Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
I thought it deflected off the window frame?

AI explanation:
"Deflection by the window frame: The bullet struck the wooden frame of the window Walker was sitting near, changing its trajectory. This is a common factor in missed shots when a projectile hits a solid object before reaching the target Kennedys and King.

Walker’s quick reaction: Witnesses say Walker lowered his head just before the shot was fired, reducing the chance of a direct hit LSU Press.

Bullet fragmentation: After hitting the frame, the bullet broke apart, scattering fragments that caused only minor cuts to Walker’s lower right arm."

If it deflected off the window frame that would be an indication his aim was high unless he trying to aim at the window frame.
22
This is a signed photo by Ernest Brandt identifying himself. I assume, even for you, this is good enough.
(or have I faked it  8))



     PAYETTE - Put your wallet back in your pocket. Dan is Not selling this signed JFK Assassination Photo.
23
I watched the interview where Jill Biden said she had never seen Joe act the way he did during the debate either before that night or since. My reaction to that was, "MY ASS!!!". She saw him almost every day. How could she have not seen what was so obvious to anybody who looked at Joe with open eyes. I have zero respect for all these people in the Democrat party and the legacy media who have fessed up after Joe left office. I will never forgive the Democrats for the fraud they perpetrated on the American people in 2020 and the legacy media for being complicit with them. Now I'm supposed to buy their books so they can tell me how they did it. Jill Biden is a lying c-word and Jake Tapper can stick his mea culpa where the sun don't shine. I will never again vote for a Democrat or trust the legacy media about anything. Credibility is like virginity. Once you lose it, there's no getting it back.

    Everybody seems to have forgotten about Biden's VP.  Kamala claimed she had lunch with "Joe" almost everyday at the White House. That the guy was "running rings around everybody". Then she sticks the knife in his back in order to try and take his job. These people routinely eat each other up as they climb the ladder.
24
Talk about "overthinking," I give you Exhibit A.  ::)
25
Common Sense tells us it is impossible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps, tell everyone there about the assassination, after which Shelley and Lovelady are pictured walking down the Elm St Ext.
100% that did not happen.
Trolls like Tom are not interested in Common Sense or what's possible in reality.
As far as he is concerned, Kamp has magically produced an image of Lovelady and no amount of evidence can change what's left of his mind.

However, it is perfectly possible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps in the allotted time, where Darnell pictured her telling Lovelady and everyone on the steps about the assassination:



    If this ain't Lovelady, " l'll eat a bug". (As Cal Worthington used to say).
    That balding/massive forehead of Lovelady is his "calling card". Plus, this balding figure is standing very close to where Lovelady was captured on Altgens 6. DPD Officer Baker is running directly toward this figure. BEHIND Officer Baker are the "2 Guys" that just exited the "getaway" car on the Couch and Darnell Films. Lovelady can Not be in 2 places at the same time. Lovelady is Not one of the "2 Guys" that we see moving away from the intended "getaway" car.
26
Whether or not it would have made sense for him to get a second PO box to receive the rifle, the fact is he didn't so that becomes a moot point. There is ample evidence he ordered the rifle from Klein's, ample evidence he received it, ample evidence he fired it at Walker, and ample evidence he used it to kill JFK.

Oswald's note to Marina indicated he thought there was a real possibility he would not be coming back after killing Walker. He gave her specific instructions as to what to do if he did not.

The curious thing is why he missed Walker at such short range. I've read the suggestion Walker might have leaned over just as Oswald fired, ala The Day of the Jackal. I think the answer might lie in the fact it was such a short shot. The Carcano's fixed sights are zeroed for 200 meters which means at that range it would shoot high if Oswald didn't make an adjustment in his aim point. The scope was adjustable but if Oswald didn't adjust it, the same problem would have occurred. It's all academic. Oswald missed and likely would never have been identified as the assailant had he not killed JFK.


Robert Oswald wrote in his book “Lee” that he thought his brother Lee had no previous experience with rifle scopes. But it seems to me that LHO would have known to zero the scope at the distance he intended to shoot at Walker. However according to FBI agent Frazier, it took the shocks of several shots for the scope reticle to settle into a stable position. If LHO didn’t realize this and relied on just one shot for his zero adjustment, then the scope’s reticle could have still been unstable. This could have resulted in it being slightly off when he shot at Walker.
27
Then why are you here?

Ah, the "why are you here?" ploy! I see this at least ten times a week on the FOX News comments, when someone dares to criticize the one-sided inanity of many FOX articles. "Then why are you here, you non-MAGA maggot?"

Putting myself under oath, an honest answer would be something like "sheer boredom" and "amusing myself as my own best audience."

However, in my own little way I feel that I am contributing to that hall of mirrors called "JFKA studies." Some of my contributions, I believe, are borderline worthwhile. Not many, but sometimes I get lucky.

Am I required to still be grieving JFK and hating Oswald in order to participate on a JFKA forum? That would be a weird Term of Service, not unlike those one finds on many Christian forums:

1. Participants are reminded that this is a JFK assassination forum. For many, this is a deeply sensitive subject and their grief remains fresh. Similarly, their hatred of Oswald remains intense and equally fresh. While fawning worship of JFK's memory and foaming-at-the-mouth hatred of Oswald is not a condition of participation, sensitivity is required and will be enforced at the discretion of the moderators. If you do not agree that JFK was the greatest American who ever lived and that Oswald is an evil monster who would have been aborted before birth if only you had a time machine, perhaps this is not the forum for you. Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are not deemed True JFKA Believers and may participate only on the Unorthodox JFKA Beliefs section of the forum.
28
Whether or not it would have made sense for him to get a second PO box to receive the rifle, the fact is he didn't so that becomes a moot point. There is ample evidence he ordered the rifle from Klein's, ample evidence he received it, ample evidence he fired it at Walker, and ample evidence he used it to kill JFK.

Oswald's note to Marina indicated he thought there was a real possibility he would not be coming back after killing Walker. He gave her specific instructions as to what to do if he did not.

The curious thing is why he missed Walker at such short range. I've read the suggestion Walker might have leaned over just as Oswald fired, ala The Day of the Jackal. I think the answer might lie in the fact it was such a short shot. The Carcano's fixed sights are zeroed for 200 meters which means at that range it would shoot high if Oswald didn't make an adjustment in his aim point. The scope was adjustable but if Oswald didn't adjust it, the same problem would have occurred. It's all academic. Oswald missed and likely would never have been identified as the assailant had he not killed JFK.

I thought it deflected off the window frame?
29
Having one trial for both murders raises the possibility of one bombshell moment derailing the prosecution of both murders, like when OJ tried on the gloves. It was a stupid stunt by the prosecution that backfired terribly but had they had a separate trial for both murders, they could have avoided that blunder in a second trial. They could have also brought in expert testimony to explain why the leather gloves might have shrunk after being soaked with blood and then dried. Of course they weren't going to try OJ in separate trials. I can't think of any other case where someone charged with multiple homicides in the same jurisdiction was tried separately for each one. Apparently neither can you.

Keep digging because that hole is just getting deeper. The OJ trial was two murders at the same time, at the same scene, with the same weapon. The evidence in each case, including the bloody gloves, was exactly the same.

Perhaps you are not aware, but the prosecution in a criminal case is subject to rather strong ethical restrictions. The bloody gloves were an important piece of evidence in BOTH murders. The prosecution could not have failed to disclose them to the defense or omitted them from the second trial; if the prosecution had not introduced them, the defense would. What you call a "stupid stunt" by the prosecution was actually requested by the judge; Marcia Clark violently opposed the "stunt," but Christopher Darden went ahead both because the judge had requested it and Darden knew the defense would do it if he didn't. In any event, your notion that the gloves could have been omitted at a second trial (e.g., for the murder of Goldman) is just non-lawyerly nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense.

In your non-lawyerly way, you have identified why there would have been two trials with Tippit and JFK. In your scenario, the bloody gloves destroyed the prosecution's case in both murders. But it also cuts the other way: The potential prejudice to Oswald would have been the jury making a connection from the Tippit murder to the JFK murder, even though the evidence and witnesses in those cases would have been entirely different: "We think he killed Tippit; ergo, he must have killed JFK" - precisely the invalid connection that Bugliosi made in the mock trial.

I am having "Sandy Larsen flashbacks." Attempting to engage in a lawyerly discussion with a Perry Mason fan who thinks 20 episodes have made him a lawyer is something of a surreal experience. Give it up; you're making a fool of yourself.
30

Let’s consider the revolver since he ordered it about six weeks before he ordered the rifle. It does seem reasonable that if he intended to use the revolver to shoot Walker, he most likely wouldn’t expect to get away with it because using a revolver would typically need to be at a relatively close range with other people being present. Under those conditions using a separate P.O. Box makes less sense.

However, it seems to me that by March 12, 1963 LHO had probably devised his plan to shoot at Walker with the rifle at night from behind the backyard fence and his expectations of getting away with it would have been more reasonable. In fact it appears that he planned to do just that (get away with it). And he apparently delighted in learning from the news accounts that the DPD apparently didn’t even consider that anyone would try to make an escape from the scene via public transportation. Under these conditions, using a separate P.O. Box would seem to me to make more sense. He wouldn’t need to maintain the P.O. Box any longer than it took to obtain his rifle. So the expense would have been minimal and prudent in my opinion.

Whether or not it would have made sense for him to get a second PO box to receive the rifle, the fact is he didn't so that becomes a moot point. There is ample evidence he ordered the rifle from Klein's, ample evidence he received it, ample evidence he fired it at Walker, and ample evidence he used it to kill JFK.

Oswald's note to Marina indicated he thought there was a real possibility he would not be coming back after killing Walker. He gave her specific instructions as to what to do if he did not.

The curious thing is why he missed Walker at such short range. I've read the suggestion Walker might have leaned over just as Oswald fired, ala The Day of the Jackal. I think the answer might lie in the fact it was such a short shot. The Carcano's fixed sights are zeroed for 200 meters which means at that range it would shoot high if Oswald didn't make an adjustment in his aim point. The scope was adjustable but if Oswald didn't adjust it, the same problem would have occurred. It's all academic. Oswald missed and likely would never have been identified as the assailant had he not killed JFK.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10