Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
I can certainly agree that there is way too much evidence against a missed first shot to make it even a remote possibility. A missed first shot is a fantasy.  There is also abundant, consistent evidence that the head shot was the last shot.  If the bullet through JFK’s neck went on to strike JBC it had to have happened on the first shot. The second shot SBT is a fantasy. 

Everything you believe is a fantasy.
Quote

But there is also abundant, consistent evidence that there were three distinct loud noises. And given the number of witnesses who reported hearing three shots (132 according to the HSCA study), many of whom reported hearing a shot a pause and then two more distinct shots, it is difficult to understand how they could have imagined a shot that did not occur. It is much easier to understand how a few witnesses might not have been counting the number of shots and  thought there were only two (17) or weren’t sure whether it was 2 or 3 (7).

There is also an abundance of witnesses who said the shots came from the GK. Ear witnesses are as unreliable as eye witnesses. Some of them get it right and some of them get it wrong.
72
FYI, there were five executions done in Texas in 1964. All were black men and two did not involve murder.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_executed_in_Texas,_1960%E2%80%931964#cite_note-5



Your chart doesn't show the date of the crime so it doesn't give us a clue as to the length of the appeals process. I have little doubt Oswald would have been convicted of a double homicide and sentenced to death but I have serious doubt his sentence would have been carried out before SCOTUS vacated all existing death penalty statutes in 1972. There is a real possibility an 86 year old Oswald would still be sneering at us from his jail cell in Texas.
73
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 05:18:29 AM »
It happens.

But it wasn’t just Mary Woodward. There are at least 23 witnesses who recalled JFK reacting to the first shot. There are another 20+ witnesses who put the first shot occurring:
  • after z180 (occupants of VP car, VP security car);
  • as the car was approaching the Thornton sign (TE Moore);
  • when JFK was passing the Stemmons sign in her line of sight (Linda Willis);
  • an instant before z202 (Phil Willis);
  • just as the President’s car was almost directly in front of where is was standing (Karan Hicks, Gloria Calvery, Karen Westbrook)
  • the President had just passed me (Jean Newman);
  • just as he got just about in front of me (John Chism)
Direction of the source of a sound is not easy for humans to observe. Perception is also skewed by the proximity of reflective surfaces. You are comparing apples and watermelons (oranges are not an apt comparison to fit this metaphor).

Humans are not clocks. The evidence does not require the last two shots being closer than 2.3 seconds apart.

For every witness you named, I can name a witness who gave a different version. You continue to rely on witnesses accurately remembering the event instead of believing what can be seen in the Z-film with your own two eyes. The fact that you continue to insist JBC wasn't hit until Z270 is a joke. He reacts at exactly the same instant that JFK did.
74
    Where are you getting, "...would RAISE a person's waist 6 FEET above the ground"?  Where has "6 FEET" been mentioned?

The expanded Badgeman photo which Duncan posted shows Badgeman, the supposed Gordon Arnold, and a third man all have their waists at the height of the 6 foot high stockade fence.
75
I don't see any dirt piles. Certainly nothing that would raise a person's waist 6 feet above the ground.

    Where are you getting, "...would RAISE a person's waist 6 FEET above the ground"?  Where has "6 FEET" been mentioned?
76
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Yesterday at 03:28:27 AM »
OK. I'll give you this one. I didn't notice the question mark at the end of your sentence.
It happens.

Quote
That doesn't change the fact that this is still the kind of mistake witnesses make when they try to piece together what happened from memory. She had no reason at the time to make a mental note of whether the first shot was fired before or after JFK turned to look to her. So taking your sentence as a question rather than a statement, my answer is yes, she got mixed up. We are talking about two events that occurred a little more than a second apart. 

But it wasn’t just Mary Woodward. There are at least 23 witnesses who recalled JFK reacting to the first shot. There are another 20+ witnesses who put the first shot occurring:
  • after z180 (occupants of VP car, VP security car);
  • as the car was approaching the Thornton sign (TE Moore);
  • when JFK was passing the Stemmons sign in her line of sight (Linda Willis);
  • an instant before z202 (Phil Willis);
  • just as the President’s car was almost directly in front of where is was standing (Karan Hicks, Gloria Calvery, Karen Westbrook)
  • the President had just passed me (Jean Newman);
  • just as he got just about in front of me (John Chism)

Quote
She also said the shots came from over her right shoulder, i.e. the GK. Do you believe that part too?
Direction of the source of a sound is not easy for humans to observe. Perception is also skewed by the proximity of reflective surfaces. You are comparing apples and watermelons (oranges are not an apt comparison to fit this metaphor).


Quote
As for you insistence that the last 2 shots came in rapid succession, if that were true, there were two gunmen. The Carcano was not designed to fire two shots in rapid succession. The FBI determined it would take a minimum of 2.3 seconds between shots to fire an aimed shot.
Humans are not clocks. The evidence does not require the last two shots being closer than 2.3 seconds apart.
77
LP--

Amen. We are in the dozens, if that. And where is Tom Graves?

In addition, there are now dozens of people on Facebook, Instagram and X, doing the JFKA thing, and splintering the audience.

Beyond all that, the bulk of JFKA-RFKA junkies appear to suffer from colic.

78
LP--

Fair enough, though I think LHO's confederates were either lower-level G-2'ers, likely acting on their own initiative...or

...hanger-on Alpha-66'ers, keeping in mind Alpha-66 had been penetrated by G-2, and there were double agents in Alpha-66. They had a house in Dallas, adding to the mix. There is a lone eyewitness account of LHO at the Alpha 66 house, on Harlandale in Dallas.

In fact, Rolando Cubela, indisputably given a poison pen by the CIA on 11.22.63, with which he was to assassinate Castro, is thought by many to have been a double agent. This is murky stuff.

Such a small, informal, ad hoc JFKA plot, involving three people (including LHO) with no written record, would be hard to detect. And the WC was, in general, prosecuting the LNT-SBT narrative.

Arlen Specter's lawyerly reasoning on the SBT is a work of art. Basically he said, "If we assume one bullet missed the limo, then the SBT is the only remaining explanation." He reasoned from a premise.

The CIA, in general, would be averse to a JFKA investigation, if suspected anti-Castro assets, or double-agents were in the brew.

It appears George Joaniddes wanted to put the kibosh on the HSCA's look-see into MC. Blakey thought so, after the fact.

OTOH, I do not see much of connection between LHO and the Mafia.

But who knows?

Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.


79
Jack Nessan really should pay me a royalty on every copy of Phantom Shot he sells, but I cannot help but be struck by the fact that Oswald manages to put two pretty precisely-placed bullets into JFK after supposedly having gone through all sorts of hypothetical gyrations and managing to miss the entire limousine - and no one can agree on exactly when he did that. Two shots seems to me to be favored by Occam's (or Ockham's) Razor, and Mrs. Occam agrees. I don't quite understand the near-desperation to preserve the three-shot scenario. There doesn't seem to be any reason the evidence demands this.

It seems to me that the best evidence, including the Gloria Calvery group, places the first shot just about where the three-shot narrative places the second shot. If the three-shot scenario were correct, it seems to me the second and third shots would be the bang-bang sequence that Bowers and others described. Is this perhaps the real motivation for insisting on an early missed shot?
I can certainly agree that there is way too much evidence against a missed first shot to make it even a remote possibility. A missed first shot is a fantasy.  There is also abundant, consistent evidence that the head shot was the last shot.  If the bullet through JFK’s neck went on to strike JBC it had to have happened on the first shot. The second shot SBT is a fantasy. 

But there is also abundant, consistent evidence that there were three distinct loud noises. And given the number of witnesses who reported hearing three shots (132 according to the HSCA study), many of whom reported hearing a shot a pause and then two more distinct shots, it is difficult to understand how they could have imagined a shot that did not occur. It is much easier to understand how a few witnesses might not have been counting the number of shots and  thought there were only two (17) or weren’t sure whether it was 2 or 3 (7).
80
The problem with both Zartman and Niedernut is they think (or thought) they were there to be Truth Police at the EF-JFKA. And they knew The Truth. Niedernut also had an insufferable personality.

Zartman actually posted on EF-JFKA that he thought LNT'ers should be banned from the EF-JFKA, and then he later became a moderator. In other words, the EF-JFKA was not a debate forum, but a CT cocoon.

I suppose it does not matter much; the readership of the EF-JFKA must be in the dozens, in a nation of 330 million. Simkin says he spends 10 hours a day writing history tomes. For who? Not the EF-JFKA, which Simkin says is a disappointment to him, due to all the insults that go on.

It looks like the EF-JFKA will continue to peter out; perhaps Niedernut's moderation will ultimately prove lethal, in combination with Simkin's senescence.

I invite EF-JFKA'ers to join this forum and at least try to have collegial conversations.

FWIW, in the thread that was deleted someone described this as an "obscure" forum "mostly for LNers." For what the Ed Forum has become to call another forum "obscure" is a pretty serious case of "Pot, meet kettle." I think they have some notion that there are hundreds if not thousands of lurkers. In fact, I think I recall someone insisting on that when I was a member, perhaps thinking that all the bots were lurkers. That is one problem with any forum like this - the same handful of people saying the same things over and over. If there are substantial numbers of lurkers, I wish they'd chime in and liven things up.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10