The Magic Bullet

[Andrew Mason]

😂🤣😃 You clearly don't know the evidence of this case.

I know it is difficult to accept that the SBT is not needed for LN conclusion, but that is what the evidence shows,. Even most LN supporters don't want to accept it. But I have given you an accurate summary of the evidence. Is it just that you do not want to base conclusions on well corroborated witness evidence? If you think I have misrepresented the evidence read my paper and tell me what you think I have misquoted or misrepresented.

[Jerry Freeman]

There was a professional hit team out there in Dealey Plaza
[Maybe the Alpha 66 guys]
...Oswald was not one of the shooters.
He was the fall guy.

[Ray Mitcham]

There was a professional hit team out there in Dealey Plaza
[Maybe the Alpha 66 guys]
...Oswald was not one of the shooters.
He was the fall guy.

Triangulation, Jerry. Classical ambush.

[Andrew Mason]

The sheer fact that you think one shooter could cause all the wounds seen illustrates that you either don't know the evidence or are misrepresenting what it actually shows.

Three bullets caused those wounds. The question is whether one person could have fired three bullets. You don't think that a single shooter can fire a rifle three times?

[Ray Mitcham]

Three bullets caused those wounds.

According to the WC. Only two bullets hit JFK.

The question is whether one person could have fired three bullets. You don't think that a single shooter can fire a rifle three times?

Of course one person could have fired three bullets. The question is was it Oswald.

[Bill Chapman]

No it isn't. That is the fundamental error most LNs and all CTs make.  The second shooter is only required if JBC is reacting to his chest wound by z235 or so.  But, if one follows the evidence, there was only one shot to that point.  The last two were noticeably closer together to the vast majority of those who recalled a shot pattern. The second shot SBT is impossible with that shot pattern.

But that is not all. A second shot SBT is also excluded by the Connallys and about 22 other witnesses who said that JFK reacted to the first shot (in distinctly different way than the smiling and waving seen prior to z195 or so).

Again, that is not all: a second shot SBT is excluded by dozens of witnesses along Elm and in the motorcade who put the first shot after z186-z191.

A first shot SBT is excluded if you believe that the Connallys were right in their observation that JBC was not struck in the chest on the first shot.

So the demise of the SBT does not imply multiple shooters unless you are convinced that all these witnesses are wrong. 


Three shots fired from the SN fits all the evidence. It just does not fit your subjective view that Gov. Connally must have been hit in the chest at the same time JFK emerges from behind the sign showing signs of his neck wound.

Describing JBC's chest wound as him being 'hit in the chest' implies a shot from the front, at least as far as I understand the written word. You are ignoring the back wound suffered by the guv, it seems to me.

Are you claiming a shot from the front indeed hit JBC?

[Bill Chapman]

David Wimps work shows this same kind of jump, or movement forward, of multiple passengers at 313 as well and speculates that Zapruder does flinch in reaction to the shots

 Separately I do not get why Humes is referring to the back wound as a neck wound?

The wound could be accurately referred to as the 'back/neck' wound since the entry was at the junction where the neck anatomically meets the back (according to an article on MacAdams site).

Can you link to your David Wimps work? I have seen other work that reveals the passengers did not lurch forward at the rear entry head hit to JFK.