55 years later...

[Jon Banks]

Here is the opening paragraph of Tobin's paper. In it near the bottom is the quote about the 2nd assassin.  Hard to say what was the ultimate goal of this research. Maybe just to show the rest of us how smart they really are. A second shooter armed with a carcano.....very smart. The premise and conclusion are basically not worth repeating.

CHEMICAL AND FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF JFK ASSASSINATION
BULLET LOTS: IS A SECOND SHOOTER POSSIBLE?
BY CLIFF SPIEGELMAN, WILLIAM A. TOBIN, WILLIAM D. JAMES,
SIMON J. SHEATHER, STUART WEXLER AND D. MAX ROUNDHILL
Texas A&M University, Forensic Engineering International,
Texas A&M University, Texas A&M University,
Hightstown High School and Chem Consulting
The assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK) traumatized
the nation. In this paper we show that evidence used to rule out a second
assassin is fundamentally flawed. This paper discusses new compositional
analyses of bullets reportedly to have been derived from the same batch
as those used in the assassination. The new analyses show that the bullet
fragments involved in the assassination are not nearly as rare as previously
reported. In particular, the new test results are compared to key bullet composition
testimony presented before the House Select Committee on Assassinations
(HSCA). Matches of bullets within the same box of bullets are shown
to be much more likely than indicated in the House Select Committee on Assassinations?
testimony. Additionally, we show that one of the ten test bullets
is considered a match to one or more assassination fragments. This finding
means that the bullet fragments from the assassination that match could have
come from three or more separate bullets. Finally, this paper presents a case
for reanalyzing the assassination bullet fragments and conducting the necessary
supporting scientific studies. These analyses will shed light on whether
the five bullet fragments constitute three or more separate bullets. If the assassination
fragments are derived from three or more separate bullets, then
a second assassin is likely, as the additional bullet would not easily be attributable
to the main suspect, Mr. Oswald, under widely accepted shooting
scenarios [see Posner (1993), Case Closed, Bantam, New York].


Obviously, Tobin and the rest of the forensic dream team never understood its ramifications. In their zest and zeal to prove Guinn wrong and the existence of a conspiracy, these scientists fail to understand what their analysis of the results of their tests indicated.  Essentially, all the tests were performed on 6.5mm Carcano bullets from the same batches as LHO's and from these tests determined that there was a possibility the bullet  fragments recovered in the JFK assassination came from more than two bullets. Thus somehow proving to themselves that there was more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza. Apparently they don't realize what they are really saying is that there wasn't just one shooter in Dealey Plaza armed with a 6.5mm Carcano but two shooters both armed with 6.5mm Carcanos. Most people don't even want to believe there was one person there with a Carcano let alone two.

One additional brilliant finding from the paper: Way to go out on limb.

"Dr. Guinn may have been correct or incorrect about the number of bullets originating
from the JFK fragments; the state of knowledge even today, but definitely about 30 years ago, remains too uncertain".

The scientists didn?t set out to prove that there was a Conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination. What they proved was, the method Guinn used to rule out multiple rifles was deeply flawed.

A British team of scientists (Randich and Grant) reached a similar conclusion.

The Lead composition of the JFK assassination bullets and fragments doesn?t rule out the possibility of multiple shooters...

[Jon Banks]

As for the autopsy photos and X-rays, in 1967 the autopsy pathologists (Humes, Boswell, and Finck), the acting chief of radiology (Ebersole) and one of the autopsy photographers (Stringer) viewed the autopsy photographs and/or X-rays and confirmed the photos and X-rays were accurate in the portrayal of the wounds of the President.

Under political pressure, yes, many witnesses changed their descriptions of the events or evidence.

But it doesn't change the fact that several dozen witnesses who saw Kennedy's wounds in Texas and Bethesda described something different than what would later show up in the photos and x-rays.

[Allan Fritzke]

I was looking more for a timeline. Oswald had several jobs from the time he settled in Dallas after he came back from the USSR in 1962, while in New Orleans in 1963, and then his last job at the TSBD upon returning from Mexico in early October, 1963. You bring up the missing job application at the TSBD as being of the upmost importance but don't address how it came to be that Oswald got that job interview in the first place. Don't you think that is of the upmost importance?  I'll ask a few more questions that go in the general direction of were I believe your theory goes.

1) Do you believe Roy Truly was involved in a conspiracy to kill the President?
2) Do you believe Ruth Paine was involved in a conspiracy to kill the President?
3) Do you believe that Robert Stovall of Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall was involved in a conspiracy to kill the President?

4) Do you believe that Ted Gangel of Padgett Printing Cpy. was involved in a conspiracy to kill the President?

5)Do you believe that Linnie Mae Randle was involved in a conspiracy to kill the President?

There were many innocent people involved and it doesn't mean they were in on any conspiracy!   Your argument is that they had to know the truth and therefore guilty of the crime.   The same sort of argument that you would say a prosecutor should face in the wrongful conviction of an innocent person after he has been found guilty of using only select pieces to gain a conviction in his case and not all that he has.

The reality is, there were very few people that needed to know the truth.  The rest was building a case to convict a LNer.   The less people you have that know that, the easier it is to keep a secret.   A few people working with evidence, eye witness accounts and statements can do wonders to point a case to have a deliberate outcome.  Sad but true.

A modern day example of this improper use of selected evidence brought into the light is DNA testing.  There have been so many cases where the DNA is the only thing that saved a man after being already convicted for a crime he didn't commit.  All the circumstantial evidence presented by the DA was compelling and yet one little DNA test later on, proved he was an innocent man.   Sometimes a little extra evidence was planted just to make sure because they knew he was guilty.  If you have convinced yourself of this ahead of time, then you seek to add to make the case watertight.  In these cases,  they don't throw the prosecutors in jail for these things.    The prosecutors are very good at picking and choosing evidence to get their desired end result and ignoring those facts that don't lead to a non-conviction!

So to, you must have an open mind with LHO.  He was killed and wasn't there to defend himself.    Eye witness accounts and statements can be easily obtained and signed off.   In fact the more you can get, the more conflicting it all is, the less reliable they become and the more easy it becomes to mislead and develop your own argument in the case.  So, lets not get into those 5 questions you are itching to have me answer.   Look at what hasn't been provide with it to solidify it and make it into a watertight case!   It is really more important to establish via job application, pay stubs, bank accounts and so on, the exact time he started working at the TBSD.  The traceable phone calls made from his home, collect calls and to who.  The paper would be unquestionable proof, not based on eyewitness or sworn testimony and act as independent evidence.

There have been many cases where a just man has been tried and found guilty for a crime that he didn't do.  It would be fairly easy to do in a case where the man (LHO) is dead already and can't even be questioned or provide  statements.   As a witness, if you are told by the DA or a rep, that a suspect was already guilty and we ask for "just a little extra help to clean up a few loose ends and make the case stick", you might think you are doing the country a favor and saving the taxpayer money too.    "I may even let you in on a little secret in the process to help get the statement from you that I need."   Here is a go at it, let your imagination run wild for a small paragraph!

These people can offer an argument which makes sense.  "Can you imagine what utter chaos the country will be thrown into if you can't help us out a little bit?   We so need to keep riots and civil unrest from occurring.  The simple solution is to have a lone gunman responsible if at all possible.   Heaven forbid that you could have a coup d'etat take place with more than one gunman present.    You certainly wouldn't want LBJ to be accused of a sinister plot to wrench the power out of JFK's hands now would you - that is treason man!   Can you imagine having a rumor like that going around?   Can you imagine then how the Russians would drop nukes on us as we would appear to be leaderless?  They would come attack us at night while we weren't ready in the middle of our unrest  and Communism would take over!  The stock market would crash - our liberty and freedom would be gone forever and you my friend would be held responsible if that were to occur.   You wouldn't want that to happen, now would you?"

Surely you can see my argument?  Strike a little fear in the people's hearts and see what can happen. Now back to reality!
 
IMHO, there is a need for documentation.   The obvious document to look at would be the TBSD job application as example.   It was discussed in Truly's statement.  Wouldn't that be perfect evidence if LHO lied and signed it?  It would establish without doubt when he started.  LHO's tax documents and bank account statements, telephone calls etc. would also show you exactly if he acted alone  and who had paid him and establish the timeline.   Would you mind opening your filing cabinet?  I know if he was only hired 5 weeks earlier, you wouldn't have thrown them out or have someone shred them already?  He is a new employee.  IF you want to fire him and he lied to you, that is an important document!!!  This was not investigated or brough forward?  Why not?   These rabbit trails are the critical ones if you want to know if he acted alone or as part of a larger group or sinister plot.  
What was so important to follow the purchase path of the rifle itself other than to make it a direct path from the store to him and not via someone else.  This again ties in with the "lonenut" narrative, acting alone.  What about all the various ammunition he used, is there a trail for that?  Why so many types, hard nose, frangible, various casings all mixed in his clip we are led to believe.  Even casing from pistol, some coming from an ammo belt.  Two different pistols.     Close examination of this combination of the various evidence is not very convincing when you try to find commanality among it and a coherent argument.

It is little wonder there is conspiracy theories?   A proper and independent investigation was not done!  Take it one step further:

Can you substantiate a motive as to why he hated a President so much that he felt he was called upon to take it upon himself to shoot him?   He loved Communism so much?   He felt his idol Fidol Castro was going to be assassinated by JFK and his gang?    The simple fact is, his being at the TBSD building began after JFK and Connally had decided in September on the Fund Raiser trip for JFK to Dallas!  Those are the real questions of the day!   

Furthermore, what do we know about his character?  Do we even know if he had a driver's license?   Was it customary for someone like him to be driven around - even to work - chauffeured - a man with wife and kids living the American dream?   At the same time, he was a marksman.   It seems strange even in the 60s that he wouldn't drive an automobile or be a normal sort of man - unless he was brainwashed into thinking he was part of some spy novel, was living the part and mentally deranged!   Maria didn't mention that!  In a few of the interviews she had later, the newsman all but put words into her mouth for her.
 
None of these things are questioned - all were deemed unimportant.   We only know that he proclaimed his innocence and that he wanted legal counsel - none provided!    Dying rather quickly without a story was a perfect ending - a perfect crime!

[Jack Nessan]

The scientists didn?t set out to prove that there was a Conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination. What they proved was, the method Guinn used to rule out multiple rifles was deeply flawed.

A British team of scientists (Randich and Grant) reached a similar conclusion.

The Lead composition of the JFK assassination bullets and fragments doesn?t rule out the possibility of multiple shooters...

Rahn and Sturdivan confirmed Guinn's analysis of there only having been two bullets.

Rahn and Sturdivan also disputed the findings of Randich and Grant and explain why the assumptions used by Randich and Grant in their analysis was faulty.
www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/NAA/Review_of_RG/Review.html

The only bullets analyzed by Tobin and Spiegelman were from different lots of Carcano cartridges. No matter how you look at it they are stating there had to be two snipers both armed with Carcano's. Tobin's goal was to prove there was more than two bullets by reanalyzing Guinn's findings and in the process used his own set of assumptions.

Based on Posner's book, Case Closed, Tobin assumed the shooting sequence proposed by Posner was the basis for his determination that if there was three bullets then there had to be two shooters. In the end they still could not prove Guinn wrong about there only being two bullets and that fact was stated in the conclusion.

[Oscar Navarro]

There were many innocent people involved and it doesn't mean they were in on any conspiracy!   Your argument is that they had to know the truth and therefore guilty of the crime.   The same sort of argument that you would say a prosecutor should face in the wrongful conviction of an innocent person after he has been found guilty of using only select pieces to gain a conviction in his case and not all that he has.

The reality is, there were very few people that needed to know the truth.  The rest was building a case to convict a LNer.   The less people you have that know that, the easier it is to keep a secret.   A few people working with evidence, eye witness accounts and statements can do wonders to point a case to have a deliberate outcome.  Sad but true.

A modern day example of this improper use of selected evidence brought into the light is DNA testing.  There have been so many cases where the DNA is the only thing that saved a man after being already convicted for a crime he didn't commit.  All the circumstantial evidence presented by the DA was compelling and yet one little DNA test later on, proved he was an innocent man.   Sometimes a little extra evidence was planted just to make sure because they knew he was guilty.  If you have convinced yourself of this ahead of time, then you seek to add to make the case watertight.  In these cases,  they don't throw the prosecutors in jail for these things.    The prosecutors are very good at picking and choosing evidence to get their desired end result and ignoring those facts that don't lead to a non-conviction!

So to, you must have an open mind with LHO.  He was killed and wasn't there to defend himself.    Eye witness accounts and statements can be easily obtained and signed off.   In fact the more you can get, the more conflicting it all is, the less reliable they become and the more easy it becomes to mislead and develop your own argument in the case.  So, lets not get into those 5 questions you are itching to have me answer.   Look at what hasn't been provide with it to solidify it and make it into a watertight case!   It is really more important to establish via job application, pay stubs, bank accounts and so on, the exact time he started working at the TBSD.  The traceable phone calls made from his home, collect calls and to who.  The paper would be unquestionable proof, not based on eyewitness or sworn testimony and act as independent evidence.

There have been many cases where a just man has been tried and found guilty for a crime that he didn't do.  It would be fairly easy to do in a case where the man (LHO) is dead already and can't even be questioned or provide  statements.   As a witness, if you are told by the DA or a rep, that a suspect was already guilty and we ask for "just a little extra help to clean up a few loose ends and make the case stick", you might think you are doing the country a favor and saving the taxpayer money too.    "I may even let you in on a little secret in the process to help get the statement from you that I need."   Here is a go at it, let your imagination run wild for a small paragraph!

These people can offer an argument which makes sense.  "Can you imagine what utter chaos the country will be thrown into if you can't help us out a little bit?   We so need to keep riots and civil unrest from occurring.  The simple solution is to have a lone gunman responsible if at all possible.   Heaven forbid that you could have a coup d'etat take place with more than one gunman present.    You certainly wouldn't want LBJ to be accused of a sinister plot to wrench the power out of JFK's hands now would you - that is treason man!   Can you imagine having a rumor like that going around?   Can you imagine then how the Russians would drop nukes on us as we would appear to be leaderless?  They would come attack us at night while we weren't ready in the middle of our unrest  and Communism would take over!  The stock market would crash - our liberty and freedom would be gone forever and you my friend would be held responsible if that were to occur.   You wouldn't want that to happen, now would you?"

Surely you can see my argument?  Strike a little fear in the people's hearts and see what can happen. Now back to reality!
 
IMHO, there is a need for documentation.   The obvious document to look at would be the TBSD job application as example.   It was discussed in Truly's statement.  Wouldn't that be perfect evidence if LHO lied and signed it?  It would establish without doubt when he started.  LHO's tax documents and bank account statements, telephone calls etc. would also show you exactly if he acted alone  and who had paid him and establish the timeline.   Would you mind opening your filing cabinet?  I know if he was only hired 5 weeks earlier, you wouldn't have thrown them out or have someone shred them already?  He is a new employee.  IF you want to fire him and he lied to you, that is an important document!!!  This was not investigated or brough forward?  Why not?   These rabbit trails are the critical ones if you want to know if he acted alone or as part of a larger group or sinister plot.  
What was so important to follow the purchase path of the rifle itself other than to make it a direct path from the store to him and not via someone else.  This again ties in with the "lonenut" narrative, acting alone.  What about all the various ammunition he used, is there a trail for that?  Why so many types, hard nose, frangible, various casings all mixed in his clip we are led to believe.  Even casing from pistol, some coming from an ammo belt.  Two different pistols.     Close examination of this combination of the various evidence is not very convincing when you try to find commanality among it and a coherent argument.

It is little wonder there is conspiracy theories?   A proper and independent investigation was not done!  Take it one step further:

Can you substantiate a motive as to why he hated a President so much that he felt he was called upon to take it upon himself to shoot him?   He loved Communism so much?   He felt his idol Fidol Castro was going to be assassinated by JFK and his gang?    The simple fact is, his being at the TBSD building began after JFK and Connally had decided in September on the Fund Raiser trip for JFK to Dallas!  Those are the real questions of the day!   

Furthermore, what do we know about his character?  Do we even know if he had a driver's license?   Was it customary for someone like him to be driven around - even to work - chauffeured - a man with wife and kids living the American dream?   At the same time, he was a marksman.   It seems strange even in the 60s that he wouldn't drive an automobile or be a normal sort of man - unless he was brainwashed into thinking he was part of some spy novel, was living the part and mentally deranged!   Maria didn't mention that!  In a few of the interviews she had later, the newsman all but put words into her mouth for her.
 
None of these things are questioned - all were deemed unimportant.   We only know that he proclaimed his innocence and that he wanted legal counsel - none provided!    Dying rather quickly without a story was a perfect ending - a perfect crime!

There were many innocent people involved and it doesn't mean they were in on any conspiracy!   Your argument is that they had to know the truth and therefore guilty of the crime.   The same sort of argument that you would say a prosecutor should face in the wrongful conviction of an innocent person after he has been found guilty of using only select pieces to gain a conviction in his case and not all that he has.

But if there was a conspiracy at least one of the persons named had to be involved. There's no way to get around that fact becuase that's the only way Oswald could have gotten the job at the TSBD.

The reality is, there were very few people that needed to know the truth.  The rest was building a case to convict a LNer.   The less people you have that know that, the easier it is to keep a secret.   A few people working with evidence, eye witness accounts and statements can do wonders to point a case to have a deliberate outcome.  Sad but true.



You're basing something as real and true on nothing more than conjecture.  There's nothing, not a scrap of evidence that can lead anyone to assume what you're saying. IMHO.

So to, you must have an open mind with LHO.  He was killed and wasn't there to defend himself.    Eye witness accounts and statements can be easily obtained and signed off.   In fact the more you can get, the more conflicting it all is, the less reliable they become and the more easy it becomes to mislead and develop your own argument in the case.  So, lets not get into those 5 questions you are itching to have me answer.   Look at what hasn't been provide with it to solidify it and make it into a watertight case!   It is really more important to establish via job application, pay stubs, bank accounts and so on, the exact time he started working at the TBSD.  The traceable phone calls made from his home, collect calls and to who.  The paper would be unquestionable proof, not based on eyewitness or sworn testimony and act as independent evidence.


The evidence pointing to Oswald's  guilt is overwhelming so why should I have to try to look at the possibilities that he was innocent? Why don't you try to look at this case from the historical perspective instead of as a defense of Oswald?  It's really very convenient to refuse to answer my questions because it would place the burden on you of proving how and why any of those persons were involved in a conspiracy. It's much easier to say well, we can't rely on dozens of witness statements that Oswald worked at the TSBD, not even Oswalds own statement in front of the camera that he indeed worked at the TSBD. Since Oswald is innocent until proven guilty even his own statement must not be allowed as evidence. It's really mindboggling.  BTW, here is the face sheet of Oswald's job application for the TSBD  https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=961#relPageId=357&tab=page

Surely you can see my argument?  Strike a little fear in the people's hearts and see what can happen. Now back to reality!



Yes, please.

What about all the various ammunition he used, is there a trail for that?  Why so many types, hard nose, frangible, various casings all mixed in his clip we are led to believe.  Even casing from pistol, some coming from an ammo belt.  Two different pistols.     Close examination of this combination of the various evidence is not very convincing when you try to find commanality among it and a coherent argument.


What! There were only tow types of ammo used. WC 6.5 mm copper plated used in the Carcano and Winchester-Western/Remington-Peters .38 cal bullets used in the S&W .38 Special.

It is little wonder there is conspiracy theories?   A proper and independent investigation was not done!  Take it one step further:



There are conspiracy theories. Many, many, conspiracy theories involving dozens if not over a hundred different characters and entities. And they all began with Marguerite Oswald, IMO.

Can you substantiate a motive as to why he hated a President so much that he felt he was called upon to take it upon himself to shoot him?   He loved Communism so much?   He felt his idol Fidol Castro was going to be assassinated by JFK and his gang?    The simple fact is, his being at the TBSD building began after JFK and Connally had decided in September on the Fund Raiser trip for JFK to Dallas!  Those are the real questions of the day!



A motive can only be arrived at by conjecture. I'm not going to go there although a plausible motive could be arrived at by looking at the evidence, Oswald's affinity for violence, his attraction to a political cause, and the current confrontational relations between the JFK administration and both Cuba and the USSR.

What you claim as a simple fact is all conjecture. If the questions brought up by me were answered a simple timeline and narrative would explain how it came to be that Oswald ended up employed at the TSBD.

Furthermore, what do we know about his character?  Do we even know if he had a driver's license?   Was it customary for someone like him to be driven around - even to work - chauffeured - a man with wife and kids living the American dream?   At the same time, he was a marksman.   It seems strange even in the 60s that he wouldn't drive an automobile or be a normal sort of man - unless he was brainwashed into thinking he was part of some spy novel, was living the part and mentally deranged!   Maria didn't mention that!  In a few of the interviews she had later, the newsman all but put words into her mouth for her.



We know a lot about his character. There's the testimony of his brother Robert, his wife Marina, Ruth Paine, George D, people of the Russian emigre community who dealt with him and Marina, co-workers, bosses, Oswald's diary...etc. No drivers license was found in his possession or in his belongins and Ruth Paine said that even though his driving had improved the one time they went to get a drivers license the place was closed.

None of these things are questioned - all were deemed unimportant.   We only know that he proclaimed his innocence and that he wanted legal counsel - none provided!    Dying rather quickly without a story was a perfect ending - a perfect crime!

A lot of things were questioned and investigated by the WC and the HSCA and they happened to come to the same conclusion except for the HSCA erroneous conclusion there had been a shooter at the Grassy Knoll who missed and, therefore, there was a conspiracy. The HSCA could not arrive at any conclusion as to who or what organization or government was involved in a conspiracy though.  Yes, it's true that Oswald say he was innocent but he was provided with an opportunity for counsel and rejected it. He wanted a certian lawyer named Abt and attempts were made to get him to no avail.

[Jon Banks]

Rahn and Sturdivan confirmed Guinn's analysis of there only having been two bullets.

Rahn and Sturdivan also disputed the findings of Randich and Grant and explain why the assumptions used by Randich and Grant in their analysis was faulty.
www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/NAA/Review_of_RG/Review.html

The only bullets analyzed by Tobin and Spiegelman were from different lots of Carcano cartridges. No matter how you look at it they are stating there had to be two snipers both armed with Carcano's. Tobin's goal was to prove there was more than two bullets by reanalyzing Guinn's findings and in the process used his own set of assumptions.

Based on Posner's book, Case Closed, Tobin assumed the shooting sequence proposed by Posner was the basis for his determination that if there was three bullets then there had to be two shooters. In the end they still could not prove Guinn wrong about there only being two bullets and that fact was stated in the conclusion.

Jack, Guinn used junk science. His claims are no longer viewed as credible.

Those statements are confirmed by the fact that Law Enforcement no longer uses the same methods for Lead Analysis as they did 40 years ago. Guinn may have been Right but the methods he used to reach his conclusions were wrong...

?

Tobin was the FBI lab's chief metallurgy expert for more than two decades. He analyzed metal evidence in major cases that included the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1996 explosion of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island.

After retiring, he attracted national attention by questioning the FBI science used in prosecutions for decades to match bullets to crime suspects through their lead content. The questions he and others raised prompted a National Academy of Sciences review that in 2003 concluded that the FBI's bullet lead analysis was flawed. The FBI agreed and generally ended the use of that type of analysis.

Using new guidelines set forth by the National Academy of Sciences for proper bullet analysis, Tobin and his colleagues at Texas A&M re-analyzed the bullet evidence provided to the 1976 House Select Committee on Assassinations to support the conclusion that only one shooter, Oswald, fired the shots that killed Kennedy.

Tobin, Spiegelman and James said they bought the same brand and lot of bullets used by Oswald and analyzed their lead using the new standards. The bullets from that batch are still on the market as collectors' items.

They found that the scientific and statistical assumptions Guinn used -- and the government accepted at the time -- to conclude that the fragments came from just two bullets fired from Oswald's gun were wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/16/AR2007051601967.html