides us with bad guys with a far, far stronger motive than Oswald would have had, and (2) it doesn't require Oswald to be a half-crazy sociopath, which I don't think he was. I'm not planting my flag in it, but I do see it as a plausible, not-entirely-evidence-free alternative to the LN narrative.