Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
61
That is-why witnesses are cross-examined by opposing parties and why fact finders look for corroboration.

While witnesses make errors it is exceedingly rare that two witnesses will independently make up the same wrong story about what occurred.

Witnesses can be induced to misidentify a person. But eyewitness identification of someone they do not know is not fact recollection. It is an after-event opinion that the person they saw was the same person shown to them. That is completely different than someone hearing a shot pattern or observing what happened after hearing the first shot.

You're being ridiculous. Everything the witnesses tell us is "an after-event opinion" and there is no reason to believe a witness' after-event recollection of  a shot pattern is any more reliable than their identification of a perpetrator. As the one article pointed out, the human mind does not have a video recorder. All recollections by witnesses are subject to memory fallibility. If humans perfectly remembered details, there would be unanimity of the recollections of the shot pattern. Clearly there was not.
62
JFK Assassination Short Railroad Yard Scenes With Dallas Deputy Sheriff  Roger Dean Craig - 5 Different Speeds


   Just watch the above Darnell Film snippet showing us this Bogus Motorcycle Cop for an extended period of time. When we 1st see him, he is already ALL the way back by the string of passenger train cars. Why would a Motorcycle Cop leave his motorcycle well behind him, and walk ALL the way back to these passenger train cars? On top of that, Officer Haygood says NOTHING about doing this in his WC Q/A. Officer Haygood testified that he saw what he "presumed" to be a railroad detective and then went right back to his motorcycle. On this Darnell Film snippet, we NEVER see this Bogus Motorcycle Cop in close proximity to anyone.  All we see this Impostor do is walk and walk and walk. He keeps moving, and he Never moves in the direction of the Haygood Motorcycle parked near the Triple Underpass. And just where is he headed? He is headed straight toward/down the Elm St Ext and the TSBD.
63
(December 21, 1956; Camp Pendleton in California)
Oswald score qualified him as a SHARPSHOOTER!!!

Sharpshooter Qualification = 210
Oswald score = 212



 Thumb1: ...3 years later he lost it when he did worse

Question: Do you have a personal knowledge of Oswald's ability with a rifle?

Delgado: It has been said that he was a terrific marksman, but at the range he couldn't prove to me that he was a good shot....
Well, in Oswald's particular case it was quite funny to watch because he would get a couple of discs,
maybe out of the possible ten he would get two or three "Maggie's Drawers". This is a red flag on a long pole and
this is run from left to right on the target itself. You don't see this too often on the firing line, not the Marine firing line....

------------
Mr. DELGADO - "With respect to his rifle. He didn't spend as much time as the rest of us did in the armory cleaning it up.
He would, when he was told to. Otherwise, he wouldn't come out by himself to clean it."

Mr. DELGADO - "He just qualified, that's it. He wasn't as enthusiastic as the rest of us.
We all loved--liked, you know, going to the range."

Mr. DELGADO - "Right; I was in the same line. By that I mean we were on line together, the same time,
but not firing at the same position, but at the same time, and I remember seeing his. It was a pretty big joke,
because he got a lot of "Maggie's drawers," you know, a lot of misses, but he didn't give a darn."

Mr. LIEBELER - Missed the target completely?

64
To this day, Royell has ever never offered a single piece of evidence the car in question was a getaway car, or that the DPD showed any interest in the car. He simply assumes what he cannot prove and his reasons for believing that car was a getaway car are truly laughable.
65
The debate over Oswald's proficiency reminds me of a quote from the late Tim McCarver, former MLB catcher turned announcer. The other announcers were mercilessly ribbing him about how slow he was. He finally interrupted and said, "Lest folks get the wrong idea here, I was a very slow ... MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYER. In high school, I won a five-county track meet in Ohio." When I look at Oswald's Marine rifle score books, this was not Joe Average with his .22 plinker. His scores at 500 yards were astounding to me. I think the debate over whether he could have made the shots is a non-starter, especially if there were only two shots.
66
     The main point that the slick Specter avoids in this WC Q/A, is SPECTER's admittance that 3 SHOTS were fired in a MAX firing time of 5.6 SECONDS. THAT, was a mistake. The appraised difficulty of these 3 shots Never takes into consideration that the 3 shots were fired by the bolt action carcano rifle in only 5.6 SECONDS MAX. The only considerations specifically mentioned are: (1) Range, and, (2) Equipment used. This is typical of these 1 sided WC Q/A's. Especially the Q/A's conducted by Specter. Both the Kellerman and Tomlinson Q/A's are an absolute Railroading. Nowhere close to "fact finding".

I've never seen that Q/A you write about so I won't comment on that. 3 shots in 5.6 seconds was never the conclusion of the WC. They only pointed to it as a possible scenario, dependent upon the missed shot being the second shot. If either the first or third shot was the miss, the entire time for all three shots would have been indeterminant because they could not establish an exact moment when such a missed shot was fired.

I believe we now have a clear consensus among LNs that the first shot was the missed shot based on clues in the Z-film that the WC did not pick up on. We've had the advantage of decades to study that film and millions of eyeballs observing it. I believe if the WC had picked up on these clues, they would have concluded that first shot was the missed shot but since they had no definitive evidence of when the missed shot was fired, that had to at least allow for the possibility the second shot missed and the maximum firing time Oswald would have had would have been 5.6 seconds.
67
Yes Tom, the car seems close to the Elm Exension's south curb, which is the "island" north curb. I'm attaching a single graphic showing the two positions along with the Wiegman frame for comparison. Which 3D render looks more like the Wiegman frame to you?


    This is the Brightest still frame I have seen. Just look at the ladies standing on the far (R). They are standing in the street. Behind them is the Street. Not the Island. The surface of the Street behind these ladies on the far (R), is the same as what we see Behind Fedora Man. Behind Fedora Man we are seeing ALL the way back to the car parked near the "wide open" Huge Gates. And why is that? Because the "getaway" car is Not There. NOT YET!
68
Mr. SPECTER. Of what do your current duties consist?
Sergeant ZAHM. I am the NCO in charge of the Marksmanship Training Unit Armory at the Marksmanship Training Unit in the Weapons Training Battalion Marine Corps School, Quantico, Va.

Mr. SPECTER. Based on the tests of Mr. Oswald shown by those documents, how would you characterize his ability as a marksman?
Sergeant ZAHM. I would say in the Marine Corps he is a good shot, slightly above average, and as compared to the average male of his age throughout the civilian, throughout the United States, that he is an excellent shot.

Mr. SPECTER. How would you characterize that, as a difficult, not too difficult, easy, or how would you characterize that shot?
Sergeant ZAHM. With the equipment he had and with his ability, I consider it a very easy shot.

Sergeant ZAHM. I consider it still an easy shot, a little more difficult from the President's body position and increase in distance of approximately 40 feet, but I still consider it an easy shot for a man with the equipment he had and his ability.
Mr. SPECTER. Assuming that there were three shots fired in a range of 4.8 to 5.6 seconds, would that speed of firing at that range indicated in the prior questions be within Mr. Oswald's capabilities as a marksman?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes.

--------------------------------------

Mr. SPECTER - Of what do your current duties consist?
Major ANDERSON - I am assistant head of the Marksmanship Branch, Headquarters Marine Corps.


Mr. SPECTER - I now show you a document marked as Commission Exhibit No. 902, which characterizes what was believed to have been the shot which struck President Kennedy in the head at a distance from rifle in window to the President of 265.3 feet, with the photograph through rifle scope identified on the document being the view which the marksman had of the President at the time the President was struck in the head, and I ask you again for an opinion as to the ease or difficulty of that shot, taking into consideration the capabilities of Mr. Oswald as a marksman, evidenced by the Marine Corps documents on him.
Major ANDERSON - I consider it to be not a particularly difficult shot at this short range, and that Oswald had full capabilities to make such a shot.

-------------------------------------

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us your position, Mr. Simmons?
Mr. SIMMONS. I am the Chief of the Infantry Weapons Evaluation Branch of the Ballistics Research Laboratory of the Department of the Army.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do I understand your testimony to be that this rifle is as accurate as the current American military rifles?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. As far as we can determine from bench-rest firing.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you consider that to be a high degree of accuracy?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, the weapon is quite accurate.


JohnM

     The main point that the slick Specter avoids in this WC Q/A, is SPECTER's admittance that 3 SHOTS were fired in a MAX firing time of 5.6 SECONDS. THAT, was a mistake. The appraised difficulty of these 3 shots Never takes into consideration that the 3 shots were fired by the bolt action carcano rifle in only 5.6 SECONDS MAX. The only considerations specifically mentioned are: (1) Range, and, (2) Equipment used. This is typical of these 1 sided WC Q/A's. Especially the Q/A's conducted by Specter. Both the Kellerman and Tomlinson Q/A's are an absolute Railroading. Nowhere close to "fact finding".
69
To discuss the reliability of eyewitness testimony in general terms is very misleading. A civil or criminal trial is often long after the event - sometimes years. In the interim, witnesses have been interviewed or deposed, prepped by lawyers, influenced by conversations and media coverage, emotionally bonded with one side or the other. We see this in Mark Lane's interviews and the way that many prominent JFKA witnesses' stories got markedly "better" over the years and decades. Studies with hoax UFOs (i.e., designed to fool witnesses) showed that people accurately described what they saw (e.g., three flashing lights in a triangular formation) but simply misinterpreted it as otherworldly - but, then, the study had been designed to fool them by having the phenomenon not easily fit any known aircraft. With a witness's description right after an event, we are really not talking about "fallibility of memory" but simply "accuracy of perception." With the JFKA eyewitnesses and earwitnesses, we'd have to take into account the sudden, very short and wholly unanticipated nature of the event and the circumstances of each eyewitness or earwitness - location, what he or she was doing at the time, etc., etc. To simply "count heads" is likely to be very misleading. Harold Norman thought the "first shot" sounded different and seemed really only certain about the second and third - and the rifle was supposedly right above his head! Regarding Glen Bennett, one would think his training would make him a solid witness - but he said he heard "what sounded like a firecracker." Given the number of witnesses who said the "first shot" sounded different from the others, I'm not sure that we can reasonably attribute these descriptions to a missed gunshot - especially given the lack of other other evidence for such a gunshot and the wildly different estimates as to when it occurred.
70
(May 06,1959 MCAS | El Toro CA)
Oswald scored one point above the minimum for the lowest grade.

Marksman Qualification = 190
Oswald Score = 191

“To become qualified as a sharpshooter the Marine Corps is of the opinion that most Marines
with a reasonable amount of adaptability to weapons firing can be, so qualified.
Consequently a low marksman qualification indicates a “rather poor shot” (Vol 19 pages 16-18)


(December 21, 1956; Camp Pendleton in California)
Oswald score qualified him as a SHARPSHOOTER!!!

Sharpshooter Qualification = 210
Oswald score = 212


BTW your quote came from Colonel Folsom who being a desk jockey was hardly qualified to be making expert shooting analysis. Hahaha. :D

Mr. ELY - What is your job in the Marine Corps, sir?
Colonel FOLSOM - My primary duty is head, Records Branch, Personnel Department, Headquarters U.S. Marine Corps, Washington, D.C.

----------------------

What do some actual Expert Marine Officers say about Oswald's shooting abilities.

Mr. SPECTER. Based on the tests of Mr. Oswald shown by those documents, how would you characterize his ability as a marksman?
Sergeant ZAHM. I would say in the Marine Corps he is a good shot, slightly above average, and as compared to the average male of his age throughout the civilian, throughout the United States, that he is an excellent shot.


How about the question of Oswald's capabilities to take the head shot?

Mr. SPECTER - I now show you a document marked as Commission Exhibit No. 902, which characterizes what was believed to have been the shot which struck President Kennedy in the head at a distance from rifle in window to the President of 265.3 feet, with the photograph through rifle scope identified on the document being the view which the marksman had of the President at the time the President was struck in the head, and I ask you again for an opinion as to the ease or difficulty of that shot, taking into consideration the capabilities of Mr. Oswald as a marksman, evidenced by the Marine Corps documents on him.
Major ANDERSON - I consider it to be not a particularly difficult shot at this short range, and that Oswald had full capabilities to make such a shot.


Then lastly, what was the difficulties of Oswald with his equipment of taking the Dealey Plaza shot?

Mr. SPECTER. How would you characterize that, as a difficult, not too difficult, easy, or how would you characterize that shot?
Sergeant ZAHM. With the equipment he had and with his ability, I consider it a very easy shot.


Oops!

And finally let's put Oswald's last Shooting Qualification into historical perspective.

Oswald was 17 when he scored "212" and then at 19 he scored "191", so Oswald was older and more experienced yet scored less, what changed between these two events? How does that even make sense, well, considering at the time Oswald's poor relationship with the Marines and the fact in a few months he was about to lie about his Mother to get out of the Marines and then defect to the Enemy and then try to reject his American citizenship, says all we need to know.

1. Oswald brings joy and happiness to the Marines and scores "212"
2. Oswald was court-martialled for illegal possession of a firearm.
3. Oswald was court-martialled for a second time for assaulting a superior officer.
4. Oswald spends time in the Brig and seemingly becomes disillusioned with this whole Marines thing.
5. Oswald's unit arrives in Taiwan, where he suffers a nervous breakdown and is sent back to Japan.
6. Delgado a fellow Marine describes Oswald on the firing range as not "giving a darn", seeing this as a "joke" and not being very "enthusiastic".
7. Oswald scores "191"
8. Just a few months after his "191", Oswald makes up a Bogus story about his injured Mother and is soon after released from active Duty.
9. Oswald defects to the enemy.
10. The enemy rejects Oswald, so Oswald in a rage of self harm, rips open his wrist which bleeds excessively and the wound requires a number of stitches. Oswald in his Historic Diary" describes his suicide attempt, "watch my life whirl away. I think to myself. "how easy to die" and "a sweet death""

JohnM




Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10