JFK Assassination Forum

JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Charles Collins on December 14, 2019, 08:46:35 PM

Title: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 14, 2019, 08:46:35 PM
This thread is a companion to the “An Innocent Man” thread that I started earlier today. It is related to the same crime that Richard Jewell was charged with. The perpetrator of the crime wrote this:

In the summer of 1996, the world converged upon Atlanta for the Olympic Games. Under the protection and auspices of the regime in Washington millions of people came to celebrate the ideals of global socialism. Multinational corporations spent billions of dollars, and Washington organized an army of security to protect these best of all games. Even though the conception and the purpose of the so-called Olympic movement is to promote the values of global socialism as perfectly expressed in the song "Imagine" by John Lennon, which was the theme of the 1996 Games—even though the purpose of the Olympics is to promote these ideals, the purpose of the attack on July 27 was to confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand. The plan was to force the cancellation of the games, or at least create a state of insecurity to empty the streets around the venues and thereby eat into the vast amounts of money invested.

Here is a link to a Wikipedia article that the above quote is from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Rudolph

There are some comparisons that can be made between him and LHO. I will start with:

They both are considered to be militant fanatics (zealots) with political causes.

Feel free to add your own comparisons.

Some of the items in the article are just plain scary. For instance, his brother purposely cutting off his own hand in order to “make a statement.”
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 19, 2019, 02:37:08 PM
The book “The Suspect” by Kent Alexander and Kevin Salween, details a great many more details of the story than does the movie “Richard Jewell.” Including details of the real terrorist and three other bombings he was responsible for. There are quite a few similarities between him and LHO and I do recommend this book for those who might be interested.

One interesting similarity that jumped out at me when I read it was this one:

Rudolph watched as prosecutors outlined the “factual basis,” the evidence they would have presented at trial. At the conclusion, U.S. District Judge Lynwood Smith asked the defendant if the government had proved its case in the bombing of a Birmingham women’s clinic. “Just barely, your honor,” Rudolph replied. “But let me just cut to the chase,” the judge said. “Did you plant the bomb that exploded at the New Woman All Women clinic?” “I certainly did, your honor.” Observers couldn’t miss his smirk. Soon after, Judge Smith declared, “The defendant is now adjudged guilty.”
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 19, 2019, 07:27:33 PM
The book “The Suspect” by Kent Alexander and Kevin Salween, details a great many more details of the story than does the movie “Richard Jewell.” Including details of the real terrorist and three other bombings he was responsible for. There are quite a few similarities between him and LHO and I do recommend this book for those who might be interested.

One interesting similarity that jumped out at me when I read it was this one:

Rudolph watched as prosecutors outlined the “factual basis,” the evidence they would have presented at trial. At the conclusion, U.S. District Judge Lynwood Smith asked the defendant if the government had proved its case in the bombing of a Birmingham women’s clinic. “Just barely, your honor,” Rudolph replied. “But let me just cut to the chase,” the judge said. “Did you plant the bomb that exploded at the New Woman All Women clinic?” “I certainly did, your honor.” Observers couldn’t miss his smirk. Soon after, Judge Smith declared, “The defendant is now adjudged guilty.”

“Did you plant the bomb that exploded at the New Woman All Women clinic?” “I certainly did, your honor.” Observers couldn’t miss his smirk.

Similarity??   .... Mr Oswald, did you shoot the President ?   " No Sir, Nobody has said that to me yet.... The first I heard that was when a a reporter,  Gulp, ( choking back emotion at learning that JFK had been killed)  in the hall asked me that question" 
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 19, 2019, 08:52:33 PM
“Did you plant the bomb that exploded at the New Woman All Women clinic?” “I certainly did, your honor.” Observers couldn’t miss his smirk.

Similarity??   .... Mr Oswald, did you shoot the President ?   " No Sir, Nobody has said that to me yet.... The first I heard that was when a a reporter,  Gulp, ( choking back emotion at learning that JFK had been killed)  in the hall asked me that question" 

The similarity is the smirk (I bolded that sentence).

However, if LHO had been in a position to plea bargain his way out of the electric chair (like the terrorist did), I am reasonably sure he would have pled guilty. And I am almost positive that he would have had a smirk on his face...
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 20, 2019, 01:04:46 AM
The similarity is the smirk (I bolded that sentence).

However, if LHO had been in a position to plea bargain his way out of the electric chair (like the terrorist did), I am reasonably sure he would have pled guilty. And I am almost positive that he would have had a smirk on his face...

Charlie,.... I've seen the video of Lee at the mid-night "press conference" that was held to give Jack Ruby a chance to shoot Lee....and I've not detected a "smirk".     I have seen deep grief and choked back tears by Lee at that conference... The cops saw it also, and shut down the conference immediately.    After all how would it have looked for the police if Lee had burst into tears after he learned from the reporter that President Kennedy had been killed.   
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 20, 2019, 02:14:42 AM
Charlie,.... I've seen the video of Lee at the mid-night "press conference" that was held to give Jack Ruby a chance to shoot Lee....and I've not derected a "smirk".     I have seen deep grief and choked back tears by Lee at that conference... The cops saw it also, and shut down the conference immediately.    After all how would it have looked for the police if Lee burst into tears after he learned from the reporter that President Kennedy had been killed.

The words of Bill Mercer from “When the News Went Live”:

As police concluded the “press conference” and Oswald started to turn, I stood up with the mike in my hand. When he was again asked, “Did you kill the president?” Oswald looked toward me and said, “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.” He pronounced it “axed.” I looked into his face and said, “You have been charged.” Oswald looked a little blank and moved his head backward in a natural reflective response. And then he was taken back to his cell on the fifth floor.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 20, 2019, 03:10:55 PM
The words of Bill Mercer from “When the News Went Live”:

As police concluded the “press conference” and Oswald started to turn, I stood up with the mike in my hand. When he was again asked, “Did you kill the president?” Oswald looked toward me and said, “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.” He pronounced it “axed.” I looked into his face and said, “You have been charged.” Oswald looked a little blank and moved his head backward in a natural reflective response. And then he was taken back to his cell on the fifth floor.


As police concluded the “press conference” and Oswald started to turn, I stood up with the mike in my hand. When he was again asked, “Did you kill the president?” Oswald looked toward me and said, “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.” He pronounced it “axed.” I looked into his face and said, “You have been charged.” Oswald looked a little blank and moved his head backward in a natural reflective response. And then he was taken back to his cell on the fifth floor.

Charlie, I believe that the reporter has twisted the information a tad.... The "conference" was NOT being concluded....It had just started.

I believe that this is an accurate quote of what Lee said....

 “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”

However the written words do not accurately convey the truth...   Lee's facial expression added to the meaning of his words.
You can hear him choke back emotion when he said the word "hall".....  “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the... hall.. asked me that question.”

I believe that what Lee said was true....   He wasn't aware until that moment that President Kennedy had been killed., and it came as a shock to him.

The reporter told Lee that he had been charged.... And Lee's disdainful glare at the reporter spoke volumes....   The facial expression and  body language clearly told the reporter that he was an idiot and didn't know what the hell he was talking about.


Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 20, 2019, 03:45:43 PM

As police concluded the “press conference” and Oswald started to turn, I stood up with the mike in my hand. When he was again asked, “Did you kill the president?” Oswald looked toward me and said, “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.” He pronounced it “axed.” I looked into his face and said, “You have been charged.” Oswald looked a little blank and moved his head backward in a natural reflective response. And then he was taken back to his cell on the fifth floor.

Charlie, I believe that the reporter has twisted the information a tad.... The "conference" was NOT being concluded....It had just started.

I believe that this is an accurate quote of what Lee said....

 “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”

However the written words do not accurately convey the truth...   Lee's facial expression added to the meaning of his words.
You can hear him choke back emotion when he said the word "hall".....  “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the... hall.. asked me that question.”

I believe that what Lee said was true....   He wasn't aware until that moment that President Kennedy had been killed., and it came as a shock to him.

The reporter told Lee that he had been charged.... And Lee's disdainful glare at the reporter spoke volumes....   The facial expression and  body language clearly told the reporter that he was an idiot and didn't know what the hell he was talking about.

Bill Mercer was in front of the room kneeling with the microphone so that LHO’s responses could be heard by the broadcast audience. He was very close and looking at LHO’s face. I choose to believe his interpretation of LHO’s reaction. You can continue to believe your version as far as I am concerned. But it makes no sense to me.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 20, 2019, 05:29:58 PM
Bill Mercer was in front of the room kneeling with the microphone so that LHO’s responses could be heard by the broadcast audience. He was very close and looking at LHO’s face. I choose to believe his interpretation of LHO’s reaction. You can continue to believe your version as far as I am concerned. But it makes no sense to me.

May I ask you, WHAT doesn't make sense to you?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 20, 2019, 05:46:18 PM
Bill Mercer was in front of the room kneeling with the microphone so that LHO’s responses could be heard by the broadcast audience. He was very close and looking at LHO’s face. I choose to believe his interpretation of LHO’s reaction. You can continue to believe your version as far as I am concerned. But it makes no sense to me.

I choose to believe his interpretation of LHO’s reaction.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 20, 2019, 06:27:13 PM
I choose to believe his interpretation of LHO’s reaction.

Yes, his interpretation versus your interpretation. Only LHO knew for sure what exactly was going through his mind at that point in time because he didn’t say anything in response to hearing that he had been charged with the assassination. Anyone that believes  they know what he was thinking at that moment is only spouting their own interpretation of what they think his body language meant.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on December 20, 2019, 07:00:21 PM
Yes, here is the man that these powerful conspirators were so afraid would expose their conspiracy that they had him killed.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg)

Dozens of reporters, live cameras. This is how they "silenced" him. But this was done to give Ruby a chance to shoot him. So why didn't Ruby do it? Never mind.

They gave Oswald numerous opportunities to expose their conspiracy; but he never did.  He talked to his family, to the head of the Dallas Bar, to numerous reporters. But not a word from him about this conspiracy.

To normal people that's evidence that there wasn't one. To conspiracy thinkers it's evidence that there was.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 20, 2019, 11:36:27 PM
Yes, here is the man that these powerful conspirators were so afraid would expose their conspiracy that they had him killed.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg)

Dozens of reporters, live cameras. This is how they "silenced" him. But this was done to give Ruby a chance to shoot him. So why didn't Ruby do it? Never mind.

They gave Oswald numerous opportunities to expose their conspiracy; but he never did.  He talked to his family, to the head of the Dallas Bar, to numerous reporters. But not a word from him about this conspiracy.

To normal people that's evidence that there wasn't one. To conspiracy thinkers it's evidence that there was.

why didn't Ruby do it? Never mind.  Yes, I agree ..."never mind" because everybody knows that Ruby with his trusty "bulldog" in his pocket was jammed into the rear of the room and could not get within the kill zone ...  The cops saw that Ruby was not going to be able to perform the lynching so they immediately curtailed the "conference"
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 21, 2019, 04:49:07 AM
Yes, here is the man that these powerful conspirators were so afraid would expose their conspiracy that they had him killed.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg)

Dozens of reporters, live cameras. This is how they "silenced" him. But this was done to give Ruby a chance to shoot him. So why didn't Ruby do it? Never mind.

They gave Oswald numerous opportunities to expose their conspiracy; but he never did.  He talked to his family, to the head of the Dallas Bar, to numerous reporters. But not a word from him about this conspiracy.

To normal people that's evidence that there wasn't one. To conspiracy thinkers it's evidence that there was.

A trained espionage agent would never reveal his true goal or motive, and blow his cover.   Lee was still playing the role he had been given.....He thought that he would be accused of shooting AT   AT  JFK..... And be allowed to escape to Cuba as a fugitive.   At the time of the mid-night "press conference" he didn't know that JFK had been killed. ....and he said as much.  " Mr Oswald did you kill the president?"....    “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”    

NOTICE....  "NOBODY HAS SAID THAT TO ME YET"     IOW....  Nobody had told him that JFK had been killed and .... the first thing I heard about it was when the reporters in the hall asked me that same question....

You may argue and disagree but I believe that Lee nearly lost his composure and he nearly started crying when he said the word "hall".....
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 21, 2019, 03:08:16 PM
A trained espionage agent would never reveal his true goal or motive, and blow his cover.   Lee was still playing the role he had been given.....He thought that he would be accused of shooting AT   AT  JFK..... And be allowed to escape to Cuba as a fugitive.   At the time of the mid-night "press conference" he didn't know that JFK had been killed. ....and he said as much.  " Mr Oswald did you kill the president?"....    “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”    

NOTICE....  "NOBODY HAS SAID THAT TO ME YET"     IOW....  Nobody had told him that JFK had been killed and .... the first thing I heard about it was when the reporters in the hall asked me that same question....

You may argue and disagree but I believe that Lee nearly lost his composure and he nearly started crying when he said the word "hall".....

Yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head. Your hypothesis goes real well (not) with what he said and how he behaved when Walker was questioning him:

Mr. Walker. And he said, ‘No, that is not my real name.’ And I started talking to him and I asked him, I said, ‘Why did you kill the officer?’ And he just looked at me. And I said, ‘Did you kill the officer because you were scared of being arrested or something?’ And he said, ‘I am not scared of anything. Do I look like I am scared now?’ Mr. Belin. Did he look like he was scared? Mr. Walker. No; he didn’t look like he was scared. He was calm. Not a bit nervous.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 21, 2019, 03:34:17 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg)  (https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/305139/content/arcmedia/media/images/33/34/33-3304a.gif)

Left Photo: Is that a hole in the elbow of Oswald's right sleeve?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 21, 2019, 04:02:25 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg)  (https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/305139/content/arcmedia/media/images/33/34/33-3304a.gif)

Left Photo: Is that a hole in the elbow of Oswald's right sleeve?

Thanks for broaching that subject...I had the same question in mind and I also looked at Lee's right elbow when I saw the photo but I concluded that the photo was not clear enough to answer the question... "Is that a hole in the elbow of Oswald's right sleeve?"

But apparently you have Superman eyes.....

Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 21, 2019, 04:14:04 PM
Thanks for broaching that subject...I had the same question in mind and I also looked at Lee's right elbow when I saw the photo but I concluded that the photo was not clear enough to answer the question... "Is that a hole in the elbow of Oswald's right sleeve?"

But apparently you have Superman eyes.....

Well, I believe I might be seeing the upper end of the sewn shirt seam that the cuff button closes at the wrist. The seam end is away from the "hole". So either the officer's hand is exhibiting five fingers (the thumb is hidden) or there's an open area ("hole") beneath his four fingers.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 21, 2019, 04:28:04 PM
Well, I believe I might be seeing the upper end of the sewn shirt seam that the cuff button closes at the wrist. The seam end is away from the "hole". So either the officer's hand is exhibiting five fingers (the thumb is hidden) or there's an open area ("hole") beneath his four fingers.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg)

There's no hole in the sleeve.....
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 21, 2019, 09:11:58 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg)  (https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/305139/content/arcmedia/media/images/33/34/33-3304a.gif)

Left Photo: Is that a hole in the elbow of Oswald's right sleeve?


Yes, it is. And the frayed edge of the torn fabric is showing just above the fingernail of the little finger of the hand on his right arm.




Also, a portion of the hole can be seen in this photo (red arrow pointing at it):


(https://i.vgy.me/Fn0cJI.jpg)

If you can find a better quality copy of this photo, it should help to verity the hole in the sleeve...
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Mytton on December 21, 2019, 09:43:58 PM
Well, I believe I might be seeing the upper end of the sewn shirt seam that the cuff button closes at the wrist. The seam end is away from the "hole". So either the officer's hand is exhibiting five fingers (the thumb is hidden) or there's an open area ("hole") beneath his four fingers.

 Thumb1:

(https://i.postimg.cc/t4bR680F/oswald-shirt-hole1.jpg)

JohnM
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 22, 2019, 01:22:34 AM
This thread is a companion to the “An Innocent Man” thread that I started earlier today. It is related to the same crime that Richard Jewell was charged with. The perpetrator of the crime wrote this:

In the summer of 1996, the world converged upon Atlanta for the Olympic Games. Under the protection and auspices of the regime in Washington millions of people came to celebrate the ideals of global socialism. Multinational corporations spent billions of dollars, and Washington organized an army of security to protect these best of all games. Even though the conception and the purpose of the so-called Olympic movement is to promote the values of global socialism as perfectly expressed in the song "Imagine" by John Lennon, which was the theme of the 1996 Games—even though the purpose of the Olympics is to promote these ideals, the purpose of the attack on July 27 was to confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand. The plan was to force the cancellation of the games, or at least create a state of insecurity to empty the streets around the venues and thereby eat into the vast amounts of money invested.

Here is a link to a Wikipedia article that the above quote is from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Rudolph

There are some comparisons that can be made between him and LHO. I will start with:

They both are considered to be militant fanatics (zealots) with political causes.

Feel free to add your own comparisons.

Some of the items in the article are just plain scary. For instance, his brother purposely cutting off his own hand in order to “make a statement.”

The same MO can be attributed to every single member of the False Defector Program at the time. They were singleton agents disavowed by their government and groomed to be a defector. This was the case for Thomas Arthur Vallee (see my sig photo) in Chicago only 20 days earlier. He was Plan A of the Big Event, Oswald was Plan B.

November 1, 1963: In Chicago, the Secret Service detains and questions two members of a four-man sniper team suspected of planning to assassinate President Kennedy during his visit to Chicago the following day. The other two snipers escape. Thomas Arthur Vallee, a mentally damaged ex-Marine in a building over Kennedy’s motorcade route, is monitored by the Chicago police.

November 2, 1963: South Vietnam President Diem is assassinated by an Army coup and White House press secretary Pierre Salinger announces President Kennedy’s trip to Chicago has been cancelled. While the two suspected snipers are questioned at Chicago Secret Service headquarters, potential assassin scapegoat Thomas Arthur Vallee is arrested. The other two alleged snipers remain at large in Chicago. Only Vallee is ever identified publicly.

November 22, 1963: Plan B succeeds.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 22, 2019, 01:42:40 AM
The same MO can be attributed to every single member of the False Defector Program at the time. They were singleton agents disavowed by their government and groomed to be a defector. This was the case for Thomas Arthur Vallee (see my sig photo) in Chicago only 20 days earlier. He was Plan A of the Big Event, Oswald was Plan B.

November 1, 1963: In Chicago, the Secret Service detains and questions two members of a four-man sniper team suspected of planning to assassinate President Kennedy during his visit to Chicago the following day. The other two snipers escape. Thomas Arthur Vallee, a mentally damaged ex-Marine in a building over Kennedy’s motorcade route, is monitored by the Chicago police.

November 2, 1963: South Vietnam President Diem is assassinated by an Army coup and White House press secretary Pierre Salinger announces President Kennedy’s trip to Chicago has been cancelled. While the two suspected snipers are questioned at Chicago Secret Service headquarters, potential assassin scapegoat Thomas Arthur Vallee is arrested. The other two alleged snipers remain at large in Chicago. Only Vallee is ever identified publicly.

November 22, 1963: Plan B succeeds.


The same MO???!

LHO and the Centennial Olympic Park bomber were lone nuts.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 22, 2019, 08:25:19 PM

The same MO???!

LHO and the Centennial Olympic Park bomber were lone nuts.

LOL. Do you think if you keep saying it enough it becomes true? Every single member of the False Defector program was a lone nut, by design. They obviously knew what they were doing since you LNers continue to shill for them 1/2 a century later.

If LHO was a lone nut assassin then this case would have been solved by the HSCA decades ago. LHO may have been up to his eyeballs in the Big Event, but he was not a lone nut, he was a patsy. It's not too soon to get over it.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 22, 2019, 08:52:38 PM
LOL. Do you think if you keep saying it enough it becomes true? Every single member of the False Defector program was a lone nut, by design. They obviously knew what they were doing since you LNers continue to shill for them 1/2 a century later.

If LHO was a lone nut assassin then this case would have been solved by the HSCA decades ago. LHO may have been up to his eyeballs in the Big Event, but he was not a lone nut, he was a patsy. It's not too soon to get over it.

The case was solved on 11/22/63. After 56-years there is no credible evidence of a conspiracy. Your conjecture and innuendo is just that.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 22, 2019, 10:01:25 PM
The case was solved on 11/22/63. After 56-years there is no credible evidence of a conspiracy. Your conjecture and innuendo is just that.

On the contrary. After 56 years there is no credible evidence that the case has been solved.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 22, 2019, 10:12:19 PM
On the contrary. After 56 years there is no credible evidence that the case has been solved.

More twaddle from the twaddle master...
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 23, 2019, 05:14:26 AM
Apparently your blanket twaddle statements are ok though...
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 27, 2019, 04:25:08 PM
LOL. Do you think if you keep saying it enough it becomes true? Every single member of the False Defector program was a lone nut, by design. They obviously knew what they were doing since you LNers continue to shill for them 1/2 a century later.

If LHO was a lone nut assassin then this case would have been solved by the HSCA decades ago. LHO may have been up to his eyeballs in the Big Event, but he was not a lone nut, he was a patsy. It's not too soon to get over it.

LHO may have been up to his eyeballs in the Big Event, but he was not a lone nut, he was a patsy.

Explain please.....  What do you mean when you say.... " LHO may have been up to his eyeballs in the Big Event," ...  Do you actually believe that Lee was involved in the plot to murder JFK?   ie; He knew that JFK was going to be murdered and willing went along with the plot?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 27, 2019, 05:13:44 PM

As police concluded the “press conference” and Oswald started to turn, I stood up with the mike in my hand. When he was again asked, “Did you kill the president?” Oswald looked toward me and said, “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.” He pronounced it “axed.” I looked into his face and said, “You have been charged.” Oswald looked a little blank and moved his head backward in a natural reflective response. And then he was taken back to his cell on the fifth floor.

Charlie, I believe that the reporter has twisted the information a tad.... The "conference" was NOT being concluded....It had just started.

I believe that this is an accurate quote of what Lee said....



 “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”

However the written words do not accurately convey the truth...   Lee's facial expression added to the meaning of his words.
You can hear him choke back emotion when he said the word "hall".....  “No, I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the... hall.. asked me that question.”

I believe that what Lee said was true....   He wasn't aware until that moment that President Kennedy had been killed., and it came as a shock to him.

The reporter told Lee that he had been charged.... And Lee's disdainful glare at the reporter spoke volumes....   The facial expression and  body language clearly told the reporter that he was an idiot and didn't know what the hell he was talking about.

The reporter told Lee that he had been charged.... And Lee's disdainful glare at the reporter spoke volumes....   The facial expression and  body language clearly told the reporter that he was an idiot and didn't know what the hell he was talking about.

Lee's disdainful glare conveyed the message ...I just told you that  "I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”...What part of "I HAVE NOT BEEN CHARGED WITH THAT" can't you understand, moron?

P.S. ...  Oh I nearly forgot ....   I meant to ask Mr Organ How it could be possible for Lee Oswald to be wearing a shirt that was in possession of the FBI....

There are many photos of the evidence that was turned over to the FBI at midnight 11/22/63, and the arrest shirt is prominently displayed in those photos.  So the question is:... How do you know that the shirt that Lee is wearing at the midnight "press conference" isn't the shirt that was found in Lee's room at 1026 N. Beckley?   
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 27, 2019, 10:16:16 PM
The reporter told Lee that he had been charged.... And Lee's disdainful glare at the reporter spoke volumes....   The facial expression and  body language clearly told the reporter that he was an idiot and didn't know what the hell he was talking about.

Lee's disdainful glare conveyed the message ...I just told you that  "I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”...What part of "I HAVE NOT BEEN CHARGED WITH THAT" can't you understand, moron?

P.S. ...  Oh I nearly forgot ....   I meant to ask Mr Organ How it could be possible for Lee Oswald to be wearing a shirt that was in possession of the FBI....

There are many photos of the evidence that was turned over to the FBI at midnight 11/22/63, and the arrest shirt is prominently displayed in those photos.  So the question is:... How do you know that the shirt that Lee is wearing at the midnight "press conference" isn't the shirt that was found in Lee's room at 1026 N. Beckley?   

Don't tell me this picture was taken after midnight.

(https://static4.businessinsider.com/image/59f20618bcf93d1e008b4a5e-1980/ap6311220252.jpg)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 27, 2019, 11:45:40 PM
LHO may have been up to his eyeballs in the Big Event, but he was not a lone nut, he was a patsy.

Explain please.....  What do you mean when you say.... " LHO may have been up to his eyeballs in the Big Event," ...  Do you actually believe that Lee was involved in the plot to murder JFK?   ie; He knew that JFK was going to be murdered and willing went along with the plot?

I mean that Oswald was up to his eyeballs (followed orders) as a patsy, either knowingly or not. Pretty simple. Also, the patsy is never the shooter because the murder weapon is always a piece of spombleprofglidnoctobuns planted ahead of time. Oswald likely knew he was the designated patsy and hoped the conspirators would allow him to escape to Cuba/Russia/Mexico. Instead the DPD double-crossed him and served him up on a silver platter to Ruby. The DPD didn't kill Oswald in the theater so they could claim plausible deniability because their hands were already filthy. Killing Oswald went beyond their mandate.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 28, 2019, 03:15:52 AM
I mean that Oswald was up to his eyeballs (followed orders) as a patsy, either knowingly or not. Pretty simple. Also, the patsy is never the shooter because the murder weapon is always a piece of spombleprofglidnoctobuns planted ahead of time. Oswald likely knew he was the designated patsy and hoped the conspirators would allow him to escape to Cuba/Russia/Mexico. Instead the DPD double-crossed him and served him up on a silver platter to Ruby. The DPD didn't kill Oswald in the theater so they could claim plausible deniability because their hands were already filthy. Killing Oswald went beyond their mandate.

 I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”

Oswald likely knew he was the designated patsy and hoped the conspirators would allow him to escape to Cuba/Russia/Mexico.

This would indicate that Lee knew that JFK was going to be ambushed and murdered....  I seriously doubt that Lee would have participated if he knew that JFK was going to be murdered.   IN fact He had heard rumors that  there was a plot afoot and he tried to foil the plot by notifying his handler who he thought  was a legitimate FBI Agent .(Warren  De Brueys)   He was assured that the FBI knew of the plot and had everything under control, so he could go ahead with the hoax attempt to shoot JFK and they would cover him so he could flee to Cuba.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 28, 2019, 06:24:17 AM
I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question.”

Oswald likely knew he was the designated patsy and hoped the conspirators would allow him to escape to Cuba/Russia/Mexico.

This would indicate that Lee knew that JFK was going to be ambushed and murdered....  I seriously doubt that Lee would have participated if he knew that JFK was going to be murdered.   IN fact He had heard rumors that  there was a plot afoot and he tried to foil the plot by notifying his handler who he thought  was a legitimate FBI Agent .(Warren  De Brueys)   He was assured that the FBI knew of the plot and had everything under control, so he could go ahead with the hoax attempt to shoot JFK and they would cover him so he could flee to Cuba.

Hard to say how loyal Oswald was to JFK. But Judyth Baker claimed that Oswald was stationed in Dallas to try and save the POTUS. However, he was the designated patsy whether he knew it or not. It seems evident that he was to meet up with his handler(s) in or near the theater and they were to give him his next orders or pick him up. And if he was a patsy then that means this was a conspiracy and the DPD were in on it and double-crossed him. At any rate, the way the Big Event went down, you'd have be a crazy LNer to believe Oswald was a lone nut assassin.  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 28, 2019, 05:00:16 PM
Hard to say how loyal Oswald was to JFK. But Judyth Baker claimed that Oswald was stationed in Dallas to try and save the POTUS. However, he was the designated patsy whether he knew it or not. It seems evident that he was to meet up with his handler(s) in or near the theater and they were to give him his next orders or pick him up. And if he was a patsy then that means this was a conspiracy and the DPD were in on it and double-crossed him. At any rate, the way the Big Event went down, you'd have be a crazy LNer to believe Oswald was a lone nut assassin.  ;)

(https://i.gifer.com/23x4.gif)

LNers are "crazy"? Compared to what?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 28, 2019, 05:30:28 PM
LNers are "crazy"? Compared to what?
  • CE 133-A was taken with Lee's Minox spy camera, which had a superior lens
  • CE 399 smashed through bones
  • Bullet entered at T1 and exited at C7
  • The two laser challenge
  • Autopsy haircut
  • Oswald was extracted from the fake defector program to be the patsy

Not any crazier than the cavalcade of lame LN excuses.

 https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,100.0.html (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,100.0.html)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 28, 2019, 08:23:52 PM
LNers are "crazy"? Compared to what?
  • CE 133-A was taken with Lee's Minox spy camera, which had a superior lens
  • CE 399 smashed through bones
  • Bullet entered at T1 and exited at C7
  • The two laser challenge
  • Autopsy haircut
  • Oswald was extracted from the fake defector program to be the patsy


It's amazing how oblivious you LNers are when it comes to evaluating evidence. You compile a list that you think paints me as a crazy CTer without contesting a single item.

When are you LNers going to learn you can't mock your way out of this one. You need to use some logic, critical thinking and forensics to support your position, which aren't your strong points. Good luck with the 2 laser challenge. Post your results and make me eat crow instead of chicken for a change.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 28, 2019, 08:54:22 PM
When are you LNers going to learn you can't mock your way out of this one. You need to use some logic, critical thinking and forensics to support your position, which aren't your strong points.

That’s the Bugliosi Shuffle. If you don’t have a counter argument, try using ridicule instead and hope nobody notices.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Mytton on December 28, 2019, 10:34:29 PM
(https://i.gifer.com/23x4.gif)

LNers are "crazy"? Compared to what?
  • CE 133-A was taken with Lee's Minox spy camera, which had a superior lens
  • CE 399 smashed through bones
  • Bullet entered at T1 and exited at C7
  • The two laser challenge
  • Autopsy haircut
  • Oswald was extracted from the fake defector program to be the patsy

Thanks for the Trojan summation, beyond the technical impossibilities his accusations simply make no logical sense, why use another camera? why give Kennedy a haircut? And the reason he hasn't shown us his "laser challenge" results is obvious.

Anyway, as for the backyard photos being taken with different cameras it's just more nonsense, when an Imperial Reflex camera is manufactured there is going to be edge markings and in addition where the film is dragged across the plastic to be exposed there will be corresponding scratches.

The edge markings and scratches on Oswald's camera matched Oswald's family photo and also perfectly matches CE133a and CE133b, therefore the illogical and ridiculous "Minox spy camera" taking 1 "hero" photo is thoroughly refuted.

(https://i.postimg.cc/NjMzQ1B0/hsca-backyard-photo-edge-scratch-markings-comparison.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/5NprcPcG/hsca-backyard-photo-edge-scratch-markings.jpg)

Here's a test with a different Imperial Reflex camera and we see a different random distribution of edge markings and scratches.

(https://i.postimg.cc/7YqRQFR0/hsca-backyard-photo-edge-scratch-markings-another-reflex.jpg)

JohnM

Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 28, 2019, 11:19:37 PM

It's amazing how oblivious you LNers are when it comes to evaluating evidence. You compile a list that you think paints me as a crazy CTer without contesting a single item.

  • If CE 133-A was taken with the same lens as B,C,D,E,F then why does the spherical aberration match between  B,C,D,E,F but not the money shot A? Rhetorical question because you just don't know.
  • Didn't CE 399 cause 7 wounds and smash thru Connally's rib and wrist bones?
  • Ok then, which vertebrae did CE 399 enter JFK's back? The X-ray and the autopsy photos indicated T1. What vertebrae is just below JFK's Adam's apple for the alleged exit wound? Ans: C6, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say it exited at C7. What say you?
  • So how did that 2 laser challenge work out for you, or are you too scared to even try it? Or maybe you still don't understand the concept. Better not try it or you might find out the truth and realize you've wasted all these years as a crazy LNer.
  • I was being facetious re the Autopsy Haircut because you expect us to believe there was no difference between the hair length in the 2 autopsy photos. There was also the missing "fist-sized" hole in the occipital region of JFK's head. Instead you mock anyone for noticing the obvious differences. Maybe there is a simple explanation for it, but you certainly didn't provide any.
  • Of course you don't think Oswald was a patsy because you are a crazy LNer.
When are you LNers going to learn you can't mock your way out of this one. You need to use some logic, critical thinking and forensics to support your position, which aren't your strong points. Good luck with the 2 laser challenge. Post your results and make me eat crow instead of chicken for a change.

If CE 133-A was taken with the same lens as B,C,D,E,F then why does the spherical aberration match between  B,C,D,E,F but not the money shot A? Rhetorical question because you just don't know.

I've always said that CE 133A ( and the De Morenschildt print) is the ONLY authentic photo....  Lee had Marina take CE 133A, he developed and  enhanced the photo and made several copies of it. ......
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 28, 2019, 11:30:13 PM
Thanks for the Trojan summation, beyond the technical impossibilities his accusations simply make no logical sense, why use another camera? why give Kennedy a haircut? And the reason he hasn't shown us his "laser challenge" results is obvious.

Anyway, as for the backyard photos being taken with different cameras it's just more nonsense, when an Imperial Reflex camera is manufactured there is going to be edge markings and in addition where the film is dragged across the plastic to be exposed there will be corresponding scratches.

The edge markings and scratches on Oswald's camera matched Oswald's family photo and also perfectly matches CE133a and CE133b, therefore the illogical and ridiculous "Minox spy camera" taking 1 "hero" photo is thoroughly refuted.

Here's a test with a different Imperial Reflex camera and we see a different random distribution of edge markings and scratches.

JohnM

(https://images2.imgbox.com/a7/eb/ONd9sVyQ_o.png)

Thanks, John. As well, the RIT's focus test photo dispels Trojan's (and Iacoletti's since he sees nothing wrong with it) bizarre "spherical aberration" claim because anyone can see text is quite sharp in the focal plane. That's about the same focal plane where Oswald stood in 133-A. Oswald was further back (relative to the camera) in 133-B and 133-C, and so he is not as sharply-defined as in 133-A. Also, Oswald's body being closer to the camera in 133-A means there is more resolution available to define his image.

(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
(https://sites.google.com/site/shotonelmclassicsiteview/backyard/ce133c-crop-1021x1500.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
133-C (from print; negative cropped;
has greatest amount of background)
 
(https://sites.google.com/site/shotonelmclassicsiteview/backyard/ce133b-1065x1084.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
133-B (from negative, uncropped;
has slightly-less background than 133-C)
 
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
(https://sites.google.com/site/shotonelmclassicsiteview/backyard/ce133a-2425x2400.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
133-A (print, with negative frame edge markings;
has least amount of background)

I don't know what is meant by photos "D,E,F". The letters designated different poses.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 12:02:29 AM

It's amazing how oblivious you LNers are when it comes to evaluating evidence. You compile a list that you think paints me as a crazy CTer without contesting a single item.

  • If CE 133-A was taken with the same lens as B,C,D,E,F then why does the spherical aberration match between  B,C,D,E,F but not the money shot A? Rhetorical question because you just don't know.

This must be the third or fourth topic where that claim has been contested.

Quote
  • Didn't CE 399 cause 7 wounds and smash thru Connally's rib and wrist bones?

It may have "smashed" through the fifth rib, one of the thinnest bones in the body. Or pressure from its passage may have broken the rib. It certainly didn't travel through the more substantial radius bone, much less "smashed" through it. The bullet, slowed down and probably no longer nose-on, glanced off the radius, leaving the bone fractured but with all the bone present. The radius was restored and healed with a cast.

Your use of the term "smashed through bones" is to imply CE 399 should be more mutilated than it is.

Quote
  • Ok then, which vertebrae did CE 399 enter JFK's back? The X-ray and the autopsy photos indicated T1. What vertebrae is just below JFK's Adam's apple for the alleged exit wound? Ans: C6, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say it exited at C7. What say you?

Autopsy photos show the bullet entered about C7 and exited at about T1, somewhat above the sternum.

(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/neckwound/neck-transit-in-autopsy-photo-of-back.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Cervical_vertebrae_animation_small.gif)

Quote
  • So how did that 2 laser challenge work out for you, or are you too scared to even try it? Or maybe you still don't understand the concept. Better not try it or you might find out the truth and realize you've wasted all these years as a crazy LNer.

I just tried it with a standing 3D model from "Render People". They use 250 cameras to construct a model from a living human. Bullet enters C7/T1 level, misses the spinal column and exits as in the autopsy photo. If model was sitting and his neck area slouched forward, the missile track would enter a bit higher.

Quote
  • I was being facetious re the Autopsy Haircut because you expect us to believe there was no difference between the hair length in the 2 autopsy photos. There was also the missing "fist-sized" hole in the occipital region of JFK's head. Instead you mock anyone for noticing the obvious differences. Maybe there is a simple explanation for it, but you certainly didn't provide any.

Explanations for those things have been provided here for years. Maybe we didn't cover something specific to your "research."

Quote
  • Of course you don't think Oswald was a patsy because you are a crazy LNer.

When are you LNers going to learn you can't mock your way out of this one. You need to use some logic, critical thinking and forensics to support your position, which aren't your strong points. Good luck with the 2 laser challenge. Post your results and make me eat crow instead of chicken for a change.

You must be "chicken". You have yet to post your own results.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 29, 2019, 12:24:50 AM

Thanks, John. As well, the RIT's focus test photo dispels Trojan's (and Iacoletti's since he sees nothing wrong with it) bizarre "spherical aberration" claim because anyone can see text is quite sharp in the focal plane. That's about the same focal plane where Oswald stood in 133-A. Oswald was further back (relative to the camera) in 133-B and 133-C, and so he is not as sharply-defined as in 133-A. Also, Oswald's body being closer to the camera in 133-A means there is more resolution available to define his image.

Sorry, you can't BS your way thru this. You either know optics and what you are talking about or you don't and you don't. 133-A does not match the others. Live with it.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 29, 2019, 12:54:23 AM
This must be the third or fourth topic where that claim has been contested.

So Marina took all 6+ photos with the Imperial Reflex? Right.

Quote
It may have "smashed" through the fifth rib, one of the thinnest bones in the body. Or pressure from its passage may have broken the rib. It certainly didn't travel through the more substantial radius bone, much less "smashed" through it. The bullet, slowed down and probably no longer nose-on, glanced off the radius, leaving the bone fractured but with all the bone present. The radius was restored and healed with a cast.

It also smashed thru JFK's T1 vertebrae. You can call it "air" if you like.  :D

(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/x-ray_mb.gif)

Quote
Your use of the term "smashed through bones" is to imply CE 399 should be more mutilated than it is.

You're goddamned right it should have been more deformed than it was. Only a fool would think that CE 399 would magically show up on the wrong stretcher in pristine condition with no DNA on it. Get real.

Quote
Autopsy photos show the bullet entered about C7 and exited at about T1, somewhat above the sternum.

Horsespombleprofglidnoctobuns. Stop trying to use graphics to do your work for you. Do a re-enactment like Mytton did you lazy ass.

Quote
I just tried it with a standing 3D model from "Render People". They use 250 cameras to construct a model from a living human. Bullet enters C7/T1 level, misses the spinal column and exits as in the autopsy photo. If model was sitting and his neck area slouched forward, the missile track would enter a bit higher.

When are you going to learn that graphics (especially yours) are useless. You need to know how the physics engine works and its limitations. You are over complicating everything by using graphics instead of a re-enactment. What's your problem? Oh right, you're a LNer in deep denial.

Quote
Explanations for those things have been provided here for years. Maybe we didn't cover something specific to your "research."

If you think that JFK's hair is the same length in both autopsy photos then there is no hope for you.

(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/BE2_HI2.jpg)(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/e99bc825fb.jpg)

Quote
You must be "chicken". You have yet to post your own results.

No, you're the chicken. Even Mytton has done it and now he only does drive-by postings. Do you think if he had the goods on me he wouldn't post them faster than a speeding magic bullet? You are a crazy LNer who doesn't even have the guts to do the experiment yourself. All you got is to mock and ridicule my efforts to try and make it all go away. In for a penny I suppose.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 02:52:16 AM
Same head. Two different camera angles.

(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/BE1_HIO.JPG)  (https://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f237/409304d1353206519-jfk-autopsy-pictures-assassination-jfk_autopsy4.jpg)

Kennedy seemed to have a full crop of hair on top in Texas. And progressively shorter on the sides and back.

(https://cdn.nybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/JFK-crop.jpg)  (https://www.semissourian.com/photos/19/64/17/1964177-A.jpg)  (https://videos.usatoday.net/Brightcove2/29906170001/2013/10/29906170001_2777542649001_JFK-914.jpg)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Mytton on December 29, 2019, 03:19:36 AM
I've always said that CE 133A ( and the De Morenschildt print) is the ONLY authentic photo....  Lee had Marina take CE 133A, he developed and  enhanced the photo and made several copies of it. ......

The backgrounds in CE133A and CE133B show many parallax changes which proves that there was two photos.

Here is CE133A and CE133B in their respective original full frames.

(https://i.postimg.cc/wBx8GH5s/hsca-ce133a-b.jpg)

In this rapid alternating GIF of the stationary fixed objects, the separation of 3D elements, the subsequent parallax changes and the pincushioning is plain to see.
The bush on the right is clearly in front of the wall behind.
The roof on the house behind moves independently of the stairs.
The shutters on the left are also shifting in relation to the camera movement.
The shadow on the post from the overhead wires shifts position.
Etc etc....
Btw one of these two photos was taken with a Minox Spy Camera, can you tell which one? Hehehe!

(https://i.postimg.cc/K82yttRf/hsca-ce133a-b12.gif)

JohnM
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 05:36:52 AM
Thanks, John. As well, the RIT's focus test photo dispels Trojan's (and Iacoletti's since he sees nothing wrong with it) bizarre "spherical aberration" claim because anyone can see text is quite sharp in the focal plane.

 BS: I never said that.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 05:40:52 AM
m
The edge markings and scratches on Oswald's camera matched Oswald's family photo

“Oswald’s camera”. LOL.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 29, 2019, 09:11:55 AM
“Oswald’s camera”. LOL.

Iacoletti,

Should he have said "his brother's camera," or "the evil, evil, evil CIA's camera"?

Need a verified sales receipt, in triplicate?

A  DNA test? 

A 30-point fingerprint match on all ten fingers?

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 01:57:24 PM
Iacoletti,

Should he have said "his brother's camera," or "the evil, evil, evil CIA's camera"?

Need a verified sales receipt, in triplicate?

A  DNA test? 

A 30-point fingerprint match on all ten fingers?

--  MWT  ;)

Righteo. Time travel might satisfy such Smart Alecks, Tommy. Or have events captured on 35mm movie film; they seem to think there were reality show camera crews following some people around in the 1960s.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 02:02:17 PM
Iacoletti,

Should he have said "his brother's camera," or "the evil, evil, evil CIA's camera"?

Need a verified sales receipt, in triplicate?

A  DNA test? 

A 30-point fingerprint match on all ten fingers?

Any evidence at all would be nice, before just labeling it “Oswald’s camera”.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 03:49:33 PM
So Marina took all 6+ photos with the Imperial Reflex? Right.

Could you post "D", "E" & "F"? I want to check the "spherical aberration match".

Quote
It also smashed thru JFK's T1 vertebrae. You can call it "air" if you like.  :D

(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/x-ray_mb.gif)

Well, HSCA radiologist consultants think likewise. Air in tissue does affect opacity; air in the lungs seem to be doing a "disappearing number" on the clavicle bones. Or were parts of them shot away, too?

Quote
You're goddamned right it should have been more deformed than it was.

Tests by actual experts show otherwise. For example, there's the 1970s/80s Lattimer tests, the 2008 Discovery show "JFK: Inside the Target Car" ( Link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dMzdvYyXNA)) and the 2013 PBS show "Cold Case JFK" ( Link (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/cold-case-jfk/). These all show a Carcano bullet passing through bodies would resist deformity depending on its speed being reduced and when tumbling occurs.

You can nitpick some trivialities within those things, but a test from the critical community using an authentic weapon and ammunition, and under accurate conditions would go a lot further. Can't say I'm aware of any such tests.

Quote
Only a fool would think that CE 399 would magically show up on the wrong stretcher in pristine condition with no DNA on it. Get real.

You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher. Why would you think there would be organic material on CE 399; bullets aren't absorbent?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 29, 2019, 04:58:36 PM
Could you post "D", "E" & "F"? I want to check the "spherical aberration match".

Well, HSCA radiologist consultants think likewise. Air in tissue does affect opacity; air in the lungs seem to be doing a "disappearing number" on the clavicle bones. Or were parts of them shot away, too?

Tests by actual experts show otherwise. For example, there's the 1970s/80s Lattimer tests, the 2008 Discovery show "JFK: Inside the Target Car" ( Link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dMzdvYyXNA)) and the 2013 PBS show "Cold Case JFK" ( Link (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/cold-case-jfk/). These all show a Carcano bullet passing through bodies would resist deformity depending on its speed being reduced and when tumbling occurs.

You can nitpick some trivialities within those things, but a test from the critical community using an authentic weapon and ammunition, and under accurate conditions would go a lot further. Can't say I'm aware of any such tests.

You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher. Why would you think there would be organic material on CE 399; bullets aren't absorbent?

You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher.

I'm sure that you'll present proof that I'm wrong if I am in error...BUT.. Wasn't Connally still on the stretcher in Trauma #2 at the time the bullet was found at 1:30?

 Why would you think there would be organic material on CE 399; bullets aren't absorbent?

Actually the Magic Bullet (CE 399) had dozens of cavities in which tissue and blood would have collected if it had passed through Two men's bodies....and then fell out of a wound.   So please explain the absence of any organic material  ....
 
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 05:32:24 PM
You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher.

I'm sure that you'll present proof that I'm wrong if I am in error...BUT.. Wasn't Connally still on the stretcher in Trauma #2 at the time the bullet was found at 1:30?

In a second-floor OR, about 1 pm, the Governor was shifted from his stretcher onto an operating table. The used stretcher was then left next to the elevator.

Quote
Why would you think there would be organic material on CE 399; bullets aren't absorbent?

Actually the Magic Bullet (CE 399) had dozens of cavities in which tissue and blood would have collected if it had passed through Two men's bodies....and then fell out of a wound. 
 

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TBmXVEhfd6I/AAAAAAAAEN4/1ZBIGlpXcfs/s400/CE399.jpg)

The more intact a jacketed bullet, the less likelihood it'll retain material. There is also the cavitation cavity that pushes soft tissue away from the missile as it passes through.

Quote
So please explain the absence of any organic material  ....

Is there a report that said there was never any material on CE 399?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 06:03:14 PM
Tests by actual experts show otherwise. For example, there's the 1970s/80s Lattimer tests,

Lattimer’s field of expertise was urology.

Quote
You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher.

And there you have it. “My claim is automatically correct unless you can prove it wrong.”

Quote
Why would you think there would be organic material on CE 399; bullets aren't absorbent?

So then what’s your reason for assuming that CE 399 ever went through a human body?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 29, 2019, 06:15:26 PM
Any evidence at all would be nice, before just labeling it “Oswald’s camera”.

Iacoletti,

Must everything be pointed out to you and explained to you, over and over again and in great detail, regarding the assassination?

You know, so you can remove whatever it is from its context and attempt to cast doubt on its evidentiary value?

How many people do you figure were "in" on the assassination and the "coverup," anyway?

Couple thousand?

Millions?

Do you believe we live in an evil, evil, evil "Deep State"?

Do you disbelieve Officer Rose (or whomever) when he says he saw that camera in a box of Oswald's things, and didn't take it in as evidence because he thought it was broken, or Robert Oswald when he said Lee had left the camera with him when he relocated to the USSR?

LOL

--  MWT   :D
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 06:19:52 PM
Iacoletti,

Must everything be pointed out to you over and over again in great detail regarding the assassination?

You know, so you can remove it from its context and attempt to cast doubt on its evidentiary value?

How many people do you figure were "in" on the assassination and the "coverup," anyway?

Couple thousand?

Millions?

Do you believe we live in an evil, evil, evil "Deep State"?

LOL

--  MWT   :D

Is this your trollish way of saying that you have no evidence that it was Oswald’s camera?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 29, 2019, 06:45:18 PM
Is this your trollish way of saying that you have no evidence that it was Oswald’s camera?

Iacoletti,

What kind of evidence would suffice for you?

A dated-and-signed sales receipt in triplicate with Oswald's saliva and 30-point fingerprints on all three copies?

Exact dates and times other photos were taken with that camera by anyone?

A photo or film showing that camera (with serial number visible, of course) in the possession of Oswald (verified by mastoid scar, etc, etc, etc)?

Not nearly good enough for you, John "The Contrarian CTer" Iacoletti?

LOL

--  MWT   :D
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 07:02:37 PM
Lattimer’s field of expertise was urology.

Hung up on credentials? How about the Haags?

Quote
And there you have it. “My claim is automatically correct unless you can prove it wrong.”

I didn't say that.

Quote
So then what’s your reason for assuming that CE 399 ever went through a human body?

According to experts, the lack of blood and tissue on a bullet wouldn't by itself exclude it from having passed through a human body.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Bill Chapman on December 29, 2019, 07:06:37 PM
When a bullet exits the body, will some blood or tissue stick to it, or does the bullet exit cleanly?
https://www.quora.com/When-a-bullet-exits-the-body-will-some-blood-or-tissue-stick-to-it-or-does-the-bullet-exit-cleanly

'Jacketed bullets don’t normally change shape (deform) when traveling through soft tissue. When intact, the smooth jacket does not provide areas which can retain tissue readily. Hollow points will have many “nooks and crannies” which can easily retain tissue'.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Bill Chapman on December 29, 2019, 07:21:40 PM
Hung up on credentials? How about the Haags?

I didn't say that.

According to experts, the lack of blood and tissue on a bullet wouldn't by itself exclude it from having passed through a human body.

'I didn't say that'
> Good one
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 29, 2019, 08:10:50 PM
Iacoletti,

What kind of evidence would suffice for you?

A dated-and-signed sales receipt in triplicate with Oswald's saliva and 30-point fingerprints on all three copies?

Exact dates and times other photos were taken with that camera by anyone?

A photo or film showing that camera (with serial number visible, of course) in the possession of Oswald (verified by mastoid scar, etc, etc, etc)?

Not nearly good enough for you, John "The Contrarian CTer" Iacoletti?

LOL

--  MWT   :D

Are you absolving the evil, evil, evil DPD's role in creating the BYPs? If Marina was telling the truth about taking 1 BYP and burning another, then someone else must have taken them. Either the DPD took them (like their inexplicable re-enactments and cutouts) or one of Oswald's handlers did (Paine or de Mohrenschildt?).

The DPD are up to their eyeballs re the BYPs. They were sheep-dipping Oswald but all the photos they took with the Imperial Reflex could not resolve the commie lit headline or capture Oswald's face in focus. If one more of you amateurs tries to talk about optics and focal planes, etc. then I'm going to call you on it. Know what you are talking about before you offer up lame excuses why CE 133A looks different than the rest. So why is it so important to you LNers that ALL the photos were snapped with the IR? Why would that make Oswald a lone nut? Why couldn't Marina have taken the money shot with another camera? Is it because you want her "revised" testimony to be true that she alone took all the photos? As soon as you establish that she was lying, then all bets are off. BAAAA!

My analysis doesn't prove CE 133A was taken with another camera since I can't experiment with the IR to know for sure. The HSCA tested the IR and found the imagery distorted significantly outside of the sweet spot of the lens and concluded this may have accounted for the differences between 133 A & C. But they never did a formal study comparing the over all lens distortion between A & C. If you knew anything about photogrammetry you would know that distortion is like a photo's watermark.  Any differences cast doubt that the photos were shot with the same lens. Photogrammetry uses camera/lens parameters to calculate, identify and correct for optical distortion created by an imperfect lens. Spherical aberration is the #1 culprit for distorting images at the periphery of the lens. Cheap and wide angle lenses tend to have a smaller "sweet spot" where the distortion is minimal.

We know that Roscoe White didn't use an enlarger lens to correct for distortion because the negative for CE 133A exists, and it appears to match the print's distortion. And what about the unregistered photo of CE 133C found in the possession of White's widow? And where are all the damn negatives?  Only a diehard LNer thinks that the DPD weren't sheep-dipping Oswald to be the patsy with the BYPs.  CE 133A was the money shot, by design and Marina likely had nothing to do with it. And if that was the case then the BYPs were all part of sheep-dipping the patsy.

ps. I'm not sure what point Mytton was trying to make up thread but I'm sure it was more obfuscation.

Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 29, 2019, 08:37:14 PM
In a second-floor OR, about 1 pm, the Governor was shifted from his stretcher onto an operating table. The used stretcher was then left next to the elevator.

If you say so.

Quote
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TBmXVEhfd6I/AAAAAAAAEN4/1ZBIGlpXcfs/s400/CE399.jpg)

The more intact a jacketed bullet, the less likelihood it'll retain material. There is also the cavitation cavity that pushes soft tissue away from the missile as it passes through.

Is there a report that said there was never any material on CE 399?

Funny how striking bones in Connally (and JFK) caused no loss of material in CE 399, let alone minimal deformation, yet the head shot FMJ bullet EXPLODES in JFK's head.

First with a right temple blow out: (not sure how LHO managed that from the 6th floor)

(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/JFK_temple_blowout2.jpg)

Then it nearly blew the top of his head off as it disintegrated into the ether: (then someone stole JFK's brain and any remnants of the FMJ bullet that killed him)

(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/323.png)

Same type of FMJ bullet producing 2 wildly different results doesn't make any sense to me. Or was it the "Jet Effect"?  :D
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 09:06:59 PM
If you say so.

Funny how striking bones in Connally (and JFK) caused no loss of material in CE 399, let alone minimal deformation, yet the head shot FMJ bullet EXPLODES in JFK's head.

First with a right temple blow out: (not sure how LHO managed that from the 6th floor)

(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/JFK_temple_blowout2.jpg)

(http://assassinationofjfk.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/A-Review-of-the-JFK-Cranial-x-Rays-and-Photographs-33.png)

Appears Kennedy's right temple was beginning to "blow out" around 1960. :D

Quote
Then it nearly blew the top of his head off as it disintegrated into the ether: (then someone stole JFK's brain and any remnants of the FMJ bullet that killed him)

(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/323.png)

Same type of FMJ bullet producing 2 wildly different results doesn't make any sense to me. Or was it the "Jet Effect"?  :D

Did the SBT-bullet strike a skull somewhere between Kennedy and Connally?

The Haags address why the bullet disintegrated for the skull impact in the 2013 NOVA show ( Link (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/cold-case-jfk/) ). Again, if you CTs have ballistic-experts on the level of the Haggs and who have used an actual Carcano M91/38 with genuine 6.5 mm ammunition and replicated the 1963 conditions as well as possible, please share.

Otherwise it's just "talking points". And you know what that's worth when they are Republican "talking points" because I've seen your posts on the "Trump supporters" board. Why you can't see you're being swindled by the JFK CTs I don't know. Maybe someday you'll see the light. By then, MAGA hats will be seen as the modern equivalent of the Klan hood.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 29, 2019, 09:34:56 PM
Are you absolving the evil, evil, evil DPD's role in creating the BYPs?  If Marina was telling the truth about taking 1 BYP and burning another, then someone else must have taken them. Either the DPD took them (like their inexplicable re-enactments and cutouts) or one of Oswald's handlers did (Paine or DeMohrenschildt?).

The DPD are up to their eyeballs re the BYPs. They were sheep-dipping Oswald but all the photos they took with the Imperial Reflex could not resolve the commie lit headline or capture Oswald's face in focus. If one more of you amateurs tries to talk about optics and focal planes, etc. then I'm going to call you on it. Know what you are talking about before you offer up lame excuses why CE 133A looks different than the rest. So why is it so important to you LNers that ALL the photos were snapped with the IR? Why would that make Oswald a lone nut? Why couldn't Marina have taken the money shot with another camera? Is it because you want her "revised" testimony to be true that she alone took all the photos? As soon as you establish that she was lying, then all bets are off. BAAAA!

My analysis doesn't prove CE 133A was taken with another camera since I can't experiment with the IR to know for sure. The HSCA tested the IR and found the imagery distorted significantly outside of the sweet spot of the lens and concluded this may have accounted for the differences between 133 A & C. But they never did a formal study comparing the over all lens distortion between A & C. If you knew anything about photogrammetry you would know that distortion is like a photo's watermark.  Any differences cast doubt that the photos were shot with the same lens. Photogrammetry uses camera/lens parameters to calculate, identify and correct for optical distortion created by an imperfect lens. Spherical aberration is the #1 culprit for distorting images at the periphery of the lens. Cheap and wide angle lenses tend to have a smaller "sweet spot" where the distortion is minimal.

We know that Roscoe White didn't use an enlarger lens to correct for distortion because the negative for CE 133A exists, and it appears to match the print's distortion. And what about the unregistered photo of CE 133C found in the possession of White's widow? And where are all the damn negatives?  Only a diehard LNer thinks that the DPD weren't sheep-dipping Oswald to be the patsy with the BYPs.  CE 133A was the money shot, by design and Marina likely had nothing to do with it. And if that was the case then the BYPs were all part of sheep-dipping the patsy.

ps. I'm not sure what point Mytton was trying to make up thread but I'm sure it was more obfuscation.

Jack,

Why would any rational person expect probable KGB agent Marina Nikolayevna (What? She knew her father's name, after all??) Prusakova to tell the truth about anything?

George DeMohrenschildt?  You mean the guy whom the FBI had investigated years earlier on suspicion of being a Communist agent, and whom CIA Counterintelligence Staff analyst Clare Edward Petty believed was a long-term KGB "illegal," based on his close reading of some WW II VENONA decrypts?

That George DeMohrenschildt?

LOL

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 10:37:55 PM
What kind of evidence would suffice for you?

Well, since you have provided NONE AT ALL, it doesn’t much matter, does it?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 10:52:28 PM
Hung up on credentials? How about the Haags?

How about them?

I’m hung up? You’re the one who invoked “expertise” (which you apparently define as agreeing with what you want to believe) as a rhetorical device.

Quote
I didn't say that.

Not those words, but you actually used “ You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher” to try to argue that it was found on Connally’s stretcher.

Quote
According to experts, the lack of blood and tissue on a bullet wouldn't by itself exclude it from having passed through a human body.

But what is your evidence (any evidence) that CE 399 went through anybody, much less both Kennedy and Connally?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 29, 2019, 10:57:22 PM
We know that Roscoe White didn't use an enlarger lens to correct for distortion because the negative for CE 133A exists, and it appears to match the print's distortion.

It doesn’t exist anymore (if it ever did). The HSCA couldn’t find it.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 29, 2019, 11:30:40 PM
How about them?

You respect their work for NOVA, then.

Quote
I’m hung up?

Well I had no problem with Dr. Lattimer and I don't see how his medical specialty was some drawback to his hands-on ballistic research, much of it presented in an excellent book called "Lincoln and Kennedy."

Quote
You’re the one who invoked “expertise” (which you apparently define as agreeing with what you want to believe) as a rhetorical device.

I don't define it that way. And I've asked CTs repeatedly on this board to provide comparable experts.

Quote
Not those words, but you actually used “ You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher” to try to argue that it was found on Connally’s stretcher.

No I didn't. And it was a reasonable response to a statement that the bullet wasn't found on Connally's stretcher, as if it was a settled matter. Why don't you ask Mr. Trojan for substantiation or provide some yourself? Rather than pretend you're some "neutral" observer which somehow makes you "smarter" and more insightful than those who decide to make a decision on the evidence.

Quote
But what is your evidence (any evidence) that CE 399 went through anybody, much less both Kennedy and Connally?

As far as I'm concerned, the bullet was found on Connally's stretcher. The Italians hadn't landed in Dallas that day, so what else would account for a Carcano bullet being there other than it had been fired at the limousine during the shooting?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 30, 2019, 04:35:30 AM
I don't define it that way. And I've asked CTs repeatedly on this board to provide comparable experts.

There isn’t an expert in the world who can tell you what bullets hit who and when.

Quote
No I didn't. And it was a reasonable response to a statement that the bullet wasn't found on Connally's stretcher, as if it was a settled matter.

The guy who found it said that it was the other stretcher. Your only argument is that it’s not impossible that he was wrong.

Quote
As far as I'm concerned, the bullet was found on Connally's stretcher. The Italians hadn't landed in Dallas that day, so what else would account for a Carcano bullet being there other than it had been fired at the limousine during the shooting?

Lots of things could account for it. That doesn’t mean that it’s rational to just arbitrarily pick one. It can’t even be proven that CE 399 was the bullet that Tomlinson found.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 30, 2019, 02:55:13 PM
There isn’t an expert in the world who can tell you what bullets hit who and when.

Not what Lattimer, "Target Car" and the Haags claimed to be doing anyway. They were duplicating a Carcano bullet passing though replicas of humans to see if slowing and tumbling of the bullet would result in a condition similar to CE 399. That's what rational people do in a criminal case with a mystery; they assume nothing until they've conducted experiments and tests.

Quote
The guy who found it said that it was the other stretcher. Your only argument is that it’s not impossible that he was wrong.

Can you prove he wasn't wrong in that regard?

Quote
Lots of things could account for it. That doesn’t mean that it’s rational to just arbitrarily pick one.

Feel free to present an alternative scenario that's more rational.

Quote
It can’t even be proven that CE 399 was the bullet that Tomlinson found.

Many things in a crime case can't be proven conclusively or to an absolute. There's no time travel yet, and most events weren't captured on film. Human memory is fallible.

Reasonable people use common sense to assess the totality of the evidence.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Freeman on December 30, 2019, 04:16:09 PM
The case was solved on 11/22/63. 

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/9/22/1411366216880/fe54ecfe-24aa-4ec4-8519-4e4383f16b8b-1024x768.jpeg?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=a93bf65c3ddf3656fa121f9353eff4a2)<<< Oswald's rifle rwaaaak

Quote
Rudolph spent five years on the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list until he was caught in 2003. 
So...it took the FBI 5 yrs to catch Rudolph but then it only took the Keystone Cops 80 minutes to grab Oswald [40 yrs earlier]:-\
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 30, 2019, 05:14:03 PM
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/9/22/1411366216880/fe54ecfe-24aa-4ec4-8519-4e4383f16b8b-1024x768.jpeg?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=a93bf65c3ddf3656fa121f9353eff4a2)<<< Oswald's rifle rwaaaak
So...it took the FBI 5 yrs to catch Rudolph but then it only took the Keystone Cops 80 minutes to grab Oswald [40 yrs earlier]:-\


So...it took the FBI 5 yrs to catch Rudolph but then it only took the Keystone Cops 80 minutes to grab Oswald [40 yrs earlier]:-\


It is amazing to me that LHO even managed to escape the TSBD immediately after the shooting. And I cannot help but believe that he was very surprised also. It appears to me that LHO didn't really expect to get away from the TSBD and didn't have much time to plan his escape anyway. The Centennial Olympic Park bomber planned everything well ahead of time. He actually had built a total of 5 bombs and planned to detonate them on consecutive nights. But decided against that plan after the first one; and detonated the other four bombs in a wooded area to the east of Atlanta. He might not have ever been caught if he had quit at that point. But his agenda was to keep going and he bombed three more locations (unrelated to the Olympics) before someone saw him running away from the last one and wrote down his tag number when he got into his vehicle. His well laid plans to hide out in the wilderness was foiled by bears (who dug up his buried food stashes) and ate them. And he consequently lost over 50-pounds surviving on bugs and acorns before getting some help from an acquaintance. In the end, a rookie cop in a small town apprehended him (not the FBI).
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 30, 2019, 07:40:15 PM
Not what Lattimer, "Target Car" and the Haags claimed to be doing anyway. They were duplicating a Carcano bullet passing though replicas of humans to see if slowing and tumbling of the bullet would result in a condition similar to CE 399. That's what rational people do in a criminal case with a mystery; they assume nothing until they've conducted experiments and tests.

Doing tests to see if something is possible doesn’t solve any mystery. And it’s not true that they are assuming nothing. They are assuming that CE 399 was actually fired at the motorcade.

Quote
Can you prove he wasn't wrong in that regard?

No, and I’m making no such claim as to the provenance of CE399, you are.

Quote
Feel free to present an alternative scenario that's more rational.

What’s rational is to say “I don’t know” when you don’t know something rather than making up a solution and assuming it’s correct until it can be proven wrong.

Quote
Many things in a crime case can't be proven conclusively or to an absolute.

I’m comfortable with a reasonable doubt standard. There isn’t an aspect of this case that doesn’t have grounds for reasonable doubt.

Quote
There's no time travel yet, and most events weren't captured on film. Human memory is fallible.

Agreed, but you don’t practice what you preach. You’re fine with human memory when it suits your conclusions.

Quote
Reasonable people use common sense to assess the totality of the evidence.

One person’s “common sense” is another person’s unsubstantiated conjecture.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 30, 2019, 07:57:45 PM

So...it took the FBI 5 yrs to catch Rudolph but then it only took the Keystone Cops 80 minutes to grab Oswald [40 yrs earlier]:-\


It is amazing to me that LHO even managed to escape the TSBD immediately after the shooting. And I cannot help but believe that he was very surprised also. It appears to me that LHO didn't really expect to get away from the TSBD and didn't have much time to plan his escape anyway. The Centennial Olympic Park bomber planned everything well ahead of time. He actually had built a total of 5 bombs and planned to detonate them on consecutive nights. But decided against that plan after the first one; and detonated the other four bombs in a wooded area to the east of Atlanta. He might not have ever been caught if he had quit at that point. But his agenda was to keep going and he bombed three more locations (unrelated to the Olympics) before someone saw him running away from the last one and wrote down his tag number when he got into his vehicle. His well laid plans to hide out in the wilderness was foiled by bears (who dug up his buried food stashes) and ate them. And he consequently lost over 50-pounds surviving on bugs and acorns before getting some help from an acquaintance. In the end, a rookie cop in a small town apprehended him (not the FBI).

he consequently lost over 50-pounds

Wow!...  He could have become wealthy ...   There are so many obese women who would have paid him dearly to learn how they could lose 50 pounds.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Charles Collins on December 30, 2019, 08:50:28 PM
he consequently lost over 50-pounds

Wow!...  He could have become wealthy ...   There are so many obese women who would have paid him dearly to learn how they could lose 50 pounds.

He is still alive and imprisoned without the possibility of ever getting out in his lifetime. Maybe you could contact him and offer to be his business agent in this brilliant idea of yours.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 30, 2019, 09:44:24 PM
He is still alive and imprisoned without the possibility of ever getting out in his lifetime. Maybe you could contact him and offer to be his business agent in this brilliant idea of yours.

Go eat a bug......
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jack Trojan on December 30, 2019, 10:38:24 PM
Not what Lattimer, "Target Car" and the Haags claimed to be doing anyway. They were duplicating a Carcano bullet passing though replicas of humans to see if slowing and tumbling of the bullet would result in a condition similar to CE 399. That's what rational people do in a criminal case with a mystery; they assume nothing until they've conducted experiments and tests.

Can you prove he wasn't wrong in that regard?

Feel free to present an alternative scenario that's more rational.

Many things in a crime case can't be proven conclusively or to an absolute. There's no time travel yet, and most events weren't captured on film. Human memory is fallible.

Reasonable people use common sense to assess the totality of the evidence.

Still waiting for you to address why the magic bullet caused so much damage and turned out pristine and the head shot bullet exploded and disintegrated in JFK's head. Weren't they both full metal jacketed bullets that don't typically explode? This should be good.  ;D
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Bill Chapman on December 30, 2019, 11:29:11 PM
Still waiting for you to address why the magic bullet caused so much damage and turned out pristine and the head shot bullet exploded and disintegrated in JFK's head. Weren't they both full metal jacketed bullets that don't typically explode? This should be good.  ;D

... 'that don't typically explode'
>>> when passing through soft flesh. There. I finished that sentence off for you.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 30, 2019, 11:32:17 PM
Still waiting for you to address why the magic bullet caused so much damage and turned out pristine and the head shot bullet exploded and disintegrated in JFK's head. Weren't they both full metal jacketed bullets that don't typically explode? This should be good.  ;D

    "Haag also found through testing – as did John K. Lattimer and
     military wound ballistician Larry M. Sturdivan – that the WCC
     Carcano bullet had the ability to “totally change character” and
     behave more like a soft-point hunting bullet, yawing and deflecting,
     when its nose-area was breeched by striking thick skull bone.
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
          -- Dale K. Myers, reviewing "The Unique and Misunderstood
              Wound Ballistics in the John F. Kennedy Assassination"
              by Lucien C. Haag, The American Journal of Forensic
              Medicine and Pathology
, December 2019

Haag appeared in the 2013 NOVA show. Lattimer and Sturdivan have published ballistics research on Carcano bullets in books and peer-reviewed articles.

I am still waiting for you to provide comparable ballistics tests that counter the findings of Lattimer, Sturdivan and the Haags.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 31, 2019, 01:00:10 AM
Still waiting for you to address why the magic bullet caused so much damage and turned out pristine and the head shot bullet exploded and disintegrated in JFK's head. Weren't they both full metal jacketed bullets that don't typically explode? This should be good.  ;D

I doubt that the bullet that exploded JFK's skull was a FMJ.   I'd bet that the bullet was mercury encased in dry ice..... Because they found no trace of the bullet in the brain cavity.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 04:17:52 AM
I doubt that the bullet that exploded JFK's skull was a FMJ.   I'd bet that the bullet was mercury encased in dry ice..... Because they found no trace of the bullet in the brain cavity.

Then why did metal particles show up in the Xrays?

Did the evil, evil, evil CIA or FBI put them there?

In the film, I mean?

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 04:29:28 AM
Still waiting for you to address why the magic bullet caused so much damage and turned out pristine and the head shot bullet exploded and disintegrated in JFK's head. Weren't they both full metal jacketed bullets that don't typically explode? This should be good.  ;D

Jack,

I'm surprised that you're glibly asserting that the so-called Magic Bullet was "pristine" when everyone knows that it wasn't.

As to how that rounded-point bullet could have done so much damage, watch PBS Nova's "Cold Case JFK".  You can watch all of the separate episodes on YouTube.

It shows the same kind of very-stable-in-flight bullet being fired from the same kind of rifle and penetrating three feet of pine wood. The fact that that kind of bullet has a strong tendency to "yaw" upward and start tumbling upon exiting something helps to explain how it injured Connally the way that it did and yet lose only a little of its mass, squeezed out of its slightly flattened base during a glancing (but devestating) blow to his wrist.

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 31, 2019, 04:48:10 AM
As to how that rounded-point bullet could have done so much damage, watch PBS Nova's "Cold Case JFK".  You can watch all of the separate episodes on YouTube.

As is usually the case with such things, they start with the assumption that CE399 hit both Kennedy and Connally and then set about to fashion a scenario in which that could be possible (if you make the right set of assumptions that will make it work).
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 05:01:18 AM
As is usually the case with such things, they start with the assumption that CE399 hit both Kennedy and Connally and then set about to fashion a scenario in which that could be possible (if you make the right set of assumptions that will make it work).

Iacoletti,

How many people do you figure were "in" on the assassination and the cover up?

Couple hundred?

Thousands?

After all, we DO live in an evil, evil, evil FBI and CIA-controled "Deep State," don't we?

LOL

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 31, 2019, 02:08:36 PM
Graves,

How many people helped you beat your wife?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 31, 2019, 03:03:32 PM
Then why did metal particles show up in the Xrays?

Did the evil, evil, evil CIA or FBI put them there?

In the film, I mean?

--  MWT  ;)

DUH...Mercury IS a metal.....
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 31, 2019, 03:11:57 PM
Jack,

I'm surprised that you're glibly asserting that the so-called Magic Bullet was "pristine" when everyone knows that it wasn't.

As to how that rounded-point bullet could have done so much damage, watch PBS Nova's "Cold Case JFK".  You can watch all of the separate episodes on YouTube.

It shows the same kind of very-stable-in-flight bullet being fired from the same kind of rifle and penetrating three feet of pine wood. The fact that that kind of bullet has a strong tendency to "yaw" upward and start tumbling upon exiting something helps to explain how it injured Connally the way that it did and yet lose only a little of its mass, squeezed out of its slightly flattened base during a glancing (but devestating) blow to his wrist.



--  MWT  ;)

squeezed out of its slightly flattened base  

HUH??   Take a 1/4 inch diameter piece of lead ( like a fishing weight ) and try to squeeze it through a smaller diameter hole...   Lead doesn't flow like toothpaste from a tube....
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on December 31, 2019, 03:21:12 PM
DUH...Mercury IS a metal.....

Wouldn't the pathologists have noticed mercury moving in the brain, pooling in the skull and dripping?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 31, 2019, 04:11:56 PM
Wouldn't the pathologists have noticed mercury moving in the brain, pooling in the skull and dripping?

That's very difficult to determine..... minute particles of mercury like those that show up in an ex-ray would probably have remained where they came to rest.

Probably the majority of the mass blew right out of the huge opening in the back of JFK's skull.    Do you recall that Clint Hill said that he heard an unusual noise about the time he reached the back of the Lincoln?  Hill described the noise a like that of a 45 caliber bullet hitting a concrete wall.  ( Probably something that he had heard and could relate the sound to. )   I would imagine a mercury bullet would make an unusual impact sound.   
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 04:18:39 PM
squeezed out of its slightly flattened base  

HUH??   Take a 1/4 inch diameter piece of lead ( like a fishing weight ) and try to squeeze it through a smaller diameter hole...   Lead doesn't flow like toothpaste from a tube....

Walter,

You do realize, don't you, that the bullet had lost 2 to 3 grains of lead?

How do you think that lead got out of the bullet?

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 31, 2019, 04:31:25 PM
Walter,

You do realize, don't you, that the bullet had lost a small amount of mass?

How do you think that mass got out of the bullet?

--  MWT  ;)

How do you know how much mass the bullet lost?....   Did you weigh and measure it before it was fired?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 04:46:03 PM
How do you know how much mass the bullet lost?....   Did you weigh and measure it before it was fired?

Walter,

Me?  No, I was probably busy helping the evil, evil, evil CIA and FBI do something else that day.

Regardless, you do know that same-caliber ammunition from any single manufacturer weighs almost exactly the same from bullet to bullet, don't you?

Are you aware that the bullet was flattened somewhat on one side near the base, and that the lead was pooched out a bit at the end?

Are you uncomfortable with the statement that, depending on its weight when it was fired, the bullet had lost between 2 and 3 grains of mass?

If so, why?

Are you just being uber-contrarian, like John "You Have No Proof!" Iacoletti?

Pity that.

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 31, 2019, 04:56:33 PM
Regardless, you do know that same-caliber ammunition from any single manufacturer weighs almost exactly the same from bullet to bullet, don't you?

You mean like within 2 or 3 grains of each other?

Quote
Are you just being uber-contrarian, like John "You Have No Proof!" Iacoletti?

“Tommy said so” should be good enough for anybody.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 31, 2019, 05:17:26 PM
Walter,

Me?  No, I was probably busy helping the evil, evil, evil CIA and FBI do something else that day.

Regardless, you do know that same-caliber ammunition from any single manufacturer weighs almost exactly the same from bullet to bullet, don't you?

Are you aware that the bullet was flattened somewhat on one side near the base, and that the lead was pooched out a bit at the end?

Are you uncomfortable with the statement that, depending on its weight when it was fired, the bullet had lost between 2 and 3 grains of mass?

If so, why?

Are you just being uber-contrarian, like John "You Have No Proof!" Iacoletti?

Pity that.

--  MWT  ;)

you do know that same-caliber ammunition from any single manufacturer weighs almost exactly the same from bullet to bullet, don't you?


Yes, Manufacturing specifications.... Which allows for the bullet to weigh a couple of grains more or less than the specification of 160 grains....

So, how do you know the weight of the bullet before it was fired?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 05:23:44 PM
You mean like within 2 or 3 grains of each other?

Yes!  That must be it!  And the very stable bullet that, before it was deviously switched for CE 399, had entered Kennedy's upper back at about 2100 feet per second, damaged his rib, exited his throat, entered Connally's back, exited his chest, broke his wrist, and ended up shallowly embedded in his thigh MUST have lost oodles and gobs of lead and been mutilated like a Mo-Fo, right, "Mr. Prove It"?

LOL

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 05:31:51 PM
you do know that same-caliber ammunition from any single manufacturer weighs almost exactly the same from bullet to bullet, don't you?


Yes, Manufacturing specifications.... Which allows for the bullet to weigh a couple of grains more or less than the specification of 160 grains....

So, how do you know the weight of the bullet before it was fired?

Walter,

How do you know it didn't lose at least 2 grains of mass?

Because Marine Marksman Oswald was using a "crummy" high-powered rifle, and ... and ... and ... occasionally got "Maggie's Drawers" at 500 yards, and ... and ... and ... "WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE EVIL, EVIL, EVIL, CIA HAD 23 SHOOTERS IN DEALEY PLAZA / THE TSBD THAT DAY!" ?

LOL

Do you really believe CE 399 is "pristine"?

Why would the evil bastards plant a pristine bullet on Connally's stretcher?

D'oh!

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Bill Chapman on December 31, 2019, 06:11:44 PM
CT Pulp Fiction Central starts with the assumption that CE399 couldn't have possibly traversed both victims, and then sets about to construct a scenario in which other elements were needed... complete with no-name shooters and no-name conspirators.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 06:24:50 PM
CT Pulp Fiction Central starts with the assumption that CE399 couldn't have possibly traversed both victims, and then sets about to construct a scenario in which other elements were needed; complete with no-name shooters and no-name conspirators.

Bill,

And what's really amazing is that the shot from behind the picket fence didn't take out Jackie, too!

LOL

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 31, 2019, 07:35:37 PM
Walter,

How do you know it didn't lose at least 2 grains of mass?

Because Marine Marksman Oswald was using a "crummy" high-powered rifle, and ... and ... and ... occasionally got "Maggie's Drawers" at 500 yards, and ... and ... and ... "WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE EVIL, EVIL, EVIL, CIA HAD 23 SHOOTERS IN DEALEY PLAZA / THE TSBD THAT DAY!" ?

LOL

Do you really believe CE 399 is "pristine"?

Why would the evil bastards plant a pristine bullet on Connally's stretcher?

D'oh!

--  MWT  ;)

How do you know it didn't lose at least 2 grains of mass?

No , no, no,...Tommy...You are the one who said the bullet lost mass....  Now it's up to you to put up, or shut up .

Why would the evil bastards plant a pristine bullet on Connally's stretcher?

This calls for speculation...so I'd guess that the evil bastards arrogantly thought since J. Edna Hoover and LBJ had  their back they didn't have to sweat the fine details.     And in fact their sloppiness shows through in many places.   
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 31, 2019, 08:23:18 PM
Yes!  That must be it!  And the very stable bullet that, before it was deviously switched for CE 399, had entered Kennedy's upper back at about 2100 feet per second, damaged his rib, exited his throat, entered Connally's back, exited his chest, broke his wrist, and ended up shallowly embedded in his thigh MUST have lost oodles and gobs of lead and been mutilated like a Mo-Fo, right, "Mr. Prove It"?

Cool story, bro. Too bad you can’t prove that it’s actually true.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 31, 2019, 08:27:11 PM
Walter,

How do you know it didn't lose at least 2 grains of mass?

Predictable.

So now we’re back to Walt’s original question. How do you know that CE 399 “lost 2 to 3 grains of lead”?

Or did you just make it up?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on December 31, 2019, 08:29:58 PM
CT Pulp Fiction Central starts with the assumption that CE399 couldn't have possibly traversed both victims,

I don’t know who that is.

But “possible in some contrived scenario” does not equal “that’s what happened”.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Bill Chapman on December 31, 2019, 09:49:19 PM
I don’t know who that is.

But “possible in some contrived scenario” does not equal “that’s what happened”.

OMG
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on December 31, 2019, 10:46:52 PM
Predictable.

So now we’re back to Walt’s original question. How do you know that CE 399 “lost 2 to 3 grains of lead”?

Or did you just make it up?

Iacoletti,

Do you believe the bad guys would have planted a nearly pristine bullet in the hospital, and try to make us believe it had done all that damage to JFK, or, if you prefer, to just JFK or to just Connally?

Wouldn't it have made more sense for them (gasp ... Jack Ruby?) to put a damaged, lighter-than-original bullet there?

Do you believe CE 399 is nearly pristine?  Do you believe it didn't lose any lead?

LOL

--  MWT ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Alan Hardaker on January 01, 2020, 01:50:51 AM
CE399 was not in pristine condition. It was compressed and misshapen. And experiments carried out replicated the damege CE399 did. Showed clearly that one bullet could take the path that CE399 took. Also the MC was of being a sufficiently capable rifle to achieve the required accuracy. And Oswald was a good enough shot to carry out the shootings.

Timing wise he had 5.4 seconds from the throat shot to the head shot. So that particular time slot for those two shots starts with the throat shot..then Oswald has 5.4 seconds to reload, take careful aim and make a direct hit to JFK's head. Frame 313 clearly shows the bullet exploding out the front of JFK's head.

Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Freeman on January 01, 2020, 03:17:42 AM
CE399 was not in pristine condition. It was compressed and misshapen.
If you fired the same bullet...with the same gun... into the air...and it fell to earth...into a soft marsh... it would most likely look very much like CE 399.
Quote
And Oswald was a good enough shot to carry out the shootings.
How could you possibly know that? There was a church shooting here in Texas this past weekend that completely put down the crack shot idea [leaving a former lawman dead]
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on January 01, 2020, 03:48:11 AM
If you fired the same bullet...with the same gun... into the air...and it fell to earth...into a soft marsh... it would most likely look very much like CE 399.

(sigh) ... Jerry, Jerry, Jerry.

Fact-checked, or did you just make that up?

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Jerry Organ on January 01, 2020, 03:52:16 AM
If you fired the same bullet...with the same gun... into the air...and it fell to earth...into a soft marsh... it would most likely look very much like CE 399.

Your bullet would be 100% pristine. It would be difficult to squeeze a Carcano bullet in a vise to make it look like CE 399.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 05:13:13 AM
OMG

 :'(
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 05:15:44 AM
Iacoletti,

Do you believe the bad guys would have planted a nearly pristine bullet in the hospital, and try to make us believe it had done all that damage to JFK, or, if you prefer, to just JFK or to just Connally?

Wouldn't it have made more sense for them (gasp ... Jack Ruby?) to put a damaged, lighter-than-original bullet there?

Do you believe CE 399 is nearly pristine?  Do you believe it didn't lose any lead?

LOL

--  MWT ;)

Does your Graves Gallop of inane leading questions ever work for you?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 05:19:44 AM
Timing wise he had 5.4 seconds from the throat shot to the head shot. So that particular time slot for those two shots starts with the throat shot..

That would imply that you know exactly when the throat shot was fired.

Quote
then Oswald has 5.4 seconds to reload, take careful aim and make a direct hit to JFK's head.

That would imply that you know Oswald fired a rifle.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 01, 2020, 05:26:51 AM
:'(

WOW
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 05:33:37 AM
WOW

GFY
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on January 01, 2020, 05:42:06 AM
Does your Graves Gallop of inane leading questions ever work for you?

Iacoletti,

Since you can't answer them, what does it matter if they're "leading" or not?

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 01, 2020, 05:50:51 AM
GFY

OMG
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on January 01, 2020, 06:06:58 AM
OMG

Gasp ... "GFY" = "Go WHAT yourself," Iacoletti?

--  MWT   ???
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 06:43:10 AM
Iacoletti,

Since you can't answer them, what does it matter if they're "leading" or not?

You still haven’t answered the question of when you stopped beating your wife.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 06:45:11 AM
Good For You, Graves
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on January 01, 2020, 08:24:57 AM
You still haven’t answered the question of when you stopped beating your wife.

Iacoletti,

No, she beats me on a fairly regular basis with that goddamn Sicillian opening.

--  MWT  ;)

PS  You still the high priest of Ritualistic Onanism in your neck of the woods?

Visual acuity still deteriorating?

All you can see are blobs?

Go to the barber twice a week to have 'em shave those hairy palms?

--  MWT  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 02:20:35 PM
...and another round of inane irrelevant questions.

Here’s a question for you: are you ever going to get a life?
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Alan Hardaker on January 01, 2020, 07:57:56 PM
That would imply that you know exactly when the throat shot was fired.

That would imply that you know Oswald fired a rifle.

Regarding the throat shot, it's well known that that shot was between frame 210-240 and the head shot was at frame 313. My opinon is that Connally is reacting in frame 222 of the Zabruder film. However I think, as others do that JFK was hit in frame 215 and the head shot was at frame 313. The 8mm camera used by Zabruder takes 18 frames per sec, so the time between the throat shot and the head shot is 5.4 seconds. Obviously could be a few tenths of a second each way. But in any case that gives the shooter at least 5 seconds to fire the head shot. You obviously know this so the only issue is who was the shooter. I think it was Oswald and that he acted alone.
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: Thomas Graves on January 01, 2020, 08:12:59 PM
Regarding the throat shot, it's well known that that shot was between frame 210-240 and the head shot was at frame 313. My opinon is that Connally is reacting in frame 222 of the Zabruder film. However I think, as others do that JFK was hit in frame 215 and the head shot was at frame 313. The 8mm camera used by Zabruder takes 18 frames per sec, so the time between the throat shot and the head shot is 5.4 seconds. Obviously could be a few tenths of a second each way. But in any case that gives the shooter at least 5 seconds to fire the head shot. You obviously know this so the only issue is who was the shooter. I think it was Oswald and that he acted alone.

Alan,

Devil's Advocate: The FBI determined that Zapruder's camera filmed at a rate of 18.3 feet-per-second.

--  Mudd Wrassler Tommy  ;)
Title: Re: A Guilty Man
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 01, 2020, 10:37:31 PM
Regarding the throat shot, it's well known that that shot was between frame 210-240 and the head shot was at frame 313.

I’m not sure what makes that “well known”. It all subjective interpretation of the movements in the Z film.

Quote
But in any case that gives the shooter at least 5 seconds to fire the head shot.

Only if you assume the head shot came from the same shooter.