Do we know anymore at 60 years?

[Charles Collins]

    Even a Serial Killer does Not kill every single person they meet. Bearing this in mind, would you choose to chum around with a Serial Killer even though they do not Kill everyone they come into contact with? To a far lesser degree and with the "character" issue in mind, would you trust the testimony of a "Jailhouse snitch"?

I wouldn’t automatically dismiss testimony of a jailhouse snitch simply because he was a jailhouse snitch. I would consider it along with the rest of the evidence.

[Royell Storing]

I wouldn’t automatically dismiss testimony of a jailhouse snitch simply because he was a jailhouse snitch. I would consider it along with the rest of the evidence.

    I believe it is now time to discuss "naivette".

[Charles Collins]

    I believe it is now time to discuss "naivette".

It is what is required and expected of a jury. Naïveté is an assumption on your part. If you think I am naive, you are grossly in error.

[Zeon Mason]

What we need is a real person who is the same height and body mass to JC with legs of the same length , to sit in the actual jump seat of the JFK  limo and determine the most probable angle of JCs legs in relation to his upper torso and shoulders which appear imo to be at an angle NOT parallel exactly with the side door, per as in the Z-224-225 frames

( Maybe Mr.Collins can do another actual empirical test like he has done before , when he demonstrated how a shooter in the 6th floor SN window could have sat on the box next to the pipes and be out if sight during the Hughes film)

The Knotts laboratory experiment (judging from their video graphic ) has what appears to me to be both of JCs  legs basically parallel to the side door , such that his Knees would be pressing into the back of Kellerman seat.

But if JCs upper torso and shoulder line was turned somewhat towards viewing umbrella man and DC man as it seems to appear to my own human eyeballs viewing the individual frames of Z223 -Z225 then it seems to me that JC trying to keep his legs parallel , while his upper torso is having to twist slightly , would have been an uncomfortable position for JC, especially if he was holding the hat upside down with the well  of the hat hanging off the outer (left) side of his left thigh , with his right  hand holding the rim of the hat pressed against the upper part of his left leg.

And if that’s the position the laboratory guys were using then that explains why they cannot align the exit wound from JCs right side of his chest with the wrist wound in his right hand and   with the left thigh wound.

I think theres probably only one way the SBT  trajectory alignment is possible, and that requires both of JCs  legs to be turned at some diagonal angle towards the right side door to the same degree his upper torso and chest and shoulder line seem to be in Z223-225.  I have to speculate that would probably have been a more comfortable position for JCs legs having a bit more room due to that diagonal angle.

However, if there’s some follow up by other scientific methodologists whom can absolutely determine which way JCs legs were oriented relative to his upper torso and shoulder angle , which winds up matching the leg position  the Knotts lab graphics show, then it would be a refutation of the Myers computer trajectory line and thus would prove the SBT is improbable.

The actual experiment in the 2003 Beyond Conspiracy to attempt to prove Myers computer model trajectory FAILED to prove the trajectory because the bullet that exited from the JFK replica , exited from the right side chest , in effect would have gone thru JFKs right lung rather than the throat.

Also Dr. Wecht, has NOT been refuted regarding his opinion on the slight deformation of CE 399 being highly improbable for a bullet that traversed thru thru 2 human body and ribs bones  plus having entered thru  the wrist bone of JCs hand BACKWARDs!.

[Charles Collins]

What we need is a real person who is the same height and body mass to JC with legs of the same length , to sit in the actual jump seat of the JFK  limo and determine the most probable angle of JCs legs in relation to his upper torso and shoulders which appear imo to be at an angle NOT parallel exactly with the side door, per as in the Z-224-225 frames

( Maybe Mr.Collins can do another actual empirical test like he has done before , when he demonstrated how a shooter in the 6th floor SN window could have sat on the box next to the pipes and be out if sight during the Hughes film)

The Knotts laboratory experiment (judging from their video graphic ) has what appears to me to be both of JCs  legs basically parallel to the side door , such that his Knees would be pressing into the back of Kellerman seat.

But if JCs upper torso and shoulder line was turned somewhat towards viewing umbrella man and DC man as it seems to appear to my own human eyeballs viewing the individual frames of Z223 -Z225 then it seems to me that JC trying to keep his legs parallel , while his upper torso is having to twist slightly , would have been an uncomfortable position for JC, especially if he was holding the hat upside down with the well  of the hat hanging off the outer (left) side of his left thigh , with his right  hand holding the rim of the hat pressed against the upper part of his left leg.

And if that’s the position the laboratory guys were using then that explains why they cannot align the exit wound from JCs right side of his chest with the wrist wound in his right hand and   with the left thigh wound.

I think theres probably only one way the SBT  trajectory alignment is possible, and that requires both of JCs  legs to be turned at some diagonal angle towards the right side door to the same degree his upper torso and chest and shoulder line seem to be in Z223-225.  I have to speculate that would probably have been a more comfortable position for JCs legs having a bit more room due to that diagonal angle.

However, if there’s some follow up by other scientific methodologists whom can absolutely determine which way JCs legs were oriented relative to his upper torso and shoulder angle , which winds up matching the leg position  the Knotts lab graphics show, then it would be a refutation of the Myers computer trajectory line and thus would prove the SBT is improbable.

The actual experiment in the 2003 Beyond Conspiracy to attempt to prove Myers computer model trajectory FAILED to prove the trajectory because the bullet that exited from the JFK replica , exited from the right side chest , in effect would have gone thru JFKs right lung rather than the throat.

Also Dr. Wecht, has NOT been refuted regarding his opinion on the slight deformation of CE 399 being highly improbable for a bullet that traversed thru thru 2 human body and ribs bones  plus having entered thru  the wrist bone of JCs hand BACKWARDs!.

Probably about 10-years ago I experimented with a chair tilted back at about the same angle as the jump seat. I simulated the height of the jump seat off the floor of the limo by placing an object of the appropriate height on the floor in front of the chair (where the feet would rest on the object). And I was able to demonstrate to myself how I would have sat in the seat, how it felt, and how I would have turned to look over my right shoulder (as JBC said he did). Anyone can do this experiment for themselves without very much trouble. And I do recommend it. What I found is that, mostly due to the backward tilt of the seat and the low height of the seat above the floor of the limo and the short distance to the front seat, the knees are elevated and gravity tends to “pin” you to the seat back. When turning to look back over the right shoulder, I found it natural that I would lift my torso slightly in order to twist it to the right. And when I settled back onto the seat back my right shoulder would end up near the center (side to side) of the seat back. Also, the legs naturally would be turned to the right and pinned up against the right side if the limo interior. And when one considers that JBC was photographed often with his torso and shoulders turned at an angle to the right, it appears to me that his legs would most likely have also been turned to a similar angle. The reasons are that it would have been uncomfortable and required an effort for him to maintain his torso twisted in relation to his legs for an extended period of time such as the length of time it took for the motorcade to travel through Dallas, and there is more room for his long legs to extend out away from him if he has them turned toward the right side of the limo. If you don’t want to go to the trouble of setting up a chair, just try sitting in the front (bucket) seat of a car and turn around to look over your right shoulder to see the passenger seated behind you. I think you will find out for yourself that JBC probably had his legs turned to the right.

[Royell Storing]

    You guys need to get over to YOU TUBE and review Everything posted there. With regard to the Z Film, I am seeing copies posted there that are superior to "Images Of An Assassination" DVD along with the upgraded Z Images provided in "The Lost Bullet". Connally can be seen clearly holding that Stetson of his UPRIGHT. I bring this up due to the necessary position of his Wrist/Hand to Hold/Grip the Stetson in that position. Combing through NBC/ABC/CBS news presentations or small Mom/Pop affiliates doing stories using JFK Assassination Film Footage provided by the Big 3 can produce a treasure trove. I just found a highly detailed copy of the train yard segment of the Darnell Film. So detailed that you can see what is on the ground up alongside the train cars. Spending time over at YOU TUBE is worth the effort. And while there, always check what is up with, "The JFK Theorist".  "Theory" in conjunction with his Groden connection is posting 2-3 pieces weekly that never disappoint.   

[Bill Brown]

i understand where you are coming from here Charles and what you say is not unreasonable at all , that is in the sense that you offered it IE  in a court room setting .

however i was talking about in a forum setting such as this forum or other places where people discuss the assassination online . in that sense we are dealing with specific mentalities .

for example lets take Mr brown who posts on this site . im talking about Bill now as ive seen another Mr brown also . i wouldnt want to cause any confusion .

he has long stated for example that in essence he only accepts statements from witnesses made very close to the events in question . i mean statements made in the hours or just a few days after the event .i once saw him in a discussion , and his logic above came up . in that instance he was discussing Earlene roberts . as we know in the days after the event she would say that she heard a police car outside and the driver tooted the horn . this was some thing that i do not believe she had any reason at all at the time to associate with Mr oswald  , but 5 or 6 days later she mentioned it . Bill took exception to that , i cant recall the exact wording of the post now but in essence he said that as she only said what she said near to a week after the tragic events in dallas that he didnt believe her . remember now this is just days after the event . later Bill would pop up and say Domingo Benavides positively identified Oswald as the killer . i knew that benavides certainly never IDed oswald on the day , at the time or even months later when testifying . so i enquired just for pig iron (just for fun ) exactly when Benavides made the statement now being attributed to him , well he made the statement several years AFTER THE EVENT . can you see what i am saying here ? , very simply an LN on one hand says that a statement made just days after the assassination is not acceptable but a statement made years after the assassination was because the person said what Bill liked . remember LN cite Earlene as a reliable witness who saw oswald come home , change and leave wearing a jacket , but now she is unreliable when she says something an LN doesnt like .

now this is in no way an attack on Bill at all , im just using this as a method to highlight LN logic .

another case is Wes frazier . obviously LN cite him to say Oswald had a long sack . but again when he talks about the sack being some 12 inches shorter than the 36 inch or more long sack in evidence LN suddenly question his reliability and even his IQ  level  . again it was Bill (not verbatim now ) if i recall correctly who in reference to Frazier said in essence that Frazier probably did not realize that 24 inches equals two feet . so another example of where a witness is credible and reliable when it suits LN , but then decidedly unreliable and lacking credibility when what they say does not suit LN .

how often do LN cite the word of Marina ? yet we know the many problems with her statements , not just that we have the redlich memo that tells is that she has been untruthful , and extremely contradictory in her statements . but LN still hang on her every word , that us until she starts saying oswald did not do it .

i could go on with examples . now as i said i am not attacking anyone here , not at all , i only mention Bill because i knew from here and on bob harris old forum . i am just giving examples of the LN  logic .

later Bill would pop up and say Domingo Benavides positively identified Oswald as the killer . i knew that benavides certainly never IDed oswald on the day , at the time or even months later when testifying . so i enquired just for pig iron (just for fun ) exactly when Benavides made the statement now being attributed to him , well he made the statement several years AFTER THE EVENT . can you see what i am saying here ?

You're not being fair.  For the record, I do not rely on Domingo Benavides when listing eyewitnesses who said the killer was Oswald.  In fact, this forum is littered with my posts naming the eyewitnesses who said the killer was Oswald and I never include Benavides.

However, for what it's worth, Benavides did indeed use the name Oswald in 1964 during his testimony to the Warren Commission:

"...and I seen Oswald, or the man that shot him, standing on the other side of the car."

I don't include Benavides though since he did not attend a lineup and/or positively identify Oswald as the cop-killer to the FBI a month or two later like other witnesses did.  For the same reason, I don't include Jack Tatum either even though he says that the man he saw was undoubtedly Oswald but not until the mid 70's to HSCA investigators.