Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Why the James Tague Wounding Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory  (Read 4424 times)

Online Zeon Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Why the James Tague Wounding Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory
« Reply #42 on: Today at 02:46:11 AM »
This from a guy who has offered no alternative explanation for how the Tague injury occurred. Why don't you give us an alternative theory wo we can compare it to the possibilities that it was caused by one of Oswald's shots. As is the custom for most CTs, you set the bar very high for the LNs and very low for yourself. We are expected to prove every last detail with 100% certainty while you are allowed to speculate while providing no evidence.
If you can, why don't you.

A number of plausible explanations have been offered for how a shot from Oswald's rifle could have continues down range and struck the curb near Tague. Posner has theorized the bullet hit a tree branch. I don't necessarily believe that but I can't logically refute it either. Others have suggested the bullet struck the traffic arm that the limo passed under. Again, not my theory but possible. I lean toward the first shot missing to the right of the limo, ricocheting off the pavement and continuing down range to toward Tague. I used a Google Earth view of Dealey Plaza and it shows a line from the sniper's nest to where Tague was standing passes through the right lane of Elm St. Still others believe that a lead fragment from the headshot passed over the windshield and continued down range toward Tague. Without knowing the exit velocity of those fragments, it's impossible to say whether or not that was possible.

Now let's see your explanations.


You are correct that  a 1st shot before Z224 to the right of the JFK limo, could strike the manhole cover.
However it would have to be high above JFKs head. So that suggests  an inadvertent unaimed shot fired as the TSBD shooter was in the act of adjusting the rifle on the boxes. It seems plausible enough to me but I’m having trouble dismissing the majority witness hearing the 1….2.3 pattern, and Tague seemly more inclined That it was 2nd or 3rd shot.

Seems to me improbable that an MC bullet would break apart after hitting the manhole cover such that a fragment of lead  completely separated from the copper jacket and flew across to the curb, while the remainder of the bullet still in the copper  jacket buried into the grass. Maybe an experiment  is necessary to see if it could happen this way.

Similarly, if no copper trace element was found in the curb and only lead then does not that rule out a 1st missed shot before Z224? Unless…Maybe it hit the road and ricocheting?  :-\  Hmm…possible but It would be almost the same result:a portion of lead separated completely from the copper jacket and flew to the curb, while the Rest of the bullet with copper went into the grass ( or where?)

But if it was the TSBD shooters MC bullet surely they should have found the builet if it buried in the grass. There is no reason not to document that if it was found (unless it was Not an MC bullet?)

So this  leaves the Z313 shot breaking up such that a lead fragment separated  completely and flew to  hit the curb. However if it got over the windshield  then as Andrew Mason noted ( if his math is correct)that the fragment would only be traveling approx 200 ft/ sec ( the parabolic arc physics equation).

So… the only  other possibility is a Z313 a fragment that went just to the left side of Greers head such that the parabolic arc is flattened by not having to go over the windshield, thus the fragment velocity could be much greater, say more like 1000 ft/ sec which with be enough  force of  impact on the curb to explode some  particles of concrete.

« Last Edit: Today at 03:00:27 AM by Zeon Mason »

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2379
Re: Why the James Tague Wounding Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory
« Reply #43 on: Today at 11:23:14 AM »

You are correct that  a 1st shot before Z224 to the right of the JFK limo, could strike the manhole cover.
However it would have to be high above JFKs head. So that suggests  an inadvertent unaimed shot fired as the TSBD shooter was in the act of adjusting the rifle on the boxes. It seems plausible enough to me but I’m having trouble dismissing the majority witness hearing the 1….2.3 pattern, and Tague seemly more inclined That it was 2nd or 3rd shot.


There is no evidence of a bullet strike on or near the manhole cover. That is a separate issue from the Tague injury. That could have been caused by a bullet hitting just to the right of the limo, ricocheting off the pavement, and continuing down range to strike the curb near Tague.
Quote

Seems to me improbable that an MC bullet would break apart after hitting the manhole cover such that a fragment of lead  completely separated from the copper jacket and flew across to the curb, while the remainder of the bullet still in the copper  jacket buried into the grass. Maybe an experiment  is necessary to see if it could happen this way.

There is no evidence of a bullet strike in the grass. One assumptions and rumors. There isn't a single witness who said he/she saw a bullet taken out of the grass.
Quote

Similarly, if no copper trace element was found in the curb and only lead then does not that rule out a 1st missed shot before Z224? Unless…Maybe it hit the road and ricocheting?  :-\  Hmm…possible but It would be almost the same result:a portion of lead separated completely from the copper jacket and flew to the curb, while the Rest of the bullet with copper went into the grass ( or where?)

Why are you hung up on a bullet in the grass. There is no evidence a bullet ever hit the grass. It's all hearsay. 
Quote

But if it was the TSBD shooters MC bullet surely they should have found the builet if it buried in the grass. There is no reason not to document that if it was found (unless it was Not an MC bullet?)

There is no documented evidence of a bullet being recovered from the grass. It's a myth.
Quote

So this  leaves the Z313 shot breaking up such that a lead fragment separated  completely and flew to  hit the curb. However if it got over the windshield  then as Andrew Mason noted ( if his math is correct)that the fragment would only be traveling approx 200 ft/ sec ( the parabolic arc physics equation).

I haven't done the calculation so I can't say whether his is correct or not. To eliminate a fragment from the head shot as a possible cause of Tague's injury, you not only have to calculate what the exit velocity of the fragment from the head would have to be for it to arc down and strike the curb near Tague, you would have to determine what the minimum velocity would needed for it to chip the concrete and cause the chips to hit Tague. If the latter is greater than the former, that would eliminate a fragment from the headshot as the cause of Tague's injury.
Quote

So… the only  other possibility is a Z313 a fragment that went just to the left side of Greers head such that the parabolic arc is flattened by not having to go over the windshield, thus the fragment velocity could be much greater, say more like 1000 ft/ sec which with be enough  force of  impact on the curb to explode some  particles of concrete.

I haven't looked at the geometry for that possibility but just trying to visualize it from what I remember when there was a video camera on the 6th floor looking down Elm St., that seems unlikely to me. Going from JFK's head to the left of Greer seems like that would be too much of a diagonal to get anywhere near Tague.

Offline Michael Capasse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
Re: Why the James Tague Wounding Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory
« Reply #44 on: Today at 12:31:28 PM »
There is no evidence of a bullet strike on or near the manhole cover.
There is no evidence a bullet ever hit the grass.
There is no documented evidence of a bullet being recovered from the grass.

Consistently repeating  BS: doesn't make it true.

« Last Edit: Today at 12:38:24 PM by Michael Capasse »

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2379
Re: Why the James Tague Wounding Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory
« Reply #45 on: Today at 02:06:38 PM »
Consistently repeating  BS: doesn't make it true.

No, but the fact that neither you nor MTG can produce a single eyewitness who saw a bullet removed from the grass along Elm St., despite being prodded to do so multiple times, is a pretty good indication no such bullet was ever found.

Offline Michael Capasse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
Re: Why the James Tague Wounding Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory
« Reply #46 on: Today at 02:08:06 PM »
No, but the fact that neither you nor MTG can produce a single eyewitness who saw a bullet removed from the grass along Elm St., despite being prodded to do so multiple times, is a pretty good indication no such bullet was ever found.

more repeat. more
  BS: