Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
You don't think all those other spectators would see a shooter on the overpass or hear his gunshot?

Do conspiracy hobbyists ever think through their theories?

Perhaps they, or several of them, actually did see a shooter and hear his gunshot or see gun smoke... and that is why a crowd gathered there at the bridge (and why Mark Bell panned his camera over this area more than once).
BUT in a conspiracy to cover-up a dirty deed, the people who say they saw something here are the very people you avoid interviewing or dismiss for one or a dozen concocted reasons...

Cancellare caught on camera someone dressed in a police uniform sitting behind the bridge, in the perfect location to make the final shot at the president.

Why should the shooter be alarmed? He's wearing a police uniform and everyone knows he's "sworn to uphold the law."
Why be alarmed? He's part of a conspiracy and knows his co-conspirators are in positions of power and have planned to pin it all on Oswald - or one or two others on the scene - if the Oswald scenario doesn't play out as expected.





(This pic below is a rendition to help viewer orientation)
72
https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/the-conversation/2023-06-19/pearl-harbor-historian-honors-past-looks-toward-future

Thank you for posting what you did about Daniel Martinez. It turns out I remembered his first name correctly but not his surname.

A google search turned up the following story about him. It turns out he was working for the National Park Service until 2023 which means he was moonlighting when he appeared on "Death in Dealey Plaza". I've always enjoyed listening to him no matter what subject he was talking about.
74
That misses the point.  Why would anyone provide a statement containing details that they did not remember?  I wasn’t expecting you to do that.  I asked whether, assuming that you gave a statement containing details that you did remember clearly in your mind whether you would maintain your statement was not reliable.  I thought it was a rhetorical question. Apparently, you have very low confidence in your ability to make observations that you can retain in memory for a few hours. Either that or you think you would make a statement to police authorities containing details that you could not recall.

Studies have shown that even when witnesses were confident about their recollections, they could still be wrong. I don't care if the witnesses were clear in their mind. That doesn't mean what they remember was accurate.
75
The survey data at CE884 puts the Kennedy to Rifle distance 218.0 feet at z255 and 265.3 feet at z313. That means that he travelled 47.3 feet in 58 frames. At that rate at z271 JBC was 233 feet from the rifle. At 2000 fps that means the trigger was pressed about 233/2000=116.5 ms earlier.

Since it's survey data, I doubt it took into account the elevation. Adding the elevation increases the distance.
Quote

For the shot that struck at z313 when JFK was 265.3 feet from the rifle, the trigger would have been pulled 265.3/2000=133 ms earlier.

So we are talking about a difference of 16.5 ms or .0165 of a second

Since the exposure time of Zapruder’s camera was 1/40th of a second or 25 ms., there was 30 ms of non-exposure between frames.
It's a miniscule difference but since your data doesn't take into account elevation, it becomes even less relevant.

You are correct that there is a gap between each frame of the film when the camera isn't recording.
Quote


When I say z271-272 I mean the shot occurred at some time either very late during the exposure of z270 up to very early in the beginning of the exposure of z272.  Since the time between frames is 1000/18.3=55 ms, that provides a range of the time of the shot of 55+30=85 ms. The head shot could have occurred very late in the exposure of z312 to the middle of the exposure of z313.  That is about 45 ms. Total uncertainty is 130/2=65 ms=.065 sec.

So the time difference t between trigger pulls between the second shot striking JBC at z271-272 and the third shot striking JFK at z312 to z313 a distance of 32.3 feet farther from the rifle is:
t=(312-270)/18.3-(32.3/2000)  ± .065 seconds

t=(42)/18.3-.0165 ± .065 seconds

t=2.28  ± .065 seconds or 2.22 to 2.34 seconds
Even with your tweaking, you don't bring the time between shots to what the FBI determined was the minimum time needed to fire an aimed shot. Even that is a theoretical time, it's very unlikely Oswald would have tried to fire the rifle as fast as he could. Accuracy would be far more important than speed. That's why he took almost 5 seconds between the second and third shots.
Quote

Certainly. Hickey just said that JFK’s hair flew up at the moment he heard the second shot. There could have been movement of the air caused by something other than the bullet.  But that wouldn’t alter the observation that the hair flutter-which occurs at no other time-coincided with the sound of the second shot.  But I don’t see the hair of anyone else move.
What Hickey says doesn't establish the bullet caused his hair to fly up. The bullet would have arrived before the sound because the bullet was traveling almost twice the speed of sound.
Quote

The Warren Commission found that a minimum of about 2.3 seconds was required to fire, reload aim and fire again using Oswald’s rifle. This appears to be based on the FBI re-enactment using that rifle. FBI ballistics expert Robert Frazier, who actually fired 3
shots in 4.6 seconds, said “4.6 seconds is firing this weapon as fast as the bolt can be operated, I think”. (3H407). The FBI’s Ronald Simmons noted that one marksman fired three shots in 4.6 seconds using the telescopic sight and three shots in 4.45 seconds using the iron sights.(3H446). There was no time placed on the middle shots so we cannot determine the smallest interval between shots.

Why would you think Oswald was would try to fire his rifle as fast as was humanly possible? Was he trying to win a prize?
76
One might correctly remember one and not the other.
For the record, I didn't remember either. I was not in Dealey Plaza when the shooting took place. I was in 7th grade math class.
I have said on a number of occasions that I might or might not remember specific details about an event. That makes me the same as the other 8 billion people on the planet.
That misses the point.  Why would anyone provide a statement containing details that they did not remember?  I wasn’t expecting you to do that.  I asked whether, assuming that you gave a statement containing details that you did remember clearly in your mind whether you would maintain your statement was not reliable.  I thought it was a rhetorical question. Apparently, you have very low confidence in your ability to make observations that you can retain in memory for a few hours. Either that or you think you would make a statement to police authorities containing details that you could not recall.


I would suggest you greatly overestimate the general populace's ability to perceive accurate details of an event, especially a shocking event that happens with no warning and lasts less than 10 seconds.
It's hard to forget something you didn't notice in the first place. Most people did hear 3 shots but some only remembered hearing 2. I find it probable that the one they either didn't hear or didn't remember hearing was the first shot. For whatever reason, that shot didn't seem to register with them. It's not hard to understand why that would be since the man they were all focusing on didn't seem to react to it either. He kept waving to the crowd and was slowly lowering his arm when he was struck by the second shot.

Do you have a better explanation for why some of the witnesses such as Jackie or Clint Hill only remembered 2 shots?
[/quote]
77
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 08:10:41 PM »
How damn stupid are legacy media reporters. I'm going to paraphrase this since I can't quote him word-for-word. Wolf Blitzer just said that he was just a short distance away when the "alleged gunman" was taken down by the Secret Service. If he saw him do it, why is he saying it's an alleged gunman. Does Wolf need confirmation to report what he saw with his own damn eyes. What an idiot.
78
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 08:06:23 PM »
   When did Kaline, "defer 2/3 of his salary..."? I follow the older players dating back to "Murderer's Row". Never heard the Kaline, "2/3 deferred" story.

I am a lifelong Tiger fan and I read that about him a long time ago. I'm going to guess it was sometime in the mid 1960s that I read that. It's not surprising that you wouldn't have heard that since it wouldn't have been widely reported.
79
The head shot would have to have been fired at Z311 or earlier to cover the 88 yards before striking JFK's head at Z313. That is based on an estimated average velocity of 2000 fps.
88 yards is 264 feet.
264 / 2000 = 0.132 seconds to cover the 88 yards.
1 / 18.3 = 0.546.... elapsed time for a single frame.
0.132 / 0.546... = 2.4156 frames for the bullet to travel 88 yards
The survey data at CE884 puts the Kennedy to Rifle distance 218.0 feet at z255 and 265.3 feet at z313. That means that he travelled 47.3 feet in 58 frames. At that rate at z271 JBC was 233 feet from the rifle. At 2000 fps that means the trigger was pressed about 233/2000=116.5 ms earlier.

For the shot that struck at z313 when JFK was 265.3 feet from the rifle, the trigger would have been pulled 265.3/2000=133 ms earlier.

So we are talking about a difference of 16.5 ms or .0165 of a second

Since the exposure time of Zapruder’s camera was 1/40th of a second or 25 ms., there was 30 ms of non-exposure between frames. 

When I say z271-272 I mean the shot occurred at some time either very late during the exposure of z270 up to very early in the beginning of the exposure of z272.  Since the time between frames is 1000/18.3=55 ms, that provides a range of the time of the shot of 55+30=85 ms. The head shot could have occurred very late in the exposure of z312 to the middle of the exposure of z313.  That is about 45 ms. Total uncertainty is 130/2=65 ms=.065 sec.

So the time difference t between trigger pulls between the second shot striking JBC at z271-272 and the third shot striking JFK at z312 to z313 a distance of 32.3 feet farther from the rifle is:
t=(312-270)/18.3-(32.3/2000)  ± .065 seconds

t=(42)/18.3-.0165 ± .065 seconds

t=2.28  ± .065 seconds or 2.22 to 2.34 seconds

Quote
I don't suppose you considered the possibility that JFK's hair movement could be cause by the fact he is in a moving open top car.
Certainly. Hickey just said that JFK’s hair flew up at the moment he heard the second shot. There could have been movement of the air caused by something other than the bullet.  But that wouldn’t alter the observation that the hair flutter-which occurs at no other time-coincided with the sound of the second shot.  But I don’t see the hair of anyone else move.

Quote
Oswald could have fired a shot 2.3 seconds after a previous shot as long as he didn't bother to take time to aim the rifle. The FBI determined it would take a shooter a minimum of 2.4 seconds between shots if the shooter took time to aim.

The Warren Commission found that a minimum of about 2.3 seconds was required to fire, reload aim and fire again using Oswald’s rifle. This appears to be based on the FBI re-enactment using that rifle. FBI ballistics expert Robert Frazier, who actually fired 3
shots in 4.6 seconds, said “4.6 seconds is firing this weapon as fast as the bolt can be operated, I think”. (3H407). The FBI’s Ronald Simmons noted that one marksman fired three shots in 4.6 seconds using the telescopic sight and three shots in 4.45 seconds using the iron sights.(3H446). There was no time placed on the middle shots so we cannot determine the smallest interval between shots.
80
You'd have to ask the Red Sox front office. I suspect this move had been under consideration for some time and the decision was made prior to yesterday's game. The outcome of one game isn't going to change people's minds once a decision like that has been made.
That's politics. You are overstating the influence of Nike and China. The NBA owners know how much revenue is generated by those entities, but that doesn't mean they are calling the shots. I hardly watch basketball much because I don't like the modern game. Most of the offense has become shooting threes or driving to the hoop and getting fouled. It drives me nuts when I see a player pass up a high percentage shot to kick the ball out to the arc for teammate to shoot a three.
What is your evidence that Ohtani was the perp and not the victim of this crime.

Deferred compensation is nothing new. I remember as far back as Al Kaline deferring 2/3 of his salary and that was in an era when he was only making $60-70K. He worked for an auto company in his offseason. He knew he couldn't play ball indefinitely and deferred his salary so he would have income long past his playing days.

   When did Kaline, "defer 2/3 of his salary..."? I follow the older players dating back to "Murderer's Row". Never heard the Kaline, "2/3 deferred" story.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10