Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
Sean Kneringer, Mark Wellhausen

Author Topic: 10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent  (Read 866 times)

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
Re: 10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent
« Reply #14 on: Yesterday at 02:56:14 PM »
It's truly amazing the conclusions the CTs can arrive at from something as innocuous as a cheese sandwich and an apple. Meanwhile they are perfectly willing to dismiss all rock solid evidence of Oswald's guilt, the kind of evidence that is routinely used to prosecute criminals in other cases, fingerprints, ballistics, medical evidence, fiber evidence, etc.

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
Re: 10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent
« Reply #15 on: Yesterday at 03:10:13 PM »
I should mention that you made this same argument in the thread "Appreciating the Research of Howard Donahue," and that I answered it. But, as usual, you have repeated this argument and ignored my previous reply to it. Just for everyone's information, here's my previous reply to this argument:

I was referring to the following point that Donahue made and that I discussed in the OP for the Donahue thread:

But, you've ignored all of this information and simply repeated your invalid, evasive argument. Most readers would probably not know this if I didn't point it out. You pull this stunt all the time, literally over and over.

Your answer made no more sense the second time you gave it than the first time.
Quote

You still have yet to explain the fact that an FMJ bullet would never, ever, ever produce the kind bullet fragmentation that we see on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays. {/quote]

I don't need to explain things that are based on your false premises.
Quote


Those x-rays show a "lead snowstorm" of over 40 tiny fragments in the right-frontal region, which alone automatically rules out FMJ ammo, as world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Vincent DiMaio pointed out:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Again, for at least the sixth time in the last two months, did you catch that? (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

The JFK autopsy skull x-rays also show two isolated fragments very near the right orbit: the 3 x 1 mm and the 7 x 2 mm fragments that Humes removed during the autopsy. There is no other particle or fragment anywhere near those two fragments on the extant skull x-rays. How did they get there? Your scenario has no way to explain those two fragments.

Unlike you, I am smart enough not to think my analysis of the medical evidence based on a few photos and x-rays that have been made public should trump the opinions of the original autopsy team which had the body in front of them or the FPP which had access to all the original photos and x-rays. I'm the guy who trusts the opinions of people who actually know their shit. You're the other guy.
Quote

As I've discussed previously, the largest of the tiny fragments in the right-frontal fragment cluster are at the left end of the cluster on the right lateral skull x-ray, clear proof, according to the laws of physics and ballistics, that the fragments came from a bullet that struck in the front, as a number of experts have noted. The heavier fragments in a fragment trail will travel the farthest from the point of entry, while the lighter fragments will come to a halt closer to the entry point.

In addition, the skull x-rays show a very thin genuine 6.3 mm x 2.5 mm fragment embedded in the rear outer table of the skull and inside the ghosted image of the 6.5 mm object. This is undoubtedly the rear head fragment mentioned by Sibert and O'Neill in their report. Sibert and O'Neill said this fragment was "the next largest fragment" (the largest fragment was the 7 x 2 mm fragment), and that it was "at the rear of the skull at the juncture of the skull bone" (p. 3).

On the AP x-ray, this fragment is 1 cm below the phantom cowlick entry site and over 3 inches above the EOP entry site. The only rational, scientific explanation for this fragment is that it is a ricochet fragment from the bullet that struck the pavement behind the limo early in the shooting.

Given the serious conflicts in the reports regarding bullet fragments and bullets found in the limousine, you are on shaky ground from the outset to be citing CE 567 and CE 569. Furthermore, (1) forensic science tells us that those two fragments could not have come from the ammo that hit JFK's skull; (2) there is no evidence that those fragments transited JFK's skull; and (3) the claim that NAA testing proved that CE 567 and the two fragments from JFK's brain came from the same ammo was exploded years ago.

"Proper Assessment of the JFK Assassination Bullet Lead Evidence from Metallurgical and Statistical Perspectives," by Dr. Erik Randich and Dr. Patrick Grant

"Ballistics and Baloney: Lucien Haag and the JFK Assassination," by Martin Hay.

This should not be surprising, since we know from forensic science that FMJ bullets will never, ever shatter into dozens of tiny fragments, much less while also depositing fragments on the outer table of the skull upon impact and while also magically depositing two fragments at the opposite end of the skull with no other fragments deposited anywhere near them.

Sooner or later, you and other WC true believers are going to have to face the fact that the ammo that hit JFK's head behaved nothing like the ammo that Oswald allegedly used, that Oswald's alleged ammo could not possibly have produced the bullet fragmentation seen on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays.

I was going to say that sooner or later you're going to have to face the fact that the only bullets recovered from the shooting were 6.5mm Carcano FMJ bullets, but then I remembered who I was replying to and realized it is unlikely you will ever deal with the realities of the situation. No other bullets or fragments of bullets were found in the body or in the limo.

Online Brian Doyle

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent
« Reply #16 on: Yesterday at 04:49:34 PM »
It's truly amazing the conclusions the CTs can arrive at from something as innocuous as a cheese sandwich and an apple. Meanwhile they are perfectly willing to dismiss all rock solid evidence of Oswald's guilt, the kind of evidence that is routinely used to prosecute criminals in other cases, fingerprints, ballistics, medical evidence, fiber evidence, etc.


In his Commission testimony Captain Will Fritz was not going to let yankee federal commission members make a good Texan lie so when Commission lawyer Ball asked Fritz where Oswald said he was during the assassination Fritz responded with the truth...He told Ball that Oswald told him he was eating a cheese sandwich and apple in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room...That cheese sandwich and apple was Oswald's description, not Fritz's...Ball went in to panic mode and guided Fritz back to the official story, but not before Fritz had gotten the full truth out that Oswald was eating a cheese sandwich and apple in the same 2nd Floor Lunch Room that Carolyn Arnold saw him in...That is the same cheese sandwich and apple that Frazier is talking about that the un-named employee said was on the 2nd Floor Lunch Room table after the assassination...And if it was on the table after the assassination then it had to be right there on the table when Truly & Baker confronted Oswald in that same Lunch Room...The Education Forum calls itself a research forum but it seems to be more interested in writing overbearing rules than actually discussing case-cracking solving of the case like this... 

As to the evidence that was collected against Oswald, that was a combination of defrauded evidence and that evidence which occurs when an Intelligence agent is cooperating with his being framed...

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2069
Re: 10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent
« Reply #17 on: Yesterday at 05:23:04 PM »
No.11 reason: the 24” bag (give or take a couple of inches) as Buell W. Frazier described the way he saw Oswald  carrying the bag under  his armpit and in the  cupped palm of his hand.

No.12 reason: per BW Frazier, Oswald was wearing the GRAY jacket that Friday morning. Oswald had only 2 jackets, a gray jacket and a blue jacket. Oswald left TSBD wearing no jacket according to John Corbett because he believes Bledsoe saw Oswald on McWatters bus wearing  only the brown shirt with a hole in the sleeve. Ok, if that is true then how does Oswald’s gray jacket which he must have left in the TSBD get to under a car in a parking lot to be pointed out by some unnamed person? Oswald leaving the boarding house zipping up a jacket (per Earlene Roberts), could therefore only be the BLUE jacket. The description of the Tippit shooters “tan” jacket does not fit the  BLUE jacket Oswald had on when he left the boarding house. If Oswald discarded this blue jacket before he was seen by Brewer, how does that BLUE jacket wind up being found in the TSBD in the Domino room? And Who found BLUE jacket anyway?

In October of 1964, Frazier acknowledged that the rifle was in the bag when he signed a notarized affidavit stating that his car is the car which transported the weapon that morning.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2069
Re: 10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent
« Reply #18 on: Yesterday at 05:34:56 PM »
1. The ammo that hit JFK's head behaved nothing like the ammo that Oswald allegedly used.

The ammo that hit Kennedy's head shattered into dozens of tiny fragments (practically particles) and a few larger fragments, deposited at least three fragments on the rear outer table of the skull, and left two fragments in the very front of the skull near the right orbit. Oswald allegedly used FMJ bullets, but FMJ bullets will never, ever, ever fragment in this manner.

This is simply nonsense; Kookspeak.

Full metal jacketed bullets can indeed fragment when striking a skull while traveling at full velocity.

I'm not sure where you get your mistaken info from but you better check again.

Stop spewing misinformation.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2069
Re: 10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 05:39:45 PM »
2. Multiple eyewitness accounts clearly indicate that Oswald was not on the sixth floor during the shooting. We now know that the WC was aware of strong eyewitness evidence that Oswald did not come down the stairs after the shooting but suppressed it.

There are literally no "eyewitness accounts" indicating Oswald was not on the sixth floor at 12:30.

Online Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1772
    • JFK Assassination Website
Re: 10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent
« Reply #20 on: Yesterday at 06:15:08 PM »

[size=pt8]MG: 1. The ammo that hit JFK's head behaved nothing like the ammo that Oswald allegedly used.

The ammo that hit Kennedy's head shattered into dozens of tiny fragments (practically particles) and a few larger fragments, deposited at least three fragments on the rear outer table of the skull, and left two fragments in the very front of the skull near the right orbit. Oswald allegedly used FMJ bullets, but FMJ bullets will never, ever, ever fragment in this manner.[/size]


BB: This is simply nonsense; Kookspeak.

I'm guessing that you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread before you posted your reply. I also gather that your research into forensic and ballistics evidence in the JFK case has been rather insufficient.

Full metal jacketed bullets can indeed fragment when striking a skull while traveling at full velocity. I'm not sure where you get your mistaken info from but you better check again. Stop spewing misinformation.

You're the one "spewing misinformation." Again, you appear to have posted this gaffe without reading the rest of the thread, but even then you should have known better than to make such an erroneous claim.

One, no FMJ bullet would never, ever, ever produce the kind bullet fragmentation that we see on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays. Those x-rays show a "lead snowstorm" of over 40 tiny fragments in the right-frontal region, which alone automatically rules out FMJ ammo, as world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Vincent DiMaio pointed out:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Are we clear? Let's review: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

Two, the alleged murder weapon was a low-velocity rifle. I quote none other than FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier, who explained this to the Warren Commission:

Mr. FRAZIER. Considerably less. The recoil is nominal with this weapon, because it has a very low velocity and pressure, and just an average-size bullet weight.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is the killing power of the bullets essentially similar to the killing power at these ranges---the killing power of the rifles you have named?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. How much difference is there?
Mr. FRAZIER. The higher velocity bullets of approximately the same weight would have more killing power. This has a low velocity. . . . (3 H 414, emphasis added)