Shooting Strategy AI Dialogue

[John Corbett]

Yes, LHO executed a very good plan.

I created a model of the sniper’s nest and sat in it with a similar sized rifle aiming at targets located at the proper angles. An intentional early first shot makes no sense to me. That’s just one reason I think that an early first shot must have been an accidental discharge.

One aspect that Google Ai mentioned is the offset mounting of the scope. If the offset-to-the-left scope was zeroed-in for 100-feet for the Walker attempt, and remained that way on 11/22/63, then Google AI’s point about the furthest shot point of impact being slightly to the right of the point of aim might be the reason the bullet struck JFK slightly to the right side of the back of his head. I already knew that this is an issue with offset mounting of a scope, but hadn’t applied that knowledge to the JFK assassination until I read that AI point today.

We've had this discussion before. Even if Oswald only had a 5% chance of hitting his target, that's a better chance than if he didn't take the shot at all. He still had the later shots if he missed with that shot.

Oswald set up a very effective perch to fire down Elm St. I think that was his primary plan all along. But as his target approached on Houston St., I would think he would start contemplating whether taking that early shot made sense. He only had a limited amount of time to make the decision. While neither of us can know for sure what Oswald's intention was on the first shot, I can certainly understand why he would decide to take that awkward shot.

I didn't go to the trouble of creating a model of the sniper's nest but I did use a few objects to kinda sorta give me an idea the challenges that first shot would have presented in addition to the angular velocity. I have a Sears Ted Williams Model 53 .30-06 bolt action rifle which is actually a Winchester Model 70 which they slapped the Williams name on it back in the day when Sears hired Ted Williams to endorse their line of hunting and fishing equipment. Sears did that with lots of brand name products that they sold under the Sears name. It has a top mounted scope. I don't know how the trigger pull compares with the Carcano but it seems to me with my rifle, it would take a pretty good jolt for me to accidentally fire the rifle. I would think that if Oswald didn't intend on taking the early shot, there would be no reason for him to move around much. I think it would make more sense to set up in his intended shooting position and begin tracking JFK in his scope as he was passing under the tree. I don't see an early accidental discharge to be likely if he was doing that.

I'm curious as to what the minimum distance setting Oswald's scope allowed. I wonder if it could even be adjusted down to 100 yards. Do you have any information on that?

[Andrew Mason]

Yes, LHO executed a very good plan.

I created a model of the sniper’s nest and sat in it with a similar sized rifle aiming at targets located at the proper angles. An intentional early first shot makes no sense to me. That’s just one reason I think that an early first shot must have been an accidental discharge.

I would agree that a missed first shot makes no sense unless it was accidental.  Although it still makes no sense why he would not be in position with his rifle pointing down Elm St. a few seconds before the car was in position for the first shot.  But if there was evidence of a sudden movement of the rifle between the first and second shots, that would be compelling evidence that the first shot was made at a very different direction than the last two.

What do you make, then, of the evidence from the witnesses who saw the rifle pointing out of the window after the first shot: Howard Brennan, Amos Euins, James Worrell and Mrs. Cabell?  None of them mentioned seeing any change in rifle position.

Mrs. Cabell said she looked up upon hearing the first shot and saw something sticking out of the window.  Amos Euins said he saw a metal rod sticking out of the window before the shots and looked up after hearing the first shot and saw a man with a rifle in the same window and watched him fire the last two shots. Howard Brennan looked up after the first shot and saw the rifle in the window and saw him fire the last two shots and calmly withdraw the rifle from the window.  James Worrell looked up at the window after hearing the first shot and saw the end of the barrel and a few inches of the wooden stock sticking out of a window and watched as it fired again.

[Charles Collins]

We've had this discussion before. Even if Oswald only had a 5% chance of hitting his target, that's a better chance than if he didn't take the shot at all. He still had the later shots if he missed with that shot.

Oswald set up a very effective perch to fire down Elm St. I think that was his primary plan all along. But as his target approached on Houston St., I would think he would start contemplating whether taking that early shot made sense. He only had a limited amount of time to make the decision. While neither of us can know for sure what Oswald's intention was on the first shot, I can certainly understand why he would decide to take that awkward shot.

I didn't go to the trouble of creating a model of the sniper's nest but I did use a few objects to kinda sorta give me an idea the challenges that first shot would have presented in addition to the angular velocity. I have a Sears Ted Williams Model 53 .30-06 bolt action rifle which is actually a Winchester Model 70 which they slapped the Williams name on it back in the day when Sears hired Ted Williams to endorse their line of hunting and fishing equipment. Sears did that with lots of brand name products that they sold under the Sears name. It has a top mounted scope. I don't know how the trigger pull compares with the Carcano but it seems to me with my rifle, it would take a pretty good jolt for me to accidentally fire the rifle. I would think that if Oswald didn't intend on taking the early shot, there would be no reason for him to move around much. I think it would make more sense to set up in his intended shooting position and begin tracking JFK in his scope as he was passing under the tree. I don't see an early accidental discharge to be likely if he was doing that.

I'm curious as to what the minimum distance setting Oswald's scope allowed. I wonder if it could even be adjusted down to 100 yards. Do you have any information on that?

I'm curious as to what the minimum distance setting Oswald's scope allowed. I wonder if it could even be adjusted down to 100 yards. Do you have any information on that?

LHO’s scope is a very simple scope. I have a somewhat similar one mounted on a precision air rifle that is zeroed-in for about 40-feet. The target is far from in sharp focus at that distance. But it isn’t necessary for the target to be in sharp focus in order to hit it. See the group of five shots in the image below. I shot these just recently after not shooting for about six months.

LHO was very frugal. He paid extra dollars for the scope. And it appears he intended to use it for the attempt on Walker. Based on the FBI’s tests at 100-yards, the scope was only slightly off at 100-yards when they tried to zero it at that distance. At 100-feet (1/3 of 100-yards), it appears to me that there should be no problem with zeroing the scope.

[Charles Collins]

I would agree that a missed first shot makes no sense unless it was accidental.  Although it still makes no sense why he would not be in position with his rifle pointing down Elm St. a few seconds before the car was in position for the first shot.  But if there was evidence of a sudden movement of the rifle between the first and second shots, that would be compelling evidence that the first shot was made at a very different direction than the last two.

What do you make, then, of the evidence from the witnesses who saw the rifle pointing out of the window after the first shot: Howard Brennan, Amos Euins, James Worrell and Mrs. Cabell?  None of them mentioned seeing any change in rifle position.

Mrs. Cabell said she looked up upon hearing the first shot and saw something sticking out of the window.  Amos Euins said he saw a metal rod sticking out of the window before the shots and looked up after hearing the first shot and saw a man with a rifle in the same window and watched him fire the last two shots. Howard Brennan looked up after the first shot and saw the rifle in the window and saw him fire the last two shots and calmly withdraw the rifle from the window.  James Worrell looked up at the window after hearing the first shot and saw the end of the barrel and a few inches of the wooden stock sticking out of a window and watched as it fired again.

Although it still makes no sense why he would not be in position with his rifle pointing down Elm St. a few seconds before the car was in position for the first shot.


The Hughes film shows the window as the limo is rounding the sharp corner onto Elm Street. This is just a few seconds before the limo would appear beyond the tree into the kill zone. There is no discernible rifle or shooter in the window. I suggest that LHO simply stayed sitting upright and therefore out of sight of the Secret Service agents until the very last seconds. Then he simply needed to raise the rifle from his lap and assume his shooting position. This would take only a second or two. It is during this time and motion that I believe an accidental discharge could have happened (due to interference from the window box or the vertical pipe adjacent to the window).


What do you make, then, of the evidence from the witnesses who saw the rifle pointing out of the window after the first shot: Howard Brennan, Amos Euins, James Worrell and Mrs. Cabell?  None of them mentioned seeing any change in rifle position.

I underlined “after the first shot” for emphasis. The change in rifle position may have happened before they looked up there. Plus, if any of them did look up in time, the amount of change in the rifle position may not have been discernible from their positions and/or a detail that they didn’t remember.

[Charles Collins]

We've had this discussion before. Even if Oswald only had a 5% chance of hitting his target, that's a better chance than if he didn't take the shot at all. He still had the later shots if he missed with that shot.

Oswald set up a very effective perch to fire down Elm St. I think that was his primary plan all along. But as his target approached on Houston St., I would think he would start contemplating whether taking that early shot made sense. He only had a limited amount of time to make the decision. While neither of us can know for sure what Oswald's intention was on the first shot, I can certainly understand why he would decide to take that awkward shot.

I didn't go to the trouble of creating a model of the sniper's nest but I did use a few objects to kinda sorta give me an idea the challenges that first shot would have presented in addition to the angular velocity. I have a Sears Ted Williams Model 53 .30-06 bolt action rifle which is actually a Winchester Model 70 which they slapped the Williams name on it back in the day when Sears hired Ted Williams to endorse their line of hunting and fishing equipment. Sears did that with lots of brand name products that they sold under the Sears name. It has a top mounted scope. I don't know how the trigger pull compares with the Carcano but it seems to me with my rifle, it would take a pretty good jolt for me to accidentally fire the rifle. I would think that if Oswald didn't intend on taking the early shot, there would be no reason for him to move around much. I think it would make more sense to set up in his intended shooting position and begin tracking JFK in his scope as he was passing under the tree. I don't see an early accidental discharge to be likely if he was doing that.

I'm curious as to what the minimum distance setting Oswald's scope allowed. I wonder if it could even be adjusted down to 100 yards. Do you have any information on that?

He still had the later shots if he missed with that shot.

I doubt that LHO would have been thinking that way. I suspect LHO might have thought he had only one guaranteed shot before either JFK ducked down out of sight or the Secret Service reacted to cover JFK and/or started shooting back at LHO. I don’t believe LHO would have anticipated that most people would have mistaken the first shot for a motorcycle backfire and not reacted immediately.

[John Corbett]

He still had the later shots if he missed with that shot.

I doubt that LHO would have been thinking that way. I suspect LHO might have thought he had only one guaranteed shot before either JFK ducked down out of sight or the Secret Service reacted to cover JFK and/or started shooting back at LHO. I don’t believe LHO would have anticipated that most people would have mistaken the first shot for a motorcycle backfire and not reacted immediately.

Oswald had only seconds to decide whether to take that early shot and the choice he made isn't going to necessarily be the one you would have made had you been in his situation. The only risk to taking that first shot is it would have alerted the protection detail and if they had reacted quicker than they did, Oswald might not have had a clear follow up shot. Again, Oswald could very well have made a different judgement call than you would have. He knew he had four rounds in his rifle and a limited time to fire them so he might very well have decided to get in as many shots as possible in the limited window of time available to him.

[Lance Payette]

Just putting myself in Oswald's head, as I am wont to do, I believe the thought process more likely would have been "I may only get one shot at this, so I'm going to make it the best one I can." I don't picture a former Marine sharpshooter taking a "what the hell, maybe I'll get lucky" first shot and alerting the entire world to his location.

This seems like typical ad hoc reasoning: I think he missed an early first shot, ergo this is what he was thinking and what happened. Common sense - oops, that's the other thread - says my scenario is more likely.

I thought his cheapie scope was nonadjustable - no?