Dr. Gary Aguilar's Two-Shot Analysis

[James Slater]

When I read this, I feel like I'm in a time warp and I've traveled back to 1991.

Where did you get the idea that Oswald only had 6 seconds to fire 3 shots. Was it from Josiah Thompson's lame book Six Seconds in Dallas? The WC never concluded 3 shots were fired in 6 seconds, only that it was a theoretical possibility. 3 shots in under 6 seconds is only necessary if one believes the second shot was the missed shot. There is a general consensus among lone assassin proponents that the first shot was the missed shot. This gives Oswald at least 8 seconds to fire the three shots and some have hypothesized 10-11 seconds. Without definitive proof of exactly when Oswald fired that first missed shot, we can't really say how long it took him to fire all 3 shots. What we can be fairly certain of is that there was almost 5 seconds between the two shots that hit JFK.

The single bullet was a product of the Secret Service recreations which showed at the time JFK was shot in the back, JBC was directly in line to be hit by the bullet that exited from JFK's throat. Such a bullet could hardly have missed him. There are no eyewitnesses to a second shooter. There is no photographic evidence of a second shooter. There is no medical evidence of a second shooter. There is no ballistic evidence of a second shooter. The three recovered shells and the only two recovered bullets were positively matched to Oswald's Carcano rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world. It is a mortal lock that Oswald fired the shots that killed JFK. There is zero credible evidence he had even a single accomplice.

As for the Connallys, Nellie Connally is probably one of the worst witnesses we have. Nothing she said she saw is supported by the Z-film. John Connally was sure of one thing. He had been hit by the second bullet. He had no way of knowing whether JFK had been hit by the first or second shot. For some reason he had been led to believe that JFK had been hit by the first which is why he rejected the SBT. The reality is that both men were hit by the second shot.

You said there is no evidence of a second shooter yet I've yet to see evidence from any witness that stated they saw Oswald with a rifle in the TSBD or in the 6th floor window with a rifle. In a court of law in the United States first hand witnesses to the fact are first and foremost in any trial. They form the basis of most prosecutions and defences. Circumstantial and forensic evidence are used in conjunction with witnesses to the fact. 
Nell and John Connally were first hand witnesses to the fact, they were in the limo and if they both state that John Connally was hit two seconds after Kennedy was first struck then that is what we have to go with. If you don't then the constitution of the United States isn't worth the paper it was written on. That would be akin to suggesting that first hand witnesses are not trust worthy in ANY trial.
There are five video's available of five railroad workers who testified on film that they saw gunsmoke and heard shots fired from the picket fence. I'll post them later. None of them were allowed to testify before the Warren commission. Show me one video or piece of evidence from anyone who saw Oswald with a rifle in Dealey Plaza.

[Benjamin Cole]

JS-

Yes, I agree the Connallys were intelligent and earnest, and their steady testimony, apparently delivered without fear or favor, or axes to grind, tends to rule out the lone gunsel armed with a single-shot-per-bolt-action rifle.

My read of Z-film dovetails with the Connally testimony.

I strongly suspect LHO was the TSBD6 shooter...but that there was a second shooter also.

Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.

[John Corbett]

JS-

Yes, I agree the Connallys were intelligent and earnest, and their steady testimony, apparently delivered without fear or favor, or axes to grind, tends to rule out the lone gunsel armed with a single-shot-per-bolt-action rifle.

My read of Z-film dovetails with the Connally testimony.

I strongly suspect LHO was the TSBD6 shooter...but that there was a second shooter also.

Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.

A second shooter that nobody saw and apparently didn't hit anybody or anything and whose bullets were never recovered.

[James Slater]

A second shooter that nobody saw and apparently didn't hit anybody or anything and whose bullets were never recovered.

No one saw the first shooter. There is no witness testimony that saw ANYONE with a rifle in Dealey Plaza apart from the SS agent carrying the M16 which wasn't discharged anyway.
The truth is, absolutely no one saw anyone point a rifle and shoot Jack Kennedy in Dealey Plaza, whether they be the first, second, third or 10th shooter. Oswald was found guilty of murder with dodgy forensic and circumstantial evidence alone.

[Duncan MacRae]

The truth is, absolutely no one saw anyone point a rifle and shoot Jack Kennedy in Dealey Plaza, whether they be the first, second, third or 10th shooter.

Howard Brennan

Arnold Rowland

Amos Euins 1.46

[John Corbett]

You said there is no evidence of a second shooter yet I've yet to see evidence from any witness that stated they saw Oswald with a rifle in the TSBD or in the 6th floor window with a rifle. In a court of law in the United States first hand witnesses to the fact are first and foremost in any trial. They form the basis of most prosecutions and defences. Circumstantial and forensic evidence are used in conjunction with witnesses to the fact.

What nonsense. Eyewitnesses are the least reliable form of evidence. Convictions can be and often are obtained solely on forensic evidence. There was a witness who saw Oswald fire the final shot but his ID of Oswald is probably the least compelling piece of evidence against Oswald. The case can be made entirely on the forensic evidence. That evidence includes finger and palm prints, fiber evidence, ballistic matching, medical evidence, film evidence, and a paper trail proving Oswald ordered and was the owner of the murder weapon. There isn't a scrap of any of the above types of evidence that indicates there was a second shooter. All the forensic evidence points to Oswald alone.

Nell and John Connally were first hand witnesses to the fact, they were in the limo and if they both state that John Connally was hit two seconds after Kennedy was first struck then that is what we have to go with. If you don't then the constitution of the United States isn't worth the paper it was written on. That would be akin to suggesting that first hand witnesses are not trust worthy in ANY trial.

I don't know where you got your understanding of constitutional law but nowhere in the Constitution does it say eyewitness accounts are required to obtain a conviction nor does it say eyewitness accounts should be accepted at face value. I've served on four juries, two civil and two criminal. Each time the judge instructed us to weigh the credibility of the witnesses based on a number of factors. I was on a murder trial where we had both eyewitness and forensic evidence. The only disagreement among the jurors was whether the element of premeditation had been proven. I was one of two who believed it had not and we prevailed.  We convicted the accused of the lesser charge. I also sat on a trial in a check forgery case. The prosecution presented no eyewitnesses to the crime yet the forensic evidence was so convincing we convicted the guy in less than an hour. Eyewitnesses are not end all, be all nor should they be.

There are five video's available of five railroad workers who testified on film that they saw gunsmoke and heard shots fired from the picket fence. I'll post them later. None of them were allowed to testify before the Warren commission. Show me one video or piece of evidence from anyone who saw Oswald with a rifle in Dealey Plaza.

Correction. They saw SMOKE. Modern gun smoke does not billow. It dissipates almost immediately and if it had been fired from behind the fence, it wouldn't have made it into the clear for anybody on the overpass to see it. Lots of people had different ideas about where the sounds indicated the shots came from. Some said all three shots came from the GK and some said all three came from the direction of the TSBD. The three spent shells in the sniper's nest tells us which group got it right.

[James Slater]

Howard Brennan

Arnold Rowland

Amos Euins 1.46

Brennan has been proven to be a liar. The warren Commission stipulated that Oswald used three boxes as a rifle rest and he was angled pointing the rifle  towards the triple underpass and the route the motorcade was taking. Most of Oswald's body was obscured by the boxes he was using as a rifle rest yet Brennan stated this:"He was a white man in his early 30s, slender, nice-looking, and would weigh about 165 to 175 pounds". he also stated Oswald was 5' 10" tall. Brennan was at a 45 degree angle looking up at the building and he couldn't see Oswald's legs, he couldn't possibly know how high the window ledge was from the floor of that room without going in it so how could he conclude the sniper was 5' 10"? I'm sorry but you can't look into a window from a 45 degree angle from 100 feet way and know someone's height, weight and build unless you are superman and can see through brick walls. Many have suspected than Brennan was part of the patsy crew and I don't blame them. As for the black guys interpretation; even the Warren commission denied the rifle was hung out of the building 12 inches. They stated the tip of the barrel was resting at the end of the boxes.