Looking at the backyard photos, I don't see a scope on the rifle. It might be due to the camera angle but I don't think he had the scope on the rifle when those photos were taken. Whether he used the iron sights or the scope when he shot at Walker, a shot just 2.4" inches high might have made the difference between a clean shot at Walker's head and striking the sash. I think that is a far more likely explanation for the high shot than recoil. The amount of recoil that occurs before the bullet leaves the barrel is negligible and is mostly rearward, not upward. AI describes this much better than I would:

"Yes — a rifle does recoil before the bullet leaves the muzzle, and this movement can affect accuracy.

When the trigger is pulled, the expanding gases from the burning powder begin pushing the bullet down the barrel. By Newton’s Third Law of Motion, the rifle experiences an equal and opposite rearward force almost immediately

. High‑speed videos (100,000+ frames per second) have captured this: the barrel and rifle system move backward while the bullet is still traveling through the bore, even through a suppressor


The bullet’s barrel dwell time — the time it takes to travel from the chamber to the muzzle — is extremely short, often around 0.0006–0.0007 seconds for a 24‑inch barrel at ~3000 fps

. However, the rifle’s inertia means it accelerates more slowly than the bullet, but it still moves during that time. In one calculation, a rifle could move about 0.06 inches rearward during that dwell period

. This movement can cause the muzzle to point slightly off the initial aim point, especially if the rifle is not perfectly supported or if the shooter’s body shifts."

Recoil would have more effect on subsequent shots when firing rapidly but it would not explain Oswald's miss when he shot at Walker. The M-14 was a full-auto version of he M-1 Garand. They soon discovered the problem when firing it in full auto since it used the same .30-06 cartridge. Few soldiers could hold the weapon on target. They found that the first round would be on target, the second, slightly high, the third over the head of he target and by the fourth round, it was an anti-aircraft gun.

The BAR was also a fully automatic weapon that fired the .30-06 round but because it was so much heavier than the M-14, it was much easier to control the recoil.

In my pursuit of debunking the Greg Parker-originating Prayer Man theory I discovered, with Richard Gilbride, that one of the Prayer Man films was freely available at the Brooklyn Library in the 1970's...Also, Southern Methodist University film professor G William Jones managed to make a 1st generation film to film copy of Darnell that is now currently available at the 6th Floor Museum and, I am certain, would be sent by said institution to the Luna Task Force if requested...So the Prayer Man films were not tightly held in the past...The main bottleneck is the Prayer Man hijackers who have managed to channel everything through themselves and the crooked Mary Ferrell managers who work with them...

If we look at The Education Forum and JFK podcast community, they are very much trying to ignore the progress of the correct evidence on Prayer Man and are consciously using intentional censorship and persecution to avoid admitting the correct evidence...They are using banning (and false reasons for banning) to avoid allowing any discussion that practices the implied "debate" The Education Forum encourages...Any correct evidence that demands a response is met with shunning, ignoring, and silence - all achieved by the cowardly device of blocking/banning and organized group dishonesty...Although they claim to practice the highest level of academic discussion they have a mob that they turn you over to when you out-argue them on the evidence...Even when the main gate-keeper offending moderator is removed the Prayer Man gang and its proxies still maintain that censorship...

I'd change that to the first seven chapters. The first chapter doesn't even mention the issue of Ruby's Mafia ties. But, yes, chapter 1 is a good starting point to understand the original lone-gunman theory.

I would include the HSCA's extensive and historic research into Jack Ruby's Mafia ties and how Ruby entered the basement to shoot Oswald. These were two areas where the HSCA showed what a joke the WC's investigation was. 

Meagher's book has too many errors for me to recommend it to a newcomer. In some cases, she severely distorts the primary sources that she cites. She does make many valid points, but she also makes quite a few errors.

A solid choice. As a former Senate investigator, Weisberg was a very careful scholar. He was also honest. He turned on Garrison when he realized that Garrison was incompetent and unethical.

My two copies of Crossfire both have endnotes. I'm not sure which edition you have. The updated 2013 edition has endnotes, including in the Kindle version.

Most of Marrs' research on the JFK case was credible.

Oh, Thompson's updated version of Six Seconds in Dallas, his 2020 book Last Second in Dallas, is much better. It includes over 100 pages on the historic new research that was done by BBN scientists on the acoustical evidence, including the PCC test by Dr. Richard Mullen that proves the gunshot impulses on the dictabelt were recorded during the assassination. Thompson also makes very good use of the historic ARRB disclosures regarding the autopsy evidence.

It's a damn good finishing point as well.
This is where things go off the rails.
This is where the train has completely jumped the tracks.
This is where the train has gone down the embankment and is plowing through a cornfield.

Jim Marrs never met a conspiracy theory he didn't embrace. The guy was a charlatan.
Not the silliest conspiracy book ever written but one of the earliest. Even the title of the book is a faulty premise since the shooting took more than 6 seconds despite popular beliefs to the contrary.