JFK Assassination Forum
The JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Lance Payette on June 01, 2026, 01:48:45 AM
-
I realize it’s tiresome to see the same people posting over and over and over, so I will return to the cave for a while after sharing this thought. The problem is, when I dive back into the JFKA the thoughts that always nag at the back of my mind keep popping to the forefront.
The Walker attempt is one of the Rosetta stones of the JFKA. It shows Oswald was a violent SOB who would risk his life and abandon his family to carry out a politically motivated assassination. That’s the LN party line – nothing to see here, move along.
I do not suggest Oswald didn’t make the Walker attempt or did so as part of a conspiracy. If you think along those lines, the irrepressible Greg Doudna has summarized his 140,000-word manuscript in an active thread at the Ed Forum. The Walker shooting was a “staged” event, a “prank.” There were three participants including Oswald. Oswald had infiltrated Walker’s circle, possibly at the suggestion of de Mohrenschildt, as part of an undercover government operation to infiltrate right-wing groups. Oswald may or may not have been the shooter (probably not), but it was his rifle and his role was pretty much as he described it to Marina. OK, whatever, I just skimmed it and you can read if for yourself if you’re so inclined. It hasn’t generated much interest.
As with Oswald’s revolver, I’m talking about things that nag at me with the standard LN narrative.
1. On March 9-10, Oswald took photos of the Walker house and alley and assembled a detailed game plan with maps, bus schedules and whatnot. He, of course, did nothing like this with JFK. Granted, he didn’t have as much time – but if he seriously wanted to shoot JFK and get away with it, no law said he had to shoot from the 6th floor of the TSBD or even on 11-22. In comparison to the Walker effort, what he actually did on 11-22 was rather a stupid "plan."
2. He ordered the rifle on March 12, so it’s a virtual certainty he had the Walker attempt in mind. Yet he ordered it by mail using a money order and his own post office box, albeit with a fake name. This made the rifle completely traceable and, as Zeon has pointed out, seems foolhardy. He could have easily bought a better rifle for cash right there in Dallas and it would have been completely untraceable. Does this seem rational for the guy who did all the planning described in paragraph 1 two days previously?
3. He clearly had some awareness of Walker as a right-wing “fascist” (his term), but Walker was pretty small potatoes. Despite being the polar opposite of JFK politically, Walker did share an intense antipathy for Castro, so the two had that in common. But was Walker really worth Oswald throwing away his life and family for? Would being known as the “assassin of General Walker” really satisfy Oswald’s thirst for a place in history?
4. The attempt was made on April 10. On April 2, Michael Paine had raised the topic of Walker at a party and got no meaningful response from Oswald that he could recall.
5. On April 10, Marina was pregnant with Rachel, and June was an infant. Yet Oswald’s note clearly contemplated that he might be arrested or die in the attempt. Does this seem plausible? To throw away his life and family to kill … Walker? And, of course, he left no similar note and gave no indication of anything brewing before the JFKA.
6. Marina said he carried the rifle fully assembled under a raincoat both coming and going from the Walker attempt and that this was what he always did when he took the rifle to practice. He carried it this way on public buses. And yet, with the JFKA he took the risks of making a paper bag and asking Frazier for a ride and carried the rifle disassembled with a curious curtain rods excuse.
7. Marina said he arrived home pale and agitated – very different from the Oswald of 11-21, the morning of 11-22 and the encounter with Baker.
8. Despite being angry that he had missed (according to Marina), he made no further attempt on Walker. In fact, on October 23 (after beginning work at the TSBD) he attended a right-wing rally at which Walker was a speaker. On October 25, he attended an ACLU meeting with Michael Paine and spoke about the rally.
9. Despite her husband attempting to murder Walker and making clear he was prepared to leave his wife, infant daughter and unborn child high and dry, Marina didn’t confide in anyone who might have helped with the situation – not Robert, not the de Mohrenschildts, not any of the Russian expatriate community who had been so helpful to her.
I don’t claim to be any great student of the Walker matter. I don’t know what, if anything, the above adds up to. But as with so much of the JFKA and particularly with Oswald, I have a sense that “something is wrong with this picture.” It’s hard for me to just keep chalking things up to Oswald (supposedly) being mentally ill and erratic.
Is this “overthinking” or just “thinking”?
(Yes, that is a new avatar. I decided to use an actual photo because it's more honest.)
-
6. Marina said he carried the rifle fully assembled under a raincoat both coming and going from the Walker attempt and that this was what he always did when he took the rifle to practice. He carried it this way on public buses.
---
I have never heard of Marina saying he carried the rifle fully assembled on the bus. Do you have a source for this?
-
LP-
Given that the slug found at the Walker house was a "steel jacketed" bullet---attested to by two DPD patrolman and two DPD detectives in written contemporary statements---I doubt LHO used his own rifle for the Walker shooting attempt.
Who knows what happened April 10 1963, but my guess is LHO took a potshot at Walker, and was given a ride by confederates, and was loaned a rifle. Given the Walker house photographs and "Walker letter," almost certainly LHO was involved.
As for LHO's mysterious behavior, who knows? I am a layman, but I read there are bipolar people, who act one way one day and another the next. Maybe LHO had a variation of that.
An LHO with confederates on 4.10 suggests an LHO with confederates on 11.22.
-
I realize it’s tiresome to see the same people posting over and over and over, so I will return to the cave for a while after sharing this thought. The problem is, when I dive back into the JFKA the thoughts that always nag at the back of my mind keep popping to the forefront.
The Walker attempt is one of the Rosetta stones of the JFKA. It shows Oswald was a violent SOB who would risk his life and abandon his family to carry out a politically motivated assassination. That’s the LN party line – nothing to see here, move along.
I do not suggest Oswald didn’t make the Walker attempt or did so as part of a conspiracy. If you think along those lines, the irrepressible Greg Doudna has summarized his 140,000-word manuscript in an active thread at the Ed Forum. The Walker shooting was a “staged” event, a “prank.” There were three participants including Oswald. Oswald had infiltrated Walker’s circle, possibly at the suggestion of de Mohrenschildt, as part of an undercover government operation to infiltrate right-wing groups. Oswald may or may not have been the shooter (probably not), but it was his rifle and his role was pretty much as he described it to Marina. OK, whatever, I just skimmed it and you can read if for yourself if you’re so inclined. It hasn’t generated much interest.
As with Oswald’s revolver, I’m talking about things that nag at me with the standard LN narrative.
1. On March 9-10, Oswald took photos of the Walker house and alley and assembled a detailed game plan with maps, bus schedules and whatnot. He, of course, did nothing like this with JFK. Granted, he didn’t have as much time – but if he seriously wanted to shoot JFK and get away with it, no law said he had to shoot from the 6th floor of the TSBD or even on 11-22. In comparison to the Walker effort, what he actually did on 11-22 was rather a stupid "plan."
2. He ordered the rifle on March 12, so it’s a virtual certainty he had the Walker attempt in mind. Yet he ordered it by mail using a money order and his own post office box, albeit with a fake name. This made the rifle completely traceable and, as Zeon has pointed out, seems foolhardy. He could have easily bought a better rifle for cash right there in Dallas and it would have been completely untraceable. Does this seem rational for the guy who did all the planning described in paragraph 1 two days previously?
3. He clearly had some awareness of Walker as a right-wing “fascist” (his term), but Walker was pretty small potatoes. Despite being the polar opposite of JFK politically, Walker did share an intense antipathy for Castro, so the two had that in common. But was Walker really worth Oswald throwing away his life and family for? Would being known as the “assassin of General Walker” really satisfy Oswald’s thirst for a place in history?
4. The attempt was made on April 10. On April 2, Michael Paine had raised the topic of Walker at a party and got no meaningful response from Oswald that he could recall.
5. On April 10, Marina was pregnant with Rachel, and June was an infant. Yet Oswald’s note clearly contemplated that he might be arrested or die in the attempt. Does this seem plausible? To throw away his life and family to kill … Walker? And, of course, he left no similar note and gave no indication of anything brewing before the JFKA.
6. Marina said he carried the rifle fully assembled under a raincoat both coming and going from the Walker attempt and that this was what he always did when he took the rifle to practice. He carried it this way on public buses. And yet, with the JFKA he took the risks of making a paper bag and asking Frazier for a ride and carried the rifle disassembled with a curious curtain rods excuse.
7. Marina said he arrived home pale and agitated – very different from the Oswald of 11-21, the morning of 11-22 and the encounter with Baker.
8. Despite being angry that he had missed (according to Marina), he made no further attempt on Walker. In fact, on October 23 (after beginning work at the TSBD) he attended a right-wing rally at which Walker was a speaker. On October 25, he attended an ACLU meeting with Michael Paine and spoke about the rally.
9. Despite her husband attempting to murder Walker and making clear he was prepared to leave his wife, infant daughter and unborn child high and dry, Marina didn’t confide in anyone who might have helped with the situation – not Robert, not the de Mohrenschildts, not any of the Russian expatriate community who had been so helpful to her.
I don’t claim to be any great student of the Walker matter. I don’t know what, if anything, the above adds up to. But as with so much of the JFKA and particularly with Oswald, I have a sense that “something is wrong with this picture.” It’s hard for me to just keep chalking things up to Oswald (supposedly) being mentally ill and erratic.
Is this “overthinking” or just “thinking”?
(Yes, that is a new avatar. I decided to use an actual photo because it's more honest.)
1. On March 9-10, Oswald took photos of the Walker house and alley and assembled a detailed game plan with maps, bus schedules and whatnot. He, of course, did nothing like this with JFK. Granted, he didn’t have as much time – but if he seriously wanted to shoot JFK and get away with it, no law said he had to shoot from the 6th floor of the TSBD or even on 11-22. In comparison to the Walker effort, what he actually did on 11-22 was rather a stupid "plan."
LHO had limited means and the necessarily relatively quick planning stage was apparently just kept in his head instead of LHO documenting it the way he did with the Walker attempt. My understanding of the documentation of the Walker attempt is that LHO wanted to leave a “historical record” in case he was killed. I don’t understand why you would classify his JFKA plan as stupid. I think it was a brilliantly planned military-style ambush from behind and above. The fact that he didn’t document it the same way that he did with the Walker attempt doesn’t make it stupid; it only shows that the limited time he had available for planning didn’t allow documentation, etc. And he just might not have wanted to document the plan anyway for whatever reasons.
2. He ordered the rifle on March 12, so it’s a virtual certainty he had the Walker attempt in mind. Yet he ordered it by mail using a money order and his own post office box, albeit with a fake name. This made the rifle completely traceable and, as Zeon has pointed out, seems foolhardy. He could have easily bought a better rifle for cash right there in Dallas and it would have been completely untraceable. Does this seem rational for the guy who did all the planning described in paragraph 1 two days previously?
I don’t agree with “completely untraceable”. I believe guns had serial numbers and the investigators could have found and interviewed the original owner who could have identified LHO as the one who purchased the gun from him. I do agree that LHO made a big mistake by using his own P.O. Box. The only explanation I might have is LHO’s extreme frugality and very limited money available at that point in time.
3. He clearly had some awareness of Walker as a right-wing “fascist” (his term), but Walker was pretty small potatoes. Despite being the polar opposite of JFK politically, Walker did share an intense antipathy for Castro, so the two had that in common. But was Walker really worth Oswald throwing away his life and family for? Would being known as the “assassin of General Walker” really satisfy Oswald’s thirst for a place in history?
Some people are more prone to act based on their emotions. LHO seems to me to be one of those. Walker was all over the news at that point in time, so was Cuba. LHO had already shown his affinity for throwing away his life, country, and family when he attempted to defect to Russia. LHO repeatedly showed that he apparently enjoyed shocking other people, even at his own expense. The JFKA was his “dream come true” opportunity that just fell into his lap. I believe that he couldn’t have resisted it if he had tried.
4. The attempt was made on April 10. On April 2, Michael Paine had raised the topic of Walker at a party and got no meaningful response from Oswald that he could recall.
If I were planning the Walker attempt I wouldn’t advertise my contempt beforehand either.
5. On April 10, Marina was pregnant with Rachel, and June was an infant. Yet Oswald’s note clearly contemplated that he might be arrested or die in the attempt. Does this seem plausible? To throw away his life and family to kill … Walker? And, of course, he left no similar note and gave no indication of anything brewing before the JFKA.
See reply to #3 above.
6. Marina said he carried the rifle fully assembled under a raincoat both coming and going from the Walker attempt and that this was what he always did when he took the rifle to practice. He carried it this way on public buses. And yet, with the JFKA he took the risks of making a paper bag and asking Frazier for a ride and carried the rifle disassembled with a curious curtain rods excuse.
I am not convinced the rifle was disassembled, that’s just an assumption based on the length of the bag. If he wanted to carry it assembled, all he would have to do is place a lunch-sized bag over the short muzzle end of the barrel that would have been exposed otherwise. The Thursday night visit and curtain rods idea was just LHO’s improvisation based on his available means of transportation, etc. It apparently worked well enough for him to sneak the rifle into the TSBD the morning of 11/22/63.
7. Marina said he arrived home pale and agitated – very different from the Oswald of 11-21, the morning of 11-22 and the encounter with Baker.
LHO could apparently control his appearance when he needed to. But what about his former landlady who described LHO looking awful on the bus just after the JFKA.
8. Despite being angry that he had missed (according to Marina), he made no further attempt on Walker. In fact, on October 23 (after beginning work at the TSBD) he attended a right-wing rally at which Walker was a speaker. On October 25, he attended an ACLU meeting with Michael Paine and spoke about the rally.
LHO might have been stalking Walker while looking for weaknesses in Walker’s protective and security procedures. Who knows, maybe that’s why LHO retrieved his revolver on 11/22/63. Perhaps he was heading towards Walker’s home.
9. Despite her husband attempting to murder Walker and making clear he was prepared to leave his wife, infant daughter and unborn child high and dry, Marina didn’t confide in anyone who might have helped with the situation – not Robert, not the de Mohrenschildts, not any of the Russian expatriate community who had been so helpful to her.
She was apparently afraid to let anyone know this. It was only after the Walker attempt letter to her was found that she explained things to the investigators.
I don’t claim to be any great student of the Walker matter. I don’t know what, if anything, the above adds up to. But as with so much of the JFKA and particularly with Oswald, I have a sense that “something is wrong with this picture.” It’s hard for me to just keep chalking things up to Oswald (supposedly) being mentally ill and erratic.
Some people are naturally unpredictable. I think that LHO was one of those and he also tried to be even more unpredictable and shocking to people.
-
Just to shed some light on the tracing process. The federal government is barred from maintaining a registry of guns. Some states do, but not the federal government. In order to trace a weapon, the investigators have to have the weapon in their possession. Assuming they are able to link the weapon to a particular crime, the first step would be to contact the manufacturer with the make and serial number of the weapon in question. Since Oswald's rifle was foreign made, they probably would go first to the importer which would have records for each firearm imported. The manufacturer or importer would be able to tell them which retailer the weapon was sold to. The retailer is required by law to maintain a log of every weapon they sell, identifying the name of that person. In this case, the retailer would have told the investigators that the weapon was sold to A. Heidel and the shipping address of the buyer. If a retailer goes out of business, they are required to turn over their log of weapons sold to BATFE.
Has Oswald chosen to buy a rifle from a local retailer, they would have recorded his name and the make and serial number of the weapon sold. Oswald could have given them an alias as he did with Klein's, but there would be a record of the sale. The only thing that made the purchase of the rifle more traceable was that Klein's had an address that the rifle was shipped to and that PO Box was traceable to Oswald. Oswald's fake ID was just one more piece of the puzzle the investigator's had to link Oswald too the rifle.
If Oswald had succeeded in killing Walker, the DPD would not have had the murder weapon in their possession so there would have been no way to trace it to Oswald. In the JFKA, Oswald was forced to leave his weapon behind since trying to flee with a rifle would not have been practical. Even if he had taken the time to disassemble the rifle and put it back in the bag, it certainly would have drawn attention to himself if he tried to take the weapon with him. The decisions Oswald made in buying a mail order rifle do not need to be viewed in context of the JFKA because he couldn't possibly have known 8 months prior to that act that he would one day be able to use that rifle to kill JFK. I think he bought that rifle for one simple reason. It was dirt cheap. The fact he also purchased a scope indicates he likely had nefarious intentions.
-
6. Marina said he carried the rifle fully assembled under a raincoat both coming and going from the Walker attempt and that this was what he always did when he took the rifle to practice. He carried it this way on public buses.
---
I have never heard of Marina saying he carried the rifle fully assembled on the bus. Do you have a source for this?
That's what I understood from her WC testimony, and I don't have the time or energy at the moment to go back through it. She said that he always carried the rifle that way when he took it to practice. I may have assumed a bus. It would be kind of hard to ride a motorcycle in a raincoat with a rifle tucked under it, but the bus may be an assumption on my part. All the authorities seem to say he took a bus to the Walker house.
See pages 231-232 of her WC testimony. She said he told her he took the bus to practice and she found it rather odd that he would do that with a rifle under his raincoat.
Whew, my infallibility remains intact. I was worried there for a moment.
-
2. He ordered the rifle on March 12, so it’s a virtual certainty he had the Walker attempt in mind. Yet he ordered it by mail using a money order and his own post office box, albeit with a fake name. This made the rifle completely traceable and, as Zeon has pointed out, seems foolhardy. He could have easily bought a better rifle for cash right there in Dallas and it would have been completely untraceable. Does this seem rational for the guy who did all the planning described in paragraph 1 two days previously?
I don’t agree with “completely untraceable”. I believe guns had serial numbers and the investigators could have found and interviewed the original owner who could have identified LHO as the one who purchased the gun from him. I do agree that LHO made a big mistake by using his own P.O. Box. The only explanation I might have is LHO’s extreme frugality and very limited money available at that point in time.
As I stated on another thread, when I bought my 30-06 in Phoenix in 1976 out of the classified ads in the Arizona Republic, the seller and I met in the parking lot of Park Central Mall as a mutually convenient spot. I simply gave him the cash and he gave me the rifle. Possibly we introduced ourselves as Lance and Vladimir, but I don't recall even that. People who didn't live in a state like Arizona or Texas in the 1960's and 1970's perhaps have no idea the extent to which buying and selling guns was no more complex than buying and selling golf clubs or baby strollers. Yes, the gun would be identifiable by serial number, but tracing it would be a hell of a project.
-
As I stated on another thread, when I bought my 30-06 in Phoenix in 1976 out of the classified ads in the Arizona Republic, the seller and I met in the parking lot of Park Central Mall as a mutually convenient spot. I simply gave him the cash and he gave me the rifle. Possibly we introduced ourselves as Lance and Vladimir, but I don't recall even that. People who didn't live in a state like Arizona or Texas in the 1960's and 1970's perhaps have no idea the extent to which buying and selling guns was no more complex than buying and selling golf clubs or baby strollers. Yes, the gun would be identifiable by serial number, but tracing it would be a hell of a project.
On second thought, perhaps LHO intentionally wanted the rifle to be traced to himself. He apparently wanted to leave his Walker attempt planning records for the “historical record”. So, why not make it apparent that the revolver and rifle both belonged to himself also?
-
On second thought, perhaps LHO intentionally wanted the rifle to be traced to himself. He apparently wanted to leave his Walker attempt planning records for the “historical record”. So, why not make it apparent that the revolver and rifle both belonged to himself also?
There is also the possibility, addressed in Marina's WC testimony, that he wanted to be caught.
-
There is also the possibility, addressed in Marina's WC testimony, that he wanted to be caught.
I don’t remember reading that, but I will take your word for it. Also, remember that he still had the Alek Hidell IDs on him when he was arrested. That seems to me to possibly point toward him wanting the rifle to be traced to himself.
-
I don’t remember reading that, but I will take your word for it. Also, remember that he still had the Alek Hidell IDs on him when he was arrested. That seems to me to possibly point toward him wanting the rifle to be traced to himself.
Liebeler asked her about this since he had left behind so much incriminating evidence:
Mr. LIEBELER. Did it seem strange to you at the time, Marina, that Lee did make these careful plans, take pictures, and write it up in a notebook, and then when he went out to shoot at General Walker he left all that incriminating evidence fight in the house so that if he had ever been stopped and questioned and if that notebook had been found, it would have clearly indicated that he was the one that shot at General Walker?
Mrs. OSWALD. He was such a person that nothing seems peculiar to me for what he did. I had so many surprises from him that nothing surprised me. He may have wished to appear such a brave man or something.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever have the feeling that he really wanted to be caught in connection with the Walker affair?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know how to answer that--maybe yes and maybe no. I couldn't read his mind.
The McMillan book goes over in great detail the Walker attempt. Viz., how Marina knew based on his erratic behavior that he was up so something. About a month before the attempt he ordered her to write the Soviet Embassy asking to be let back in. She didn't want to go back but he forced her to. Again, he was planning on abandoning them again. Shortly before the attempt the beatings got worse (the neighbors complained to the landlord about it). Oddly after the attempt she said he destroyed some papers - the maps he had - but kept others. Why some but not all? Maybe the more incriminating evidence but not other?
-
While I'm off in the ozone anyway, I virtually never see it discussed why Oswald would have felt he was obligated to shoot JFK from the cramped, exceedingly risky, difficult-to-escape-from 6th floor of the TSBD. OK, you've decided to shoot JFK. No one pays any attention to what you're doing anyway, and the event is during the lunch hour. Disappear a few minutes early with your curtain rods, ascend to the roof of the Dal-Tex building or wherever, do the deed, and blend back into the crowd. By all accounts, it would have been an easier shot. Ba-da-boom, ba-da-bing.
-
As I stated on another thread, when I bought my 30-06 in Phoenix in 1976 out of the classified ads in the Arizona Republic, the seller and I met in the parking lot of Park Central Mall as a mutually convenient spot. I simply gave him the cash and he gave me the rifle. Possibly we introduced ourselves as Lance and Vladimir, but I don't recall even that. People who didn't live in a state like Arizona or Texas in the 1960's and 1970's perhaps have no idea the extent to which buying and selling guns was no more complex than buying and selling golf clubs or baby strollers. Yes, the gun would be identifiable by serial number, but tracing it would be a hell of a project.
There is no federal law requiring records being kept for sales between individuals. Gun dealers have been required to keep records of gun purchases since 1938. The fact Oswald decided to purchase a rifle via mail order rather than from a private seller is evidence of nothing. Trying to read Oswald's mind an any point in time is a futile effort.
-
While I'm off in the ozone anyway, I virtually never see it discussed why Oswald would have felt he was obligated to shoot JFK from the cramped, exceedingly risky, difficult-to-escape-from 6th floor of the TSBD. OK, you've decided to shoot JFK. No one pays any attention to what you're doing anyway, and the event is during the lunch hour. Disappear a few minutes early with your curtain rods, ascend to the roof of the Dal-Tex building or wherever, do the deed, and blend back into the crowd. By all accounts, it would have been an easier shot. Ba-da-boom, ba-da-bing.
The sniper’s nest was apparently set up for supported shots, while seated on the seat box, in the kill zone (just after the limo emerged from beneath the oak tree) on Elm Street. Yes, I have built my own full size physical model and sat in it while aiming a similar sized rifle at targets placed at the proper angles. I cannot imagine any other reasonable place providing an easier shot. It is tight quarters, but concealment was part of LHO’s reason for selecting that spot. While simply sitting straight up on the seat box, LHO was able to view the approaching limo on Houston Street without exposing much of himself to the folks outside (for the most part). When the limo was essentially right below LHO all he had to do was raise the rifle up from his lap, lean forward, support his arm and the rifle on the window boxes, aim and pull the trigger. He was mostly concealed until the very last few seconds.
For what it is worth, I helped my cousin eliminate a groundhog a few days ago. It was rambling down a grassy hill when I saw it. I kept an eye on it while my cousin went to fetch his rifle. I told him where it was at the point in time that he returned with his rifle. He spotted it, dropped down so his arm and the rifle were supported on the table in front of him, and hit the groundhog in the head the first and only shot. The whole shot sequence only took a very few seconds. He isn’t an expert marksman or anything but knows how to shoot pretty well. I don’t think he had practiced with his rifle recently. He and his wife just returned from their winter home in the Florida Keys a week or two ago. A supported shot while seated is one of the most stable shots available to a shooter.
-
A supported shot while seated is one of the most stable shots available to a shooter.
Yes it is and that might very well explain the missed first shot. There are a number of factors that indicate that first shot was the most difficult of the three. Given the extreme downward angle of the shot, I doubt he could have maintained a seated position nor would the boxes been much use as a rifle rest. He would have been tracking his target coming out of a sharp 110 degree curve which means the limo would have been moving in an arc until it straightened up. The target would have been moving across his line of fire as opposed to down the line of fire for the subsequent shots.
It makes one wonder why he even took that shot. Perhaps he was a disciple of Wayne Gretzgy who said "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take."
(Yes, I know. This was long before anybody heard of Wayne Gretzky who was less than 3 years old at the time.)
-
Yes it is and that might very well explain the missed first shot. There are a number of factors that indicate that first shot was the most difficult of the three. Given the extreme downward angle of the shot, I doubt he could have maintained a seated position nor would the boxes been much use as a rifle rest. He would have been tracking his target coming out of a sharp 110 degree curve which means the limo would have been moving in an arc until it straightened up. The target would have been moving across his line of fire as opposed to down the line of fire for the subsequent shots.
It makes one wonder why he even too that shot. Perhaps he was a disciple of Wayne Gretzgy who said "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take."
(Yes, I know. This was long before anybody heard of Wayne Gretzky who was less than 3 years old at the time.)
Just my opinion, but I believe the missed first shot was most likely inadvertent and possibly due to interference with the rifle hitting the window box, or LHO’s arm hitting the vertical pipe adjacent to the window. I think this could have occurred when LHO was raising the rifle into position to start tracking the target before it disappeared behind the oak tree. I really don’t see any reason for LHO to intentionally fire a shot that early. And if it was intentional I surely don’t think he would have missed the entire limo.
-
Just my opinion, but I believe the missed first shot was most likely inadvertent and possibly due to interference with the rifle hitting the window box, or LHO’s arm hitting the vertical pipe adjacent to the window. I think this could have occurred when LHO was raising the rifle into position to start tracking the target before it disappeared behind the oak tree. I really don’t see any reason for LHO to intentionally fire a shot that early. And if it was intentional I surely don’t think he would have missed the entire limo.
It's not hard to believe Oswald missed the entire limo because I'm pretty sure he was not trying to shoot the limo. He was shooting at a guy sitting on the extreme right side of the limo and if that shot missed to the right of the intended target, he misses the whole car. I'm not sure what kind of a trigger pull the Carcano rifle has but my bolt action .30-06 doesn't exactly have a hair trigger. An accidental discharge would likely require a pretty good jolt. There is an unconfirmed report of a bullet strike to the right rear of the limo. If that is where Oswald's first shot struck, that would be consistent with a pull of the trigger rather than a steady squeeze.
-
It's not hard to believe Oswald missed the entire limo because I'm pretty sure he was not trying to shoot the limo. He was shooting at a guy sitting on the extreme right side of the limo and if that shot missed to the right of the intended target, he misses the whole car. I'm not sure what kind of a trigger pull the Carcano rifle has but my bolt action .30-06 doesn't exactly have a hair trigger. An accidental discharge would likely require a pretty good jolt. There is an unconfirmed report of a bullet strike to the right rear of the limo. If that is where Oswald's first shot struck, that would be consistent with a pull of the trigger rather than a steady squeeze.
I did a study a while back that compared the minutes of angle (MOA) required to miss the entire limo (if it is assumed that JFK’s head was the target) to the MOA that the USMC shooting range test results indicated LHO was capable of. I am on my phone now and not inclined to search the forum for that study. My memory is that I concluded that an intentional shot wouldn’t have missed by anything even remotely close to that amount of MOA. But you are entitled to your opinion.
The trigger pull weight of the Carcano was significantly lower than what a typical military rifle would be.
-
I did a study a while back that compared the minutes of angle (MOA) required to miss the entire limo (if it is assumed that JFK’s head was the target) to the MOA that the USMC shooting range test results indicated LHO was capable of. I am on my phone now and not inclined to search the forum for that study. My memory is that I concluded that an intentional shot wouldn’t have missed by anything even remotely close to that amount of MOA. But you are entitled to your opinion.
The trigger pull weight of the Carcano was significantly lower than what a typical military rifle would be.
If you add in the awkwardness of the shot, having to raise up and fire a near vertical shot through a window open only about a foot or so at a target moving across the line of fire, it's easy to see why Oswald would miss so badly. I would agree with you if he was firing at a stationary target from a steady position, but that would not have been the case so I don't see the MOA to be all that relevant to this issue. You have recognized the difficulty of that first shot by suggesting he wouldn't have taken it on purpose but the simple fact is he had a better chance of hitting JFK by taking that shot but not that much better.
-
If you add in the awkwardness of the shot, having to raise up and fire a near vertical shot through a window open only about a foot or so at a target moving across the line of fire, it's easy to see why Oswald would miss so badly. I would agree with you if he was firing at a stationary target from a steady position, but that would not have been the case so I don't see the MOA to be all that relevant to this issue. You have recognized the difficulty of that first shot by suggesting he wouldn't have taken it on purpose but the simple fact is he had a better chance of hitting JFK by taking that shot but not that much better.
We will just have to disagree. Here’s a paragraph from the study I did a while back and a link in case you wish to read more.
I have related all of the above information in hopes that it might help drive home what a suggested minimum of 36” miss from the intended point of impact at a 104’ distance really looks like. It has been suggested that an intended shot missed the entire limo due to the limo’s movement. Let’s see what that would look like in MOA. A 36” miss means that 36” would be the radius of a circle target centered on the intended point of impact. That means a 72” in diameter target would have been completely missed from a distance of 104’. That size target is ~208-MOA at 104’. Does it seem reasonable to believe that LHO might have missed by that much if his shot was an intentional shot that was not interfered with? It definitely doesn’t seem reasonable to me. And that is just one reason why I believe an early missed shot was probably inadvertent due to some unexpected interference from the box in the window.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4151.msg159173.html#msg159173 (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4151.msg159173.html#msg159173)
-
We will just have to disagree. Here’s a paragraph from the study I did a while back and a link in case you wish to read more.
I have related all of the above information in hopes that it might help drive home what a suggested minimum of 36” miss from the intended point of impact at a 104’ distance really looks like. It has been suggested that an intended shot missed the entire limo due to the limo’s movement. Let’s see what that would look like in MOA. A 36” miss means that 36” would be the radius of a circle target centered on the intended point of impact. That means a 72” in diameter target would have been completely missed from a distance of 104’. That size target is ~208-MOA at 104’. Does it seem reasonable to believe that LHO might have missed by that much if his shot was an intentional shot that was not interfered with? It definitely doesn’t seem reasonable to me. And that is just one reason why I believe an early missed shot was probably inadvertent due to some unexpected interference from the box in the window.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4151.msg159173.html#msg159173 (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4151.msg159173.html#msg159173)
We both recognize the difficulty of the early shot. You believe Oswald wouldn't have taken that shot on purpose due to the difficulty and I believe he took the shot even with the difficulty and missed as a result. Either seems plausible to me and there's only one person who knew the truth and he's not talking. I don't think a 3' miss would be necessary to miss the entire limo. JFK was as far to his right as possible. I estimate it would only be about 18" from his center of mass to the outside of the car. It would likely have required a miss of about 2' to miss the car entirely. Given he likely would have raised up into a crouching position to fire at such a steep downward angle and probably wouldn't have been able to use the boxes to steady his aim, a miss of 2' seems reasonable to me.
I used to work on the 6th floor of an office building and my window was along an alley. The angle of the alley wasn't the same as Elm St. and the window didn't have a low sill like the 6th floor of the TSBD. Still, I was able to imagine myself trying fire downward at a moving target in the alley and it seemed it would have been a very difficult shot. I don't think it is a stretch to think Oswald would miss that shot badly.
-
That scope on that MC rifle was mounted to the left side of the stock and it’s doubtful what range the scope had been zeroed at and when it had last been checked.
And when was the last time that Oswald had shot at a moving target prior to Nov/22/63 anyway?
So a near miss to the right side of the limo is certainly plausible at the shorter range which requires a faster tracking adjustment by the shooter to keep the scope reticle or the iron sights on target.
As has been noted before, a professional shooter probably would never have chosen this scenario of shooting at a moving target from high elevation when there was ample opportunity to have shot at a stationary JFK giving a speech from a position at approx same elevation.
A CT alternative might be that a BOP survivor decided to shoot JFK in Dealey Plaza as a spectacle execution as revenge for his fellow BOP comrades being betrayed. This person perhaps was infuriated that Oswald was a pro Castro Marxist kook from having seen Oswald in New Orleans.
-
There is no federal law requiring records being kept for sales between individuals. Gun dealers have been required to keep records of gun purchases since 1938. The fact Oswald decided to purchase a rifle via mail order rather than from a private seller is evidence of nothing. Trying to read Oswald's mind an any point in time is a futile effort.
We don't have to read his mind. A mere two days after completing his preparations for the attempt on Walker, and while living in the most gun-happy, gun-friendly state in America, he chose to buy a cheap rifle by mail from a dealer in Illinois using his own post office box and an alias when he could have easily bought a better rifle that would have been completely untraceable right there in Dallas. This is what he did, regardless of why. The law allows a judge or jury to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. There is a clear disconnect that, together with other evidence, might lead to reasonable inferences that there was no such preparation, or Oswald didn't order the rifle, or Oswald had no intent to shoot at Walker.
This is likewise true with history. Historians are entitled to draw reasonable inferences, and sometimes their reasonable inferences are quite different. You seem to want to think that the LN narrative itself is a fact, when it simply isn't. It's a plausible account of what occurred, but it isn't sacrosanct and it isn't without problem areas. I have highlighted some of the aspects that nag at me, not in an effort to read Oswald's mind but to try to make sense of what he did in the context of the LN narrative - or any other narrative that might more plausibly explain what he did.
Ditto with his choice to assemble his rifle and set up the sniper's nest on the 6th floor of the building where he was employed, having no way to control who might be on that floor and having little chance of escaping without being seen, captured or killed, when he could have exited the building with his "curtain rods" and set up in a location far less risky. Again, we are talking about what he did, not why. One reasonable inference might be "He didn't do that. He wasn't on the sixth floor." - which happens to be exactly what he claimed.
I'm not saying by any means that the only reasonable inferences favor some conspiracy theory. I'm simply saying that when we look at the evidence of what Oswald did, much of it seems somewhat problematical for the LN narrative.
-
We don't have to read his mind. A mere two days after completing his preparations for the attempt on Walker, and while living in the most gun-happy, gun-friendly state in America, he chose to buy a cheap rifle by mail from a dealer in Illinois using his own post office box and an alias when he could have easily bought a better rifle that would have been completely untraceable right there in Dallas. This is what he did, regardless of why. The law allows a judge or jury to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. There is a clear disconnect that, together with other evidence, might lead to reasonable inferences that there was no such preparation, or Oswald didn't order the rifle, or Oswald had no intent to shoot at Walker.
The evidence is clear. Oswald ordered the rifle and received it at his PO Box. He had taken pictures of Walker's residence in preparation for the attempt on his life. The fact he didn't do the things you would have done in his circumstance isn't terribly relevant.
This is likewise true with history. Historians are entitled to draw reasonable inferences, and sometimes their reasonable inferences are quite different. You seem to want to think that the LN narrative itself is a fact, when it simply isn't.
Yes it is. The assassination only happened one way and all the credible evidence points to Oswald and no one else. The fact you are having trouble figuring it out doesn't change that fact.
It's a plausible account of what occurred, but it isn't sacrosanct and it isn't without problem areas. I have highlighted some of the aspects that nag at me, not in an effort to read Oswald's mind but to try to make sense of what he did in the context of the LN narrative - or any other narrative that might more plausibly explain what he did.
In 62 years no one has come up with a plausible alternative to what the WC presented to us that explains the evidence. The typical path the CTs go down is to try to explain away that evidence. If you insist that there is a plausible alternative, you could demonstrate that by presenting one. You won't because you can't.
Ditto with his choice to assemble his rifle and set up the sniper's nest on the 6th floor of the building where he was employed, having no way to control who might be on that floor and having little chance of escaping without being seen, captured or killed, when he could have exited the building with his "curtain rods" and set up in a location far less risky. Again, we are talking about what he did, not why. One reasonable inference might be "He didn't do that. He wasn't on the sixth floor." - which happens to be exactly what he claimed.
How is that remotely reasonable when his rifle, with his palmprint, and fibers matching his shirt was found on the 6th floor. The shells that were found in the sniper's nest could only have been fired by that rifle. Oswald's fingerprints were found on the boxes in the sniper's nest oriented just as they would be if he was facing down Elm St. and a bag large enough to hold the disassembled rifle that had his palm and fingerprints on the bottom. Give us a plausible scenario that takes into account all that evidence that doesn't have Oswald firing the shots from the sniper's nest. I'm not even asking you to prove your scenario. Just pressent us with another way it COULD have happened.
I'm not saying by any means that the only reasonable inferences favor some conspiracy theory. I'm simply saying that when we look at the evidence of what Oswald did, much of it seems somewhat problematical for the LN narrative.
Your half assed attempt to read Oswald's mind doesn't trump the wealth of forensic evidence that he was the assassin.
-
That scope on that MC rifle was mounted to the left side of the stock and it’s doubtful what range the scope had been zeroed at and when it had last been checked.
And when was the last time that Oswald had shot at a moving target prior to Nov/22/63 anyway?
So a near miss to the right side of the limo is certainly plausible at the shorter range which requires a faster tracking adjustment by the shooter to keep the scope reticle or the iron sights on target.
As has been noted before, a professional shooter probably would never have chosen this scenario of shooting at a moving target from high elevation when there was ample opportunity to have shot at a stationary JFK giving a speech from a position at approx same elevation.
A CT alternative might be that a BOP survivor decided to shoot JFK in Dealey Plaza as a spectacle execution as revenge for his fellow BOP comrades being betrayed. This person perhaps was infuriated that Oswald was a pro Castro Marxist kook from having seen Oswald in New Orleans.
For such a short ranged shot, I doubt Oswald would have used the scope. If he used the fixed sights which were zeroed for two hundred meters, he would have had to adjust for the shorter range or he would have been aiming high. The ABC program which aired tonight showed just where the bullet struck the frame. There was a bullet hole at the very bottom of the window frame which was open about a foot and a half. If Oswald was using the fixed sights to fire a shot through that open window, it is very understandable why it would hit the bottom of the frame above the window opening.
-
For such a short ranged shot, I doubt Oswald would have used the scope.
This sounds suspiciously like you are attempting to "read Oswald's mind." Again and again, you don't realize that you do exactly what you accuse others of doing - but it's "different" when you do it because you are, in your own mind anyway, the arbiter of all truth.
-
This sounds suspiciously like you are attempting to "read Oswald's mind." Again and again, you don't realize that you do exactly what you accuse others of doing - but it's "different" when you do it because you are, in your own mind anyway, the arbiter of all truth.
I'm speculating and I don't pretend to know this for a fact. It's really not important which sights he used. Either would likely aim high at such a short range and not surprising, the bullet struck the bottom of the window frame instead of passing through the open window. Maybe he did adjust for the short range and just fired a poor shot. It's not important to know why his shot went high. We just know that it did and likely saved Walker's life.
There's nothing wrong with speculating about things we don't have definitive evidence for as long as we recognize our speculations aren't evidence. Your problem is you use your speculations as excuses to dismiss the conclusive evidence that Oswald was the assassin. Sure, there's all that forensic evidence that Oswald was the assassin, but you try to cast doubt on that evidence because Oswald made different decisions than you think he should have made such as using his mail order rifle instead of buying an untraceable one locally. You use Oswald's attempt to reconcile with Marina as being inconsistent with someone planning to kill JFK. You disregard the fact he broke his routine by coming to Irving on a Thursday instead of the weekend and that he brought the bag he made at the TSBD with him to smuggle the rifle into the TSBD. I believe that is known as Malice Aforethought which is evidence of premeditation. Maybe he would have abandoned his plan to kill JFK if Marina had agreed to reconcile. We'll never know that. What we have ample evidence of is that he did smuggle his rifle into the TSBD the next morning and used it to kill JFK. None of your speculations about Oswald's mindset does anything to negate that evidence.
-
We both recognize the difficulty of the early shot. You believe Oswald wouldn't have taken that shot on purpose due to the difficulty and I believe he took the shot even with the difficulty and missed as a result. Either seems plausible to me and there's only one person who knew the truth and he's not talking. I don't think a 3' miss would be necessary to miss the entire limo. JFK was as far to his right as possible. I estimate it would only be about 18" from his center of mass to the outside of the car. It would likely have required a miss of about 2' to miss the car entirely. Given he likely would have raised up into a crouching position to fire at such a steep downward angle and probably wouldn't have been able to use the boxes to steady his aim, a miss of 2' seems reasonable to me.
I used to work on the 6th floor of an office building and my window was along an alley. The angle of the alley wasn't the same as Elm St. and the window didn't have a low sill like the 6th floor of the TSBD. Still, I was able to imagine myself trying fire downward at a moving target in the alley and it seemed it would have been a very difficult shot. I don't think it is a stretch to think Oswald would miss that shot badly.
I think I determined the 3’ miss distance based on my 3D computer model. I decided to try another approach using my 1/24th scale model of the limo. If we scale the 2’ and 3’ distances to 1/24th scale, they are 1” and 1.5” respectively. I cut 2” and 3” diameter targets and centered them on JFK’s head. The angles are reasonably close to the angles at Z133. Here are some resulting images:
The first image shows the two targets with a clear ruler laid on top of them in order to show their respective diameters.
(https://i.vgy.me/5woWnp.jpg)
The second image shows the 2” target centered on JFK’s head. This scales to be a 4’ diameter target.
(https://i.vgy.me/Me3Ep9.jpg)
The third image shows the 3” target centered on JFK’s head. This scales to be a 6’ diameter target.
(https://i.vgy.me/hkljlD.jpg)
As can be seen above, the 3” diameter target barely covers the limo and only at a small section of its circumference.
-
Charles, is your 1/24th scale limo one of these expensive puppies ($350 and $220): https://livecarmodel.com/products/1-24-road-signature-1961-lincoln-x-100-limousine-quick-fix-with-flags-diecast-car-model.html?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=18077476773&gbraid=0AAAAADoejY_6hAEUgmAXenm__jshLs4QY&gclid=Cj0KCQjw_vnQBhCxARIsADcZyxKNOaowPvrZU4E0x86POs6nBC1JUlA76h5k4EqTPTv3dPtPbXYTtzcaAoVvEALw_wcB. I may spring for one and see what I can do with a tiny Mafia guy on the roof of a 1/24th scale Dal-Tex building. :D
-
I'm speculating and I don't pretend to know this for a fact. It's really not important which sights he used. Either would likely aim high at such a short range and not surprising, the bullet struck the bottom of the window frame instead of passing through the open window. Maybe he did adjust for the short range and just fired a poor shot. It's not important to know why his shot went high. We just know that it did and likely saved Walker's life.
There's nothing wrong with speculating about things we don't have definitive evidence for as long as we recognize our speculations aren't evidence. Your problem is you use your speculations as excuses to dismiss the conclusive evidence that Oswald was the assassin. Sure, there's all that forensic evidence that Oswald was the assassin, but you try to cast doubt on that evidence because Oswald made different decisions than you think he should have made such as using his mail order rifle instead of buying an untraceable one locally. You use Oswald's attempt to reconcile with Marina as being inconsistent with someone planning to kill JFK. You disregard the fact he broke his routine by coming to Irving on a Thursday instead of the weekend and that he brought the bag he made at the TSBD with him to smuggle the rifle into the TSBD. I believe that is known as Malice Aforethought which is evidence of premeditation. Maybe he would have abandoned his plan to kill JFK if Marina had agreed to reconcile. We'll never know that. What we have ample evidence of is that he did smuggle his rifle into the TSBD the next morning and used it to kill JFK. None of your speculations about Oswald's mindset does anything to negate that evidence.
OK, I'm bored, so let's examine this. It's not a matter of what I think Oswald "should" have done. It's a matter of what it seems to me that someone of Oswald's intelligence who was thinking rationally would have done; since that isn't what he did, I wonder why he did what he did (or if he actually did it) and do not immediately leap to the typical LN responses of "it's irrelevant" (well, no it's not) or "Oswald was a madman" (well, no, he wasn't). Yes, he made an unusual trip to Irving the evening before the JFKA - highly suspicious. On the other hand, both Ruth and Marina accepted that he was there to try to make peace with Marina, and he made great efforts to do exactly that. The extent of those efforts and his reactions that Marina described are "just a bit" hard to explain if he was really there to get his rifle and shoot JFKA. Neither Ruth nor Marina saw anything like the mysterious paper bag or any conduct by Oswald suggesting he was taking the rifle out of the blanket and wrapping it in the bag. Indeed, as Martin has pointed out, there is no solid evidence that the rifle was even in the garage on 11-21. No one saw him making the bag in the TSBD, which would have been an odd choice anyway, and Frazier neither saw nor heard any evidence of it on the ride to Irving. Then, of course, we have Frazier's and Randle's stubborn insistence that the bag they saw was too short. It may well be that the LN version of events is 100% correct, but to suggest it's free of all doubt goes too far. Moreover, we encounter this at virtually every stage of the JFKA. For some reason, we weren't blessed with a cut-and-dried case that Perry Mason could've wrapped up in an hour.
-
I am on this, people! I've already lined up my 1/24 scale Mafia gunmen, and it appears there are multiple choices for a 1/24 scale Carlos Marcello. The 1/24 scale Dal-Tex building is going to be larger than my actual house, so we may have to go with a "Potemkin village" Dal-Tex building (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potemkin_village).
(https://i.etsystatic.com/56714946/r/il/bab214/6657906209/il_1588xN.6657906209_81ca.jpg)
-
Charles, is your 1/24th scale limo one of these expensive puppies ($350 and $220): https://livecarmodel.com/products/1-24-road-signature-1961-lincoln-x-100-limousine-quick-fix-with-flags-diecast-car-model.html?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=18077476773&gbraid=0AAAAADoejY_6hAEUgmAXenm__jshLs4QY&gclid=Cj0KCQjw_vnQBhCxARIsADcZyxKNOaowPvrZU4E0x86POs6nBC1JUlA76h5k4EqTPTv3dPtPbXYTtzcaAoVvEALw_wcB. I may spring for one and see what I can do with a tiny Mafia guy on the roof of a 1/24th scale Dal-Tex building. :D
It might be the same. However my box says it was made by Luckydiecast.com. I have had mine a few years now. It wasn’t quite that expensive normally, and I found a steeply discounted vendor price. I don’t remember who it was but it seems like it was some women’s group of some sort. Here’s a photo of the back of the box. I apologize for it being upside down. Something funky seems to be going on with the image hosting site.
(https://i.vgy.me/LtAehE.jpg)
-
It might be the same. However my box says it was made by Luckydiecast.com. I have had mine a few years now. It wasn’t quite that expensive normally, and I found a steeply discounted vendor price. I don’t remember who it was but it seems like it was some women’s group of some sort. Here’s a photo of the back of the box. I apologize for it being upside down. Something funky seems to be going on with the image hosting site.
(https://i.vgy.me/LtAehE.jpg)
Yep, both the cars on the other site are made by Luckydiecast of Hong Kong. They make some very cool stuff.
-
I think I determined the 3’ miss distance based on my 3D computer model. I decided to try another approach using my 1/24th scale model of the limo. If we scale the 2’ and 3’ distances to 1/24th scale, they are 1” and 1.5” respectively. I cut 2” and 3” diameter targets and centered them on JFK’s head. The angles are reasonably close to the angles at Z133. Here are some resulting images:
The first image shows the two targets with a clear ruler laid on top of them in order to show their respective diameters.
(https://i.vgy.me/5woWnp.jpg)
The second image shows the 2” target centered on JFK’s head. This scales to be a 4’ diameter target.
(https://i.vgy.me/Me3Ep9.jpg)
The third image shows the 3” target centered on JFK’s head. This scales to be a 6’ diameter target.
(https://i.vgy.me/hkljlD.jpg)
As can be seen above, the 3” diameter target barely covers the limo and only at a small section of its circumference.
It's hard to tell with the circles covering JFK but I'm estimating you have JFK's head to far inside. With his side against the side of the limo, I estimate the centerline of his head would only be about 9 inches inside that. I base that on my on body which is broader than JFK. I outweigh him by about 70 lbs. My ballpark estimate is the centerline of JFK's head would be at most 2 ft. from the outside edge of the limo.
I think I have that same model car although mine is not stamped Luckydiecast. I can't quite make out what the script is identifying the manufacturer but it is stamped Made in China. I've had mine about 10 years. My experience with model trains tells me manufacturers will often sell or duplicate the molds among themselves and it is not unusual to see that same item produced by two or more companies. It's very easy to change the embossed label. Mine indicates it was manufactured under license number 24048 if that means anything. The jump seats on mine fold down and then can be pushed forward completely out of the way.
-
OK, I'm bored, so let's examine this. It's not a matter of what I think Oswald "should" have done. It's a matter of what it seems to me that someone of Oswald's intelligence who was thinking rationally would have done;
Either way you are guessing and your guesses do not trump real evidence that indicates Oswald was the assassin.
since that isn't what he did, I wonder why he did what he did (or if he actually did it) and do not immediately leap to the typical LN responses of "it's irrelevant"
Your guesses are irrelevant.
(well, no it's not) or "Oswald was a madman" (well, no, he wasn't). Yes, he made an unusual trip to Irving the evening before the JFKA - highly suspicious.
On the other hand, both Ruth and Marina accepted that he was there to try to make peace with Marina, and he made great efforts to do exactly that. The extent of those efforts and his reactions that Marina described are "just a bit" hard to explain if he was really there to get his rifle and shoot JFKA.
Hard for you. Not hard for people who think real evidence outweighs guesses.
Neither Ruth nor Marina saw anything like the mysterious paper bag or any conduct by Oswald suggesting he was taking the rifle out of the blanket and wrapping it in the bag.
Since you are into guessing, do you guess he would have allowed them to see what he was up to?
Indeed, as Martin has pointed out, there is no solid evidence that the rifle was even in the garage on 11-21.
Now it's my turn to ask the same question you asked in another thread. What evidence would you expect there to be.
No one saw him making the bag in the TSBD,
Which in no way precludes him from having made the bag. Same question as before. Do you think he would have wanted anyone to see what he was doing?
which would have been an odd choice anyway, and Frazier neither saw nor heard any evidence of it on the ride to Irving.
Would he have had any reason to show Frazier his bag?
Then, of course, we have Frazier's and Randle's stubborn insistence that the bag they saw was too short
Oh goody. More guesses by witnesses. Or did either Frazier or Randle actually measure the bag.
It may well be that the LN version of events is 100% correct,
It is.
but to suggest it's free of all doubt goes too far.
Not really.
Moreover, we encounter this at virtually every stage of the JFKA. For some reason, we weren't blessed with a cut-and-dried case that Perry Mason could've wrapped up in an hour.
At every stage of the JFKA, a CT will dream up some cockamamie excuse to dismiss a piece of rock solid evidence of Oswald's guilt. I've seen this movie countless times over the past 35 years. A CT is presented with compelling evidence of Oswald's guilt and the CT responds with an excuse to disregard that evidence. They do it time and tine again. They never respond with any evidence of their own nor do they even attempt to put together an alternative scenario that takes into account all the available evidence. One would think that given the advantage of 62 years, some CT somewhere would have been able to construct a plausible evidence based scenario that has someone other than Oswald involved in the crime but that has never happened and I have no reason to believe it ever will.
-
It's hard to tell with the circles covering JFK but I'm estimating you have JFK's head to far inside. With his side against the side of the limo, I estimate the centerline of his head would only be about 9 inches inside that. I base that on my on body which is broader than JFK. I outweigh him by about 70 lbs. My ballpark estimate is the centerline of JFK's head would be at most 2 ft. from the outside edge of the limo.
I think I have that same model car although mine is not stamped Luckydiecast. I can't quite make out what the script is identifying the manufacturer but it is stamped Made in China. I've had mine about 10 years. My experience with model trains tells me manufacturers will often sell or duplicate the molds among themselves and it is not unusual to see that same item produced by two or more companies. It's very easy to change the embossed label. Mine indicates it was manufactured under license number 24048 if that means anything. The jump seats on mine fold down and then can be pushed forward completely out of the way.
I measured it (centerline of the model to edge of outside of the limo) at 3/4’ from the outside edge of the limo. That scales to be 18”.
I had previously ground away part of the model to simulate having the side of his torso against the inside edge of the side of the limo. Sorry about the sideways orientation. It’s apparently the image hosting site’s issue.
(https://i.vgy.me/a7sbIl.jpg)
Here it is sitting in the limo.
(https://i.vgy.me/WXsmba.jpg)
-
I measured it (centerline of the model to edge of outside of the limo) at 3/4’ from the outside edge of the limo. That scales to be 18”.
I had previously ground away part of the model to simulate having the side of his torso against the inside edge of the side of the limo. Sorry about the sideways orientation. It’s apparently the image hosting site’s issue.
(https://i.vgy.me/a7sbIl.jpg)
Here it is sitting in the limo.
(https://i.vgy.me/WXsmba.jpg)
Hey, could you find a Gumby doll and figure out how Govnr Connally was sitting on the jump seat and which way his legs were positioned and how he was likely holding his hat during the Z film sequence and try out Andrew’s twisted pretzel position for JC at Z270?
-
Hey, could you find a Gumby doll and figure out how Govnr Connally was sitting on the jump seat and which way his legs were positioned and how he was likely holding his hat during the Z film sequence and try out Andrew’s twisted pretzel position for JC at Z270?
I'd say that last picture is a fairly accurate representation of JFK's position in the limo. Assuming the side of the car is to scale, it does give a fairly good representation of JFK when he was shot in the back.
If you have another doll, I would just cut off the lower legs to allow it to fit and turn JBC's shoulders about where you think he was at Z222. You don't need the lower legs for this exercise.
-
Hey, could you find a Gumby doll and figure out how Govnr Connally was sitting on the jump seat and which way his legs were positioned and how he was likely holding his hat during the Z film sequence and try out Andrew’s twisted pretzel position for JC at Z270?
I haven’t been able to find any models that size that have articulating extremities, etc. (Gumby style). Here’s a photo using what I have to give a rough idea of what I believe the positions were fairly close to. As far as Andrew’s twisted pretzel position, I suggest you sit in a low-to-the-floor seat and try it yourself. If you can manage to place yourself in that position you will find it uncomfortable and not something anyone would place themselves in for a lengthy motorcade route.
(https://i.vgy.me/McX7xC.jpg)
-
I haven’t been able to find any models that size that have articulating extremities, etc. (Gumby style). Here’s a photo using what I have to give a rough idea of what I believe the positions were fairly close to. As far as Andrew’s twisted pretzel position, I suggest you sit in a low-to-the-floor seat and try it yourself. If you can manage to place yourself in that position you will find it uncomfortable and not something anyone would place themselves in for a lengthy motorcade route.
(https://i.vgy.me/McX7xC.jpg)
I'd say the shoulder position of JBC is reasonably close to what it would have been when the single bullet struck. The problem with using those dolls is the shoulders can't turn independently of the hips. JBC's trunk would have rotated more than his hips which probably turned some but not as much as the shoulders. The legs would have turned even less. There's no way I could believe JBC would have rotate to his right while his left leg flare way out to the left. That's just one of the numerous problems with his goofy theory.
It's an easy proposition that anyone can test for themselves. Sit in a chair and try to look over your right shoulder. I think you will find that your legs will turn in the same general direction as the shoulders. They won't turn as much, but they will turn. It would be completely unnatural to rotate your shoulders while at the same time your left leg flared to the left. It just didn't happen.
Andrew has been stuck with this scenario for at least 18 years going back to when he was peddling it on McAdams' forum. It made no sense then and it still doesn't. He keeps trying to force as square peg in a round hole.
-
I'd say the shoulder position of JBC is reasonably close to what it would have been when the single bullet struck. The problem with using those dolls is the shoulders can't turn independently of the hips. JBC's trunk would have rotated more than his hips which probably turned some but not as much as the shoulders. The legs would have turned even less. There's no way I could believe JBC would have rotate to his right while his left leg flare way out to the left. That's just one of the numerous problems with his goofy theory.
It's an easy proposition that anyone can test for themselves. Sit in a chair and try to look over your right shoulder. I think you will find that your legs will turn in the same general direction as the shoulders. They won't turn as much, but they will turn. It would be completely unnatural to rotate your shoulders while at the same time your left leg flared to the left. It just didn't happen.
Andrew has been stuck with this scenario for at least 18 years going back to when he was peddling it on McAdams' forum. It made no sense then and it still doesn't. He keeps trying to force as square peg in a round hole.
Thumb1:
-
I made a significant error and now I need to own up to it and correct things. The angle downwards from horizontal is about 55-degrees. I inadvertently used 35-degrees (that is actually the angle upwards from vertical, and the top angle of the triangle formed by the height and horizontal distance). When I set my tripod angle I made a mistake and used the wrong angle. So, here is what it looks like from the proper angle of 55-degrees.
(https://i.vgy.me/QqH1oK.jpg)
(https://i.vgy.me/qyRjKi.jpg)
As can be seen, when using the proper angle, the 2” target is closer to being correct than the 3” target is. I measured the apparent minimum distance to miss the entire limo (first image yellow line at bottom of the outside side of the limo) at 1-1/8”. This scales to be 27”. So I was wrong and John Corbett was closer to being correct than I was. Sorry everyone! :-X
-
While I can't logically dismiss Charles' belief that the first shot was an accidental discharge, I still think it more probable that he missed right of his intended target due to an awkward shooting position, an unsteady rifle, and possibly a rushed shot with the tree looming ahead. Oswald is the only one who can answer that question definitively and he's not talking.
-
While I can't logically dismiss Charles' belief that the first shot was an accidental discharge, I still think it more probable that he missed right of his intended target due to an awkward shooting position, an unsteady rifle, and possibly a rushed shot with the tree looming ahead. Oswald is the only one who can answer that question definitively and he's not talking.
It was the proverbial “warning shot”…. ;) ;D
-
It was the proverbial “warning shot”…. ;) ;D
Believe it or not, there was a guy on the McAdams forum who argued that. Oswald was trying to alert the protection detail that an assassination was about to take place. Another guy argued it was an alignment shot. He said no shooter would attempt a shot without first aligning his scope. The first shot was so he could make any necessary adjustments to the scope.
-
Believe it or not, there was a guy on the McAdams forum who argued that. Oswald was trying to alert the protection detail that an assassination was about to take place. Another guy argued it was an alignment shot. He said no shooter would attempt a shot without first aligning his scope. The first shot was so he could make any necessary adjustments to the scope.
I have often thought that if JBC had only shouted “get down” after the first shot, instead of “oh no, their going to kill us all” after the second shot, that JFK might have survived.
-
I have often thought that if JBC had only shouted “get down” after the first shot, instead of “oh no, their going to kill us all” after the second shot, that JFK might have survived.
Had JFK reacted the way Trump did and immediately got down, he probably wouldn't have taken the fatal shot. Some have argued that his back brace helped to keep him upright in his seat. I have no opinion on that. JFK had almost five seconds to get down before the head shot but my viewing of the Z-film tells me he was in a WTF mindset, unaware of what was about to come next.
-
I made a significant error and now I need to own up to it and correct things. The angle downwards from horizontal is about 55-degrees. I inadvertently used 35-degrees (that is actually the angle upwards from vertical, and the top angle of the triangle formed by the height and horizontal distance). When I set my tripod angle I made a mistake and used the wrong angle. So, here is what it looks like from the proper angle of 55-degrees.
(https://i.vgy.me/QqH1oK.jpg)
(https://i.vgy.me/qyRjKi.jpg)
As can be seen, when using the proper angle, the 2” target is closer to being correct than the 3” target is. I measured the apparent minimum distance to miss the entire limo (first image yellow line at bottom of the outside side of the limo) at 1-1/8”. This scales to be 27”. So I was wrong and John Corbett was closer to being correct than I was. Sorry everyone! :-X
This is embarrassing, but I was right the first time. I am going to have to stop second-guessing myself with ideas that come to me in the middle of the night. The 35-degrees down from horizontal is the proper angle (not the 55-degrees angle). So my first set of photos showing a minimum of 3' distance to miss the entire limousine is correct. The revised photos using a 55-degrees angle is incorrect. I apologize again and hope my credibility hasn't been completely destroyed... :-X
-
I'm glad you have acknowledged your error. I've made plenty of my own over the years. What I don't buy is your limiting the miss to just 3 feet. With all that was working against Oswald on that first shot. He would have been in a very awkward shooting position to fire that steep a downward shot. He would have been firing through a window about a foot from the floor and was only open about another foot, the boxes would not have been much help steadying the rifle, and his target was close to passing under the tree which could have caused him to rush the shot. A wild miss is not out of the question for that shot.
-
I'm glad you have acknowledged your error. I've made plenty of my own over the years. What I don't buy is your limiting the miss to just 3 feet. With all that was working against Oswald on that first shot. He would have been in a very awkward shooting position to fire that steep a downward shot. He would have been firing through a window about a foot from the floor and was only open about another foot, the boxes would not have been much help steadying the rifle, and his target was close to passing under the tree which could have caused him to rush the shot. A wild miss is not out of the question for that shot.
I agree with what you said above. What I disagree with is your contention that LHO would have intentionally taken a shot under those very poor conditions. He had apparently set up the sniper’s nest for some very comfortable and stable shots while the limo was in the kill zone just past the tree. Why do you believe LHO would take an intentional early shot that was so very difficult so that missing by greater than 3’ at a distance of only ~105’ was likely?
We will never know these things with any certainty, but when I consider the difficulty of an early shot and that the window box and the vertical pipe near the window were both potential interference factors for a shot at that point in time, it seems to me that the shot was most likely an accidental discharge. Accidental discharges can happen to anyone and can happen at the most in opportune times. We once obtained a hole in our dining room table and chair and floor from an accidental discharge by a federally licensed gunsmith that was also a gun safety instructor. He had been told it was loaded but unintentionally had his finger on the trigger while examining the pistol. He knew better than to have his finger on the trigger, but it happened anyway.
I believe that LHO would have, at that point in time, been in the process of raising the rifle out of his lap and into a shooting position and beginning to track the moving target while anticipating shooting just after the limo cleared the tree and entered the kill zone. If LHO had his finger on the trigger and an unexpected bump into the window box or his left elbow into the pipe, then an accidental discharge could very well have been the result. My opinion is that this is the more likely scenario.
-
I agree with what you said above. What I disagree with is your contention that LHO would have intentionally taken a shot under those very poor conditions. He had apparently set up the sniper’s nest for some very comfortable and stable shots while the limo was in the kill zone just past the tree. Why do you believe LHO would take an intentional early shot that was so very difficult so that missing by greater than 3’ at a distance of only ~105’ was likely?
We will never know these things with any certainty, but when I consider the difficulty of an early shot and that the window box and the vertical pipe near the window were both potential interference factors for a shot at that point in time, it seems to me that the shot was most likely an accidental discharge. Accidental discharges can happen to anyone and can happen at the most in opportune times. We once obtained a hole in our dining room table and chair and floor from an accidental discharge by a federally licensed gunsmith that was also a gun safety instructor. He had been told it was loaded but unintentionally had his finger on the trigger while examining the pistol. He knew better than to have his finger on the trigger, but it happened anyway.
I believe that LHO would have, at that point in time, been in the process of raising the rifle out of his lap and into a shooting position and beginning to track the moving target while anticipating shooting just after the limo cleared the tree and entered the kill zone. If LHO had his finger on the trigger and an unexpected bump into the window box or his left elbow into the pipe, then an accidental discharge could very well have been the result. My opinion is that this is the more likely scenario.
In hindsight, it's easy for us to second guess Oswald taking that first shot under such difficult circumstances, but I've consistently said over the years, we can't know what was going through Oswald's mind at any point during the event. Oswald had four rounds in his rifle and a limited amount time to fire them. It's understandable why he might try to get in a shot before JFK went under the tree, even if it was a low percentage shot. He had zero chance of scoring a hit if he didn't take that shot. As Wayne Gretzky once famously said, "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.". Hockey players try to put as many shots on goal as they can, even though they are low percentage shots. For every hockey game the shots on goal vastly outnumber the goals scored. A low percentage shot has a better chance than no shot at all.
-
In hindsight, it's easy for us to second guess Oswald taking that first shot under such difficult circumstances, but I've consistently said over the years, we can't know what was going through Oswald's mind at any point during the event. Oswald had four rounds in his rifle and a limited amount time to fire them. It's understandable why he might try to get in a shot before JFK went under the tree, even if it was a low percentage shot. He had zero chance of scoring a hit if he didn't take that shot. As Wayne Gretzky once famously said, "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.". Hockey players try to put as many shots on goal as they can, even though they are low percentage shots. For every hockey game the shots on goal vastly outnumber the goals scored. A low percentage shot has a better chance than no shot at all.
Earlier you indicated you have a 30.06 rifle. So, I would guess that you might be a deer hunter. Let’s try an analogy with a deer hunter up high in a tree stand that has prepared provisions for a comfortable and stable seated and supported shot into a clearing. A deer comes along and is moving towards the clearing right below the hunter. The deer hunter knows for certain that that deer will emerge very soon into that clearing and present itself such that the hunter has a perfect comfortable and supported shot into the deer’s vital organs zone. Why the heck would the deer hunter decide to stand up and shoot at the deer before it gets to the clearing. How many deer hunters do you know that would take a very low percentage early shot under those conditions?
-
Jack Nessan really should pay me a royalty on every copy of Phantom Shot he sells, but I cannot help but be struck by the fact that Oswald manages to put two pretty precisely-placed bullets into JFK after supposedly having gone through all sorts of hypothetical gyrations and managing to miss the entire limousine - and no one can agree on exactly when he did that. Two shots seems to me to be favored by Occam's (or Ockham's) Razor, and Mrs. Occam agrees. I don't quite understand the near-desperation to preserve the three-shot scenario. There doesn't seem to be any reason the evidence demands this.
It seems to me that the best evidence, including the Gloria Calvery group, places the first shot just about where the three-shot narrative places the second shot. If the three-shot scenario were correct, it seems to me the second and third shots would be the bang-bang sequence that Bowers and others described. Is this perhaps the real motivation for insisting on an early missed shot?
-
For a good summary of some of the problems with the case against Oswald in the Walker shooting, I recommend C.A.A. Savastano's article "The Walker Allegations":
https://www.tpaak.com/walker-allegations
The bullet that was fired at Walker was recovered. Walker said the bullet was mangled, but he also made it clear the bullet was not a WCC Carcano FMJ bullet. He was adamant on this point:
During the HSCA investigation in the 1970’s, General Walker himself said that the bullet in evidence was not the same bullet that was found in his house on 10th April 1963. He wrote to the Attorney General in February 1979 and said that it was “a ridiculous substitute.” He went on to state that “I saw the hunk of lead, picked up by a policeman in my house, and I took it from him and I inspected it carefully. There is no mistake. There has been a substitution for the bullet fired by Oswald and taken out of my house.”
(https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/oswald-and-the-shot-at-walker-redressing-the-balance)
As for Greg Doudna's upcoming book on the Walker shooting, I have great respect for Greg and agree with many of his conclusions about the shooting. You can find Greg's summary of his findings here:
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31469-my-forthcoming-book-on-the-walker-shot/
Of course, WC defenders don't bat an eye when they claim that the same guy who went 2/3 or 2/2 in 5.6 seconds when supposedly shooting JFK somehow completely missed Walker from much closer range and with plenty of time to take aim.
-
Earlier you indicated you have a 30.06 rifle. So, I would guess that you might be a deer hunter. Let’s try an analogy with a deer hunter up high in a tree stand that has prepared provisions for a comfortable and stable seated and supported shot into a clearing. A deer comes along and is moving towards the clearing right below the hunter. The deer hunter knows for certain that that deer will emerge very soon into that clearing and present itself such that the hunter has a perfect comfortable and supported shot into the deer’s vital organs zone. Why the heck would the deer hunter decide to stand up and shoot at the deer before it gets to the clearing. How many deer hunters do you know that would take a very low percentage early shot under those conditions?
I'm not a hunter at all. I shoot paper targets. Living in a rural area I have learned a little about deer hunting. Ohio does not allow deer hunting with rifles other than muzzle loaders which have their own season which greatly reduces the number of hunters in the field. Ohio deer hunters shoot deer with deer slugs fired from shotguns. We have bow hunters too but they share the primitive weapons season with the muzzle loaders.
A deer hunter will wait for an optimal shot because he knows he has to score a hit with the first shot because if he misses, the deer will be long gone before he ever gets off a second shot.
Having his intended target take off if he missed his first shot was of less concern to Oswald than to a deer hunter. Ideally, that's what should have happened but Greer was slow to react. Apparently, Oswald decided like the hockey players, the more shots he took, the more likelihood he would score a fatal hit. He had chambered his fourth and final round before deciding it wasn't necessary.
It was Oswald's decision to make and there's no reason to think he would have made the same decision as you. Since he succeeded, I see no point in second guessing his choice.
-
I'm not a hunter at all. I shoot paper targets. Living in a rural area I have learned a little about deer hunting. Ohio does not allow deer hunting with rifles other than muzzle loaders which have their own season which greatly reduces the number of hunters in the field. Ohio deer hunters shoot deer with deer slugs fired from shotguns. We have bow hunters too but they share the primitive weapons season with the muzzle loaders.
A deer hunter will wait for an optimal shot because he knows he has to score a hit with the first shot because if he misses, the deer will be long gone before he ever gets off a second shot.
Having his intended target take off if he missed his first shot was of less concern to Oswald than to a deer hunter. Ideally, that's what should have happened but Greer was slow to react. Apparently, Oswald decided like the hockey players, the more shots he took, the more likelihood he would score a fatal hit. He had chambered his fourth and final round before deciding it wasn't necessary.
It was Oswald's decision to make and there's no reason to think he would have made the same decision as you. Since he succeeded, I see no point in second guessing his choice.
I believe LHO was smart enough not to intentionally tale such a poor shot that was likely to miss by such an extremely large margin. Especially when he had apparently intentionally set up a much better and stable set of shots that he knew he would have in just a few seconds. Same as any competent deer hunter.
-
Jack Nessan really should pay me a royalty on every copy of Phantom Shot he sells, but I cannot help but be struck by the fact that Oswald manages to put two pretty precisely-placed bullets into JFK after supposedly having gone through all sorts of hypothetical gyrations and managing to miss the entire limousine - and no one can agree on exactly when he did that. Two shots seems to me to be favored by Occam's (or Ockham's) Razor, and Mrs. Occam agrees. I don't quite understand the near-desperation to preserve the three-shot scenario. There doesn't seem to be any reason the evidence demands this.
It seems to me that the best evidence, including the Gloria Calvery group, places the first shot just about where the three-shot narrative places the second shot. If the three-shot scenario were correct, it seems to me the second and third shots would be the bang-bang sequence that Bowers and others described. Is this perhaps the real motivation for insisting on an early missed shot?
I can certainly agree that there is way too much evidence against a missed first shot to make it even a remote possibility. A missed first shot is a fantasy. There is also abundant, consistent evidence that the head shot was the last shot. If the bullet through JFK’s neck went on to strike JBC it had to have happened on the first shot. The second shot SBT is a fantasy.
But there is also abundant, consistent evidence that there were three distinct loud noises. And given the number of witnesses who reported hearing three shots (132 according to the HSCA study), many of whom reported hearing a shot a pause and then two more distinct shots, it is difficult to understand how they could have imagined a shot that did not occur. It is much easier to understand how a few witnesses might not have been counting the number of shots and thought there were only two (17) or weren’t sure whether it was 2 or 3 (7).
-
I can certainly agree that there is way too much evidence against a missed first shot to make it even a remote possibility. A missed first shot is a fantasy. There is also abundant, consistent evidence that the head shot was the last shot. If the bullet through JFK’s neck went on to strike JBC it had to have happened on the first shot. The second shot SBT is a fantasy.
Everything you believe is a fantasy.
But there is also abundant, consistent evidence that there were three distinct loud noises. And given the number of witnesses who reported hearing three shots (132 according to the HSCA study), many of whom reported hearing a shot a pause and then two more distinct shots, it is difficult to understand how they could have imagined a shot that did not occur. It is much easier to understand how a few witnesses might not have been counting the number of shots and thought there were only two (17) or weren’t sure whether it was 2 or 3 (7).
There is also an abundance of witnesses who said the shots came from the GK. Ear witnesses are as unreliable as eye witnesses. Some of them get it right and some of them get it wrong.
-
There is also an abundance of witnesses who said the shots came from the GK. Ear witnesses are as unreliable as eye witnesses. Some of them get it right and some of them get it wrong.
Most witnesses said they were not sure where the shot sounds came from and expressed confusion. Only a few expressed confusion about the number of shots.
The human ear and brain is not a reliable instrument for determining sound direction in the Dealey Plaza reverb chamber. The human ear and brain is a reliable instrument for hearing and recalling three well spaced loud noises over several seconds.
-
Most witnesses said they were not sure where the shot sounds came from and expressed confusion. Only a few expressed confusion about the number of shots.
The human ear and brain is not a reliable instrument for determining sound direction in the Dealey Plaza reverb chamber. The human ear and brain is a reliable instrument for hearing and recalling three well spaced loud noises over several seconds.
I guess that's as good an excuse as any for you to cherry pick which of the earwitness accounts you choose to accept. I have a unique approach to eye and ear witness accounts. I look for evidence which either corroborates or refutes what those witnesses have told us.
The human brain is not equipped with a DVR. It does not perfectly record sights and sounds. It gets some things right and jumbles others. I agree with what Dale Meyers said on the recently aired ABC program Truth and Lies: The JFK Assassination. He said if you have three witnesses to an event, you will get three versions of that event.