JFK Assassination Forum

KB--

IMHO, you are correct, that JBC's wound-shape and the small round bullet-hole in his shirt suggest he was largely facing forward when shot by a non-tumbling bullet from behind. That is what the evidence shows. That is what Dr. Robert Shaw, his surgeon, thought most likely.

We know what the Connallys testified to, and Nellie had a ringside seat, and was uninjured, and was remarkably cool in a same-day press conference.

So, if the Connallys are correct, when was JBC struck?

My best guess is sometime after Z-295, but before Z-313.

Of course, many, many witnesses described the "bang....bang-bang" cadence of shots.

That cadence lines up with JFK hit ~Z-221, JBC at ~Z-295+ and JFK at Z-313.

Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.

There are also some who believe that it was the first two shots that were closer together, though not as many who recall it being the last two that were bunched together.

At Saturday night NPIC briefing board preparation, Dino Brugioni said the secret service was particularly interested in the frames near when JFK disappeared and reappeared from behind the sign. No, the film was not altered and I don’t believe NPIC had the original film which was still in Chicago and probably damaged by that time.

Iran just murdered approximately 40K of its own citizens.  I'm pretty sure most of those were Muslims.  They have no regard for human life.   A throwback to ancient barbarians.  Allowing them to obtain a nuclear weapon and hoping for the best is not an acceptable plan.

A 5 star response.

I picked this up from one of my old posts at City Data Forum. I had forgotten about it.

Stanislau Shushkevich, who became the first President of Belarus after the collapse of the USSR, had been assigned to teach Russian to Oswald at the radio factory in Minsk (where my wife's sister and brother-in-law worked at the same time).

This is a long and pretty interesting interview from 2013 by Radio Free Europe. Shushkevich and the other instructor were, for some reason, under unbelievably strict orders as to what they could discuss with Oswald. Nevertheless, it sounds like they had a fairly informal and pleasant relationship. It sounds like he found Oswald a pretty dull and uninteresting/uninterested character.

When Norman Mailer visited Belarus and asked to see the KGB files, he (as President) asked the chairman of the KGB if he needed to be careful. The answer: "Absolutely not. Show him everything."

After the JFKA, he visited the Dallas area for other reasons. He's a CTer! "It is my absolute conviction that they found a passive, calm, compliant boy, and used him as the guilty one. As for the conclusions of the Warren Commission, I don't believe them one bit. I have studied them and I don't think [the assassination] was the work of my student."

https://www.rferl.org/a/interview-transcript-oswald-shushkevich-belarus-soviet/25172632.html

With all this in mind, if we are doubtful about the times given by Markham and Bowley, shouldn't we also question the accuracy of the DPD radio time stamps?

Well, sure. The whole "time thing" seems to me like a quest for certainty that just isn't possible.

Westbrook testified that he returned directly to the police station after Oswald was arrested in the theater (he didn’t arrive in his own car). So Barret’s account of Westbrook flipping through the wallet and asking him if he knew Hidell or Oswald couldn’t have happened at 10th and Patton.

Mr. BALL. Now, what did you do after that [arrest at theater]?
Mr. WESTBROOK. I went back to the city hall and resumed my desk.

This doesn't make any sense. Westbrook was at the Tippit scene before he went to the Texas Theater. So, if Barrett was indeed asked, by Westbrook, if he knew Hidell or Oswald it would have been before the arrest and it would have to involve another wallet than the one that was taken from Oswald in the car by Bentley.

But there is more to this story!

After Bentley took Oswald's wallet, he did not mention Hidell at all, which is strange because Gerald Hill testified that he told Bentley to grab the suspect's wallet for the purpose of identification. During a television interview Bentley was asked about the content of the wallet and he basically said there were only items in it that one would expect. I believe he mentioned a driver's license and a credit car, which by itself is strange. Also, there isn't any contemporary report by any of the officers in the car with Oswald that mentions finding a Hidell ID. Only during his WC testimony did Gerald Hill, who was sitting with Bentley (who was never asked to testify) on either side of Oswald on the rear seat of the car - say something like that he vaguely remembered hearing the name Hidell.

When Bentley arrived at the police station with Oswald, he was instantly taken to the hospital because of an injury to his leg. There isn't a single person in the police station that we know of, who confirmed or could confirm what happened to the wallet that Bentley took from Oswald. And this is where it gets complicated, because soon after Oswald was brought into the station, Gus Rose arrived after having been called in. He was the first DPD officer to speak to Oswald and just before that conversation took place an unidentified officer gave Rose a wallet and said it belonged to the suspect. And guess what, in that wallet there were two ID's, one for Oswald and one for Hidell.

So what's a possible explanation for this confusion? Could it be that Westbrook, after being present at Oswald's arrest, returned to the police station and told this unidentified officer to give the wallet that was found at the Tippit scene to Detective Rose? Obviously, in this scenario, the wallet Bentley took from Oswald would have to disappear and Bentley could never testify.

I believe it is possible that this is way the wallet with the Hidell ID was introduced as evidence, but if somebody can give be a better explanation or - even better - a solid chain of custody for the Bentley wallet, I'll gladly reconsider my opinion.