A bit circular.  I thought you were arguing that the bullet was yawing because of what the doctors saw, not what they may have gathered from talking to others.   In any event, the concept that the torso was "nearly parallel with the flight of the bullet" must be based on the direction of the bullet not its orientation when it entered.

Dear Fancy Pants Rants (FPR),

The thesis of Epstein's 1978 book, Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald, is that Marine U-2 radar operator Oswald may have been recruited by the KGB or the GRU in Japan in 1957 or 1958, and that KGB Major I mean Lt. Col. I mean Captain Yuri Nosenko was sent to the U.S. in February 1964 to obscure Oswald’s Soviet intelligence links -- links which J. Edgar Hoover, in the interest of self-preservation, smothered institutionally.
-snip-
......
PS The "mole" that Nosenko was protecting in June 1962 was probably James Angleton's confidant, mentor, and mole-hunting superior, Bruce Leonard Solie.

It sure would be nice if our resident (or should I say rezident?) genealogist and Wayback Machine social-pages-reader, Tom "A Beautiful Mind" Scully, would look into Solie and tell us about the man with the Russian-sounding name that was living with the Solies on their dairy farm when Bruce was an impressionable lad.

https://aarclibrary.org/2018/01/27/the-jfk-case-the-twelve-who-built-the-oswald-legend-part-12-the-endgame/
By Bill Simpich [Originally published 12/31/2014]

....THE PAINES’ FAMILY AND FRIENDS WERE PROMINENT INTELLIGENCE FIGURES
Based on information from the CIA’s molehunting unit CI/SIG, the FBI wrote a telling report on William Hyde: “On December 4, 1963, CIA made available information to the Bureau Liaison that in 1957 CIA considered using this individual to operate a cooperative educational center in Vietnam but he was not used by the CIA. Investigation by CIA at that time concerning William Avery Hyde was favorable.”

Ruth Paine commented: “The information about the CIA considering my father for Vietnam was a surprise. I doubt if he would have accepted such an invitation, if it was offered. He certainly didn’t go. He went to Peru. He was working with the Agency for International Development. He helped to develop rural credit unions for the compasinos so that they could save enough money to make loans to themselves, instead of always paying the huge bank rates. He loved it. I know that USAID asked my father to appraise a situation in Georgetown, Guiana. He recommended against starting a project there, as he thought the local officials corrupt.”

Bill Hyde was also a strong anti-communist. Dr. Richard Jenkins of the Psychiatric Evaluation Board in Washington DC went to Stanford with the Hydes, and said that “Bill Hyde had been active in the cooperative movement and therefore was aware of the attempts of the Communists to infililtrate the cooperative movement.”

Like Hyde, the Hoke family was also involved in looking for communists. There is a 1955 memo to the CIA’s Office of Security, discussing how William Avery Hyde was back in his hometown of Palo Alto visiting the Hokes.

Quote

Brought into the circle was Dr. Jenkins and also Taylor Bielefeldt,

Bielefeldt was the CIA chief of the USSR Division of the Foreign Documents Division, who had spent a lot of time with Ruth’s parents William and Carol Hyde in the 1920s and 1930s. Bielefeldt’s division worked with the Joint Publications Research Service, a CIA unit that monitored public documents to study scientific and technical developments in the Soviet bloc.

Several people close to Oswald were also active in the Joint Publications Research Service. These people include legend maker #3 Priscilla Johnson, the NANA reporter in Moscow who befriended the Oswald family; legend maker #4 Richard Snyder, the American consul in Moscow; and the allegedly unwitting Spas Raikin, who greeted the Oswald family when they arrived in New York City from the USSR in 1962.

The 1955 memo mentions that Hoke, Bielefeldt and the aforementioned Dr. Richard Jenkins were all Stanford graduates. Hoke has been described as “a very brilliant person who is not very stable but who is very creative.”

The focus of the 1955 meeting was about Paul and Violet Orr. Both were Communist Party members in the San Francisco Bay Area. Paul had just been harshly interrogated by HUAC earlier that year. Violet had worked in the 1930s in the CP-friendly American League Against War and Fascism, just as Harvey’s informant Elizabeth Bentley had done. In more recent years, Violet had been part of the visible Communist Party leadership.

Two days after the memo, a wiretap revealed that former CP member Dorothy Wilson allegedly claimed that Ruth Paine’s mother Carol Hyde – the aforementioned Unitarian minister – admitted to being a communist. Another neighbor later reported hearing this rumor.

Ruth’s sister Sylvia admitted a year later that Dorothy Wilson worked at the publishing company run by her mother-in-law Helen Hoke Watts, and that Wilson had edited a book jointly written by her husband John Hoke and Mrs. Watts. Sylvia denied that her mother Carol Hyde was a communist, saying that her mother was suffering from a mental disorder.

At the time, Sylvia was supposedly working as a personnel research technician for the Air Force. However, a February 1957 memo revealed that Sylvia had been working in a semi-secret position for Naval Intelligence, and had lost her shot at a top secret position because of the Dorothy Wilson-Helen Hoke Watts relationship.

Ruth Paine made a point of telling FBI agent Jim Hosty in the weeks before the assassination that Oswald was a “Trotskyite communist“. Although Oswald subscribed to both the Trotskyist newspaper and the Communist Party newspaper, he maintained that he was not a follower of either ideological persuasion.

It is reasonable to judge Ruth Paine by her family ties. Like legend maker #3 Priscilla Johnson and legend maker #9 George de Mohrenschildt, Ruth’s family may have triggered too many security disapprovals for her to be put directly on the CIA payroll as an informant. Nonetheless, she had substantial ties to men such as Frederick Merrill and Fred Osborn at the State Department, and friends in common with Allen Dulles and Cord Meyer at the CIA...

(H. Jim Rand, employer of Robert E Webster, very, very likely knew Frederick Merrill because Rand's father made Merrill's father president of Remington Rand.
See: https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,752940,00.html )

....Whether or not editor Johnny King had his story right, Michael Paine is somehow caught up in this web of deception.

The aforementioned anomalies of the Oswald story were ignored by the Warren Commission. Instead, the month of September 1964 was used to ensure that these stories and others like it were smoothed over prior to publication. The man who had ordered this review of these stories, J. Lee Rankin, had a shot at being a hero. Rankin didn’t take it.

In the years before his death, Rankin encouraged researchers in the JFK case to keep digging. Rankin asked one researcher, “Are you looking into the plots on the basis of whether they were covered up by the CIA because some of the very people involved in them could have been involved in the President’s assassination?” When told that was an area of investigation, Rankin replied, “Good. Good. You have to look at it that way.”....

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/358
....
He repeatedly expressed the view that both the FBI and CIA had concealed important material from the Commission, and that the CIA/Mafia plots would have had a "very direct bearing on the areas of conspiracy which we tried to pursue." He also asked, "Are you looking into the plots on the basis of whether they were covered up by the CIA because some of the very people involved in them could have been involved in the President's assassination?" I said that yes that was an area of our investigation, and he replied strongly, "Good. Good. You have to look at it that way." I also said that we were looking into charges that Castro might have retaliated for the plots by killing Kennedy, and he replied, "Where is any evidence of that? I think the other approach would be much more logical." This was apparently in reference to probing those involved in the plots themselves....

I think if JFK had been hit at Z190, that at least ONE of those SS agents should have seen JFK move at least a little bit and the SS agents would probably have reacted by Z207. So the Z190 1st shot theory is improbable.

Your frequent message formatting errors, grammatical errors, and punctuation errors suggest you're in no position to be deciding who is a scholar and who is not, much less to be making sweeping pronouncements about JFKA evidence and research.

As for your comment about motive, ask any prosecutor and they'll tell you that in a complex or strongly contested case, establishing motive is very important for the prosecution--both in identifying a suspect in the first place and in persuading a jury of guilt in a trial.

Ask any detective about motive, and they'll tell you that one of the main things they seek to establish is whether the suspect had a motive.  If they've identified two possible suspects and one suspect had no motive and the other suspect did have a motive, they will see the latter person as the more likely suspect, all other things being relatively equal.

I had to giggle when I read your first sentence (which you failed to punctuate correctly, but anyway. . . .):

LOL! Yeah, gee, why should they be objective?! Humm, maybe because being objective is a key principle of critical thinking? Maybe because being objective is a hallmark of credibility, education, and an open mind?

Perhaps you should change your forum name to John "I Don't Need No Stinkin' Objectivity" Corbett.

Huh, in reading the description of the book on Amazon, I find myself thinking I might just read it. It sounds like an interesting book, assuming he did in fact write it. I heard years ago that he'd written a book but never gave it a second thought.