@neilcrouse Yes, I believe strongly that this is what we're seeing. Braden was arrested in the Dal-Tex building, but then released. He very likely was the other shooter from the rear.
Yes, I agree. To me it looks like he was reacting to one shot by raising his arms and hands to his throat, and then another shot that forced him forward.
@barmtrail Researchers like Fetzer and Twyman are incorrect when claiming alteration. We know this due to the between-sprocket images on the extant version, & these were not viewed publicly until MPI released their digital version (with mistakes). Let's pretend you're right though - if the CIA indeed altered it, they did a poor job. They must have missed the portion in my clip that shows 2 shooters firing from the rear.
It happens very quickly, and the slow-motion will deceive you. After watching in slo-mo, then watch it in real time. JFK's chest indeed moves almost violently forward at precisely 230. This causes his chin to raise. This reaction by him certainly does not appear to be voluntary. Do you think JFK could be taking a bullet to his back at 230?
@markinator012961 The film is a CIA alteration. Film frames are just as phony. The CIA is always laughing at you.
Forrest V. Sorrels (in the lead car), WC Testimony: vol.VII, pg345
Sorrels is in the car in front of the limo. Sorrels said that just after the shots, a motorcycle cop had run up on the right-hand side of the lead car to tell Chief Curry what happened. Read it for yourself. The Z film shows NO motorcycle officer passing the limo to the lead car after the shots. The film was altered.
i don't see a "thrust". i see a reaction to being shot, a voluntary movement to what must have felt like choking with a bullet going thought the throat. and as was mentioned by someone else, kennedy could have made no other movement, being already against the seat.
aside from that, the autopsy photos do show a larger exit wound in the front, but many make the false conclusion a shot from behind implicates oswald as the shooter.
too bad this isnt the shot that the warren commission, dan rather and other researchers argue about. this is the throat/ back/ neck wound aka the magic bullet because it supposedly hit connally and made 5 wounds on him. the JFK headshot sometimes referred to as bullet 3 is the shot that everyone argues about and the famous movie line of "back and to the left" comes from. every1 agrees JFK moves forward in the shot shown in ur video, its the other shot occurring at frame 312-313 in the Z-film
@pat442389@pat442389 This sequence in my clip occurs well before the headshot at 313. I strongly believe the best explanation for what JFK is doing between 230 & 234, is reacting to a bullet impact in his upper back. If Oswald was acting alone, then too many bullets are entering that car when it passed the Stemmons freeway sign. Also, due to the cartridges, if Oswald was acted alone, then ALL theories must include 3 shots only, and must account for all wounds on all people, plus James Tague.
@xarzu This isn't about Connally at all. This video demonstrates two things: First, JFK has already been hit when he emerges from behind the sign. About one-third of a second later, at precisely frame 230, it sure looks to me like JFK takes an additional bullet to his back. When viewing the Z-film overall, Connally is hit in the back at precisely frame 224. That's 3 shots just in this span of time --- JFK hit behind the sign, Connally at 224, then JFK again at 230.
@xarzu It's more sensible that JFK was hit in his frontal neck just as he passed behind that sign. My clip focuses only on JFK, but Connally clearly isn't hit until frame 224, nearly a full second later, but still too fast for Oswald to get off 2 sequential shots.
JFK is thrust forward ??? But first he is pushed violently backwards against the seat then he bounced forward. As we can see at video " Zapruder Film Closeup" Is this video suggesting that the shot came from behind ? If so we have another lone assassin theorist nut.
@Verdelufe Watch the slowest version of my clip carefully. His upper torso moves forward at 230, causing his chin to raise. It looks very much like JFK took a bullet to his back at that moment. If so, then based on Connally's obvious wounding at 224, which happens one-third of second sooner than JFK's motion, then there had to be an additional shooter located rearward.
@GeorgeVreelandHill Of course it proves JFK was shot from behind, by at least two shooters, one of whom was likely Oswald. JFK emerges from behind the sign, and has been hit, & the Warren Commission said this happened circa 210. Connally shows bullet impact at 224, then JFK shows the abrupt movement in my video at 230. That's 3 shots in the span of just over one second, & fired in a "flurry". That's why Kellerman reported a flurry, and why spectators heard 3 shot groupings, not separate shots.
@GeorgeVreelandHill If Oswald was a mere lone nut assassin, can you explain why his address in NOLA was the same building as Bannister's office? You know, Bannister, of the FBI. Clearly Oswald had connections as a low-level informant or operative in some way. Also, why would Humes choose to burn his 1st draft of the autopsy report on Sunday morning, AFTER learning Oswald had been killed? Also, you must consider the ease in which Oswald defected from, & then repatriated to the US.
@markinator012961 I've also found that odd, that at the height of the cold war, an announced communist defector is allowed to return to his country with his Russian bride. These days nobody would protest, but back then it wouldn't have happened so easily.
@cyberwing777 Correct. It's all too easy for someone to believe the Single Bullet fantasy, and the ways in which it's demonstrated to be "possible", then claim that it's the simplest version so it must be correct. Conspiracy does not seem to be the most simple solution, so it's disregarded by some. However, if we consider a very small group of people in a few key positions of power, conspiracy makes most sense. Thanks!
No one claims that at all. "it's the simplest version" when you take into consideration all the avaiilable evidence. It's counter-intuative in the fact that :
* No 2 gunshot woudings can be duplicated exactely. ESPECIALLY WHEN 2 PPL ARE INVOLVED !
* A FMJ bullet like CE-399 as it's slowed going thru 2 ppl can go fast enough to break bones but not fast enough to deform the bullet
@JgarfbiHoover I've often stated that I'll accept the SBT fantasy when several items of concern are put to rest for me: Dr. Burkley and/or the FBI's gross ineptitude concerning their "loss" of the Harper Fragment. Burkley told us years later through his attorney that he had "information" that demonstrated others' involvement. I want another independent investigation that issues subpoena for his records. Rather than mere "loss" of evidence, the limo was hastily rebuilt, "destroying evidence".
@markinator012961 "I've often stated that I'll accept the SBT fantasy when several items of concern are put to rest for me"
The Single Bullet Fact doesn't need Burkley or the Harper Fragment to stand as a verifiable theory. It's been proven in feild test experimentations a 1000 times. The Harper Fragment is a rather poor excuse to dismiss the SBT to say the least.
It's not odd at all. At the time the USSR was behind us 10 to 1 in megatonnage H-Bombs & were looking for ways of detente AND THEY DIDN'T WANT ANY SCANDELS. like has been proven when a letter showed up in a recentely deceased Sen. file from LHO saying the Russian's were holding him hostage in Minsk. Ozzie was 1 of 3 ppl who returned back home from the USSR that same year.
@JgarfbiHoover Did the other 2 defectors also have Russian wives with relatives connected to the KGB? Were they former US Marines? Did they operate at Atsugi for covert surveillance aircraft? Were their Pentagon files destoyed? The letter you mention means squat. A document such as that could easily have been forged to deflect attention, and somehow rationalize what otherwise presents itself as inept COINTEL. After we can destroy earth once, extra mega-tonnage is moot.
@markinator012961 "Did the other 2 defectors also have Russian wives w/relatives connected to the KGB?"
If you're implying that the Ruskies Dood It I'll support u on that CONspiracy theory, there's no doubt they were worried that JFK was about to 'Turn American'. "A doc such as that could easily have been forged" Y bury it in private papers, easily lost forever, so it takes an accident to find it? "inept COINTEL" More like inept CONspiracy MONgering by the Criminal Research Community !
Thats the most explainable of all, he went thru that building until he found a vacant office and used that address for his pamphlet passing COMMY support of Cuba. No more complicated than that. He needed an address and he stole one.
@JgarfbiHoover Jim Garrison realized the ridiculous nature of the idiosyncrasies of stealing an address that just so happened to be the same as Bannister's. It seems as though you're attempting to convince yourself. I'll need citation on your assertion about stealing the address. Also, I'll need your explanation of why Oswald was observed IN the office. Stealing the address of an office is one thing. You're saying he stole the address, & then used the office, which is totally absurd. Try again.
@markinator012961 "I'll need ur explanation of Y Oz was observed IN the office"
You have your JFK CONspiracy FACtoids mixed up. No one ever said or testified that he was in the office that was on his phamplets. Delphine Roberts, without corobboration from anyone else said on certain dates that Oz was seen in Bannisters office which was not connected to the rest of the building that Oz stole his address from. Pay attention and get with the CONspiracy PROgram would ya? Try again.
@JgarfbiHoover I have no need to refute your claim here, as Delphine Roberts already did. Semantics reigns supreme with the hair-splitting of differentiation between Bannister's office and the Camp street address. You didn't explain how you believe LHO stole the address. If speculation and innuendo works for your side of the argument, you must allow it from mine. Please provide me with your idea of why the Harper Fragment was lost, Burkley's claim of conspiracy, & the haste to rebuild the limo.
@markinator012961 "You didn't explain how you believe LHO stole the address"
THE OFFICE ADDRESS ON HIS PHAMPLETS WAS VACANT AT THE TIME IN QUESTION. WE CAN RIGHTLY ASSUME WITH GREAT JUSTIFICATION, SINCE HE STOLE, LIED, BLACKMAILED EVERONE HE CAME INTO CONTACT WITH, THAT HE ALSO 'BORROWED' THE VACANT ADDRESS, RIGHT? WHAT OTHER EXPLANATION IS THERE?
@auther1046 No need to type in caps, unless your eyesight is going bad, along with your reasoning. The other explanation is that Oswald was being handled in some way through Bannister. Although since you bring it up, what did Oswald steal? Certainly he lied. Who did he blackmail?
@markinator012961 "The other explanation is that Oswald was being handled in some way through Bannister"
Unqualified NO ! Everyone who knew him flatly rejects the notion that he'd follow instructions from anyone after leaving the Marine Corp.'s
"what did Oswald steal?"
The 544 Camp St. Address
"Who did he blackmail?"
Russians by cutting his wrists to get in and threathening a scandal unless he got permission to leave. Since his citizenship had not been revoked he was allowed to leave
As I recall that arrived late in the autopsy & was probably put in the evidence bag with JFK's brain, tissue slides, etc. RFK had all those destroyed to prevent public expose in the future.
"Burkley's claim"
He's one of the Kennedy family legacy keepers that didn't have any evidence at all. Being JFK's personal Dr. he'd be the last person on Earth to ask and get a truthful statement from.
@auther1046 Your recollection is not correct. The Harper Fragment didn't arrive in Washington until Sunday. He said he gave it back to the FBI, and there the chain of evidence is halted. Simple dismissal by RFK with the brain is not a viable explanation. I don't expect you to have a reasonable explanation for disposition of the Harper Fragment, because the FBI itself never gave one. Burkley, regardless of his personal connections to the family, was a key witness & wasn't called to the WC.
"Burkley was a key witness & wasn't called to the WC"
Nonsense! Burkley wasn't a pathologist, clinical pathologist, forensic pathologist, wounds ballistic engineer or any other designation that would make him a "key witness" so anything he'd have to say is irrelevent to this case, and lay opinion. Prosectors Humes Boswell & Finck were "key witness"s.
WTF cares about the "Harper Fragment"? It's also irrelevent
@auther1046 Your citation can be found at ARRB Master Set of Medical Exhibits, interviews w/ Harper, p. 6. Burkley was a doctor, saw the wounds in Parkland, saw the autopsy, yet apparently said nothing to Humes re: the throat wound obliteration by trach, & Humes missed that wound completely. Location of discovery in DP is not relevant because hundreds of people strolled the grass overnight & could have kicked it somewhere. Claims of location demonstrating LHO firing from rear are then moot.
Go to conspiracy site JFK Lancer, the limo was taken to a Wash.DC garage were it was thoughally examined, fragments recovered, and photographed. What haste?
@auther1046 The haste that you simply fail to understand is that LBJ had other limousines at his disposal. The SS100X should have been kept as evidence. Complete refurbishment within the first two weeks of the murder is indeed haste, and reeks of quick disposal of evidence of number and direction of gunfire.
The president had to make do with one limo, JEH had two, one was formally owned by Al Capone.
"quick disposal of evidence"
Nonsense! FBI recovered all bullet fragments from the car, all were found in the forward compartments, which is strong evidence (That you don't like) that all shots originated from behind. Blood splatter analysis would of been unhelpful because the limo was moving into a headwind & his brain mat. was all over
@auther1046 Only one limousine at LBJ's disposal is so absurd its laughable. Also, you cling to bullet fragments being discovered & documented. Yes, correct. What about the chrome molding? What happened to it? The damaged rear view mirror? The chrome molding was direct evidence of direction & type of ammo, & they knew it because they photographed it. You are mistaken about my theory of origin of gunfire. My video posted here SHOWS additional gunfire from behind. I make no claims re: a GK shooter
@markinator012961 "What about the chrome molding? What happened to it? The damaged rear view mirror?"
They're all in the National Archives along with the windscreen.
"My video posted here SHOWS additional gunfire from behind"
BTW you're also wrong about 'JFK's Forward Thrust'??? That's been attributed to CE-399 grazing his vertebrae causing 'Thornburn Position', elbows raised at a 45 degree angle to body, fists clenched & under chin, 1st noted in Civil War injuries by Dr. Thornburn, get w/it
@markinator012961 "Only one limousine at LBJ's disposal is so absurd its laughable"
* PBS Frontline 'The Secret Files on/of JEH' : "the president had to make do with only one such vehicle, JEH had two ^, each had to have their air-conditioning preset. Each day he would pick up Clyde Tolsen and they would" ..... so on and so forth.
^ It's a well known fact his second was taken from Al Capone after his conviction for tax evasion. It had the added benefit of also being bomb proof.
@auther1046 There can be no innocent explanation for destruction of limo evidence. As the new POTUS, LBJ could have ordered a new limo and had in the White House garage in just days. When dealing with other CT's, they indeed make claims of conspiracy with very little if any, physical evidence. My video, IMO, at least provides a visual film record of what can be JFK taking a bullet in his back at Z230. This seems more believable than the neuro-physiological delays used to rationalize the SBT.
@auther1046 We both possess extensive knowledge of the JFK case, but I must apologize for not realizing that the chrome molding had indeed been preserved at the Nat'l Archives. Robert Groden, upon examination, claimed that the dent in the molding fits perfectly with a rounded nose missile, and therefore this must have been caused by a missed shot. If that shot was separate, it becomes even more difficult to rationalize the SBT.
@auther1046 Any order in which you wish to list them. Groden viewed the above portion of the Z-film correctly --- JFK is taking a missile to his back at Z230, & this is firm visual evidence of at least one additional shooter from the rear. Through your repeated visiting me here to comment, it does appear that you also have some doubts about the missile strike at Z230. That explains your attempt to reassure yourself by rehashing other mistakes and reiterating mistakes made by others.
@auther1046 I've seen Myers' program & animations, although I don't own a copy. I just reviewed the portion that contains the same frames as my clip, & Myers' simple melded JFK's abrupt motion into frame 224. He FAILS to cite and explain the time delay from 224 to 230. Tague's wound certainly wasn't caused by a missed shot circa 160. CE399 didn't wound Tague, and I simply cannot accept that a fragment of the headshot missile was big enough to cause the concrete mark, & then wound Tague.
@markinator012961 "I simply cannot accept that a fragment of the headshot missile was big enough to cause the concrete mark, & then wound Tague"
* Well then a tiny fragment must of hit him seperately?
Or
* When Tague ducked around the conc, embankment he might of brushed his face against the conc. itself?
What I see is too quick an analysis to come to a decisive conclusion you want to hear to be of any possible use in this case. Another amatuer reaching for an amatuerish conclusion.
@markinator012961 "He FAILS to cite and explain the time delay from 224 to 230"
Reaching again. His work has been checked for accuracy by Z-Axis Corp. good enough to be submittible into a court of law world wide. Maybe you ougth to get yours checked out the same eh?
@auther1046 If you are an acquaintance of Dale Myers, perhaps you can show him my clip. He is certainly a professional in every sense, although others have taken issue with some of his positioning. His animations offered a different perspective for all of us, & it was a valuable contribution. But for some reason, his figure of JFK seems to have a long neck. This likely would not affect his conclusions concerning the SBT.
@markinator012961 "His animations offered a different perspective for all of us"
Thats an odd statement. It reflects accurately what the USG's WR said 47 yrs ago. I for one didn't see it as "a different perspective" it was more like 'confiming animation' of what has been painfully obvious to anyone not harboring an agenda and those who twist the truth for whatever reason.
Correction, I think you don't want to accept some conclusions that are apparent. After all belonging to a JFK analysis is a powerful and strong attraction. Accepting means declining your own preconcieved notions of what happened. There is abundant, interlocking, redundent and overwhelming evidence that the assassination happened exactely the way the USG characterised it. I just can't see my way past any of your objections.
@auther1046 The Z160 shot missed. Tague was not likely wounded from that shot. CE399 didn't hit Tague. Process of elimination leaves you with the headshot to deposit the 6.5mm artifact on the A-P X-ray, as well as striking the chrome molding, & leaving the trail of opacities on the right lateral X-ray. That headshot had to exhibit both its military-jacketed characteristices by staying intact enough to cause the strike to the molding, as well as fragmenting enough to deposit the tiny opacities.
@markinator012961 "That headshot had to exhibit both its military-jacketed characteristices by staying intact enough to cause the strike to the molding, as well as fragmenting enough to deposit the tiny opacities"
Why? The "tiny opacities" as well as the fragments left in JBC's wrist in total still would of weighed less than that of a postage stamp. There's plenty of weight left over even after tague to account for everything posited by the WR.
@auther1046 You are referring to CE399, which was alleged to be the transiting projectile. My statement, quoted by you, directly references the headshot -- a different shot. I've demonstrated to you that the Z160 shot missed. I'll give you the SBT & 399. However, then the headshot must account for the following: 1) Trail of opacities in the brain; 2) 6.5mm artifact in the A-P X-ray; 3) Strike to the chrome molding; 4) Windshield strike & mirror dent; 5) Tague wound Yet another magic bullet, eh?
@markinator012961 "that just so happened to be the same as Bannister's"
The 544 Camp St. address was one given to a building that had 2 completely seperate entrances but shared the same facade or roof enclosure. You could not get to Bannisters office from the one on Ozzie's Phamplet. See Frontline video 'Who Was LHO"?
@markinator012961 "Also, I'll need your explanation of why Oswald was observed IN the office"
* He was observed in the Bannisters office by one Delphine Roberts who recalled the incident years after the event
* She had no one else to corobborate her rather improbable story
* If by a rather silly co-incidence Ozzie had been there we can assume he was trying to infiltrate another anti-cuban organization to put in his resume for entrance to cuba, he tried that once before remember?
@markinator012961 "You're saying he stole the address, & then used the office, which is totally absurd"
He didn't say anything like that. He said LHO stole the address used on his phamplets, and was seen in Bannisters office (TWO SEPERATE BUILDINGS) by uncorobborated and unsworn testimony. We seem to get alot of that in this case, no?
@markinator012961 "Whose testimony do we have that says he did NOT use the office?"
This was at a point in time when he could barely afford the apt he had rented in order to get his wife to come back and live with him. There's no record that he ever rented the office, no rental receipts were ever produced to even remotely suggest he ever occupied that office. The burden of proof is on you to prove it not on anyone else to prove or disprove "he did NOT use the office"
@auther1046 His NOLA activities are moot. I demonstrate through my video posted here, at least one other gunman firing from the rear. LN's seem to demand physical and verifiable proof of conspiracy, & this video indeed provides that. Also, I must deduce that you believe I have valid points, which is why you come here to debate with me. If I was completely off the mark, you wouldn't come here and waste your time. Frankly, I prefer to have you challenge me, & as you see, I can back up my claims.
@markinator012961 "LN's seem to demand physical and verifiable proof of conspiracy, & this video indeed provides that"
YES SOLID PHYSICAL EVIDENCE ! GOT A GUN? ASSASSIN IN CUSTODY? A SHELL CASING IF THOSE OTHERS ARE TOO HARD TO CONJURE UP ? NO? THEN YOUR ASSERTION OF "this video indeed provides that" is "moot"
@markinator012961 "u believe I have valid points, which is y u come here to debate w/me"
I came here to correct your mistakes and misperceptions that have lead other ppl to conclude JFK was killed by a conspiracy when nothing could be further from the truth. I'm no fan of JFK the man but the office he held shouldn't be besmirched by half arsed science and hoaxers who think they best gain notoriety by continung 'The Great JFK Assassination Tragedy Hoaxing of America' in perpetuity. Thats BS !
@MrPatron79 Yes, I'm definitely convinced due to the above footage that I posted, that there was at least one more shooter to the rear, likely atop Dal-Tex building. Even if there wasn't a Grassy Knoll shooter, this footage demonstrates multiple shooters, with Oswald likely one of them. You may be right that we'll never know for sure, & the ones that DO know are dwindling. Thanks!
A minute before this the FBI agents told the bodyguard located at the back of the limo to get off, WHY??? THE FBI DID IT, WATCH A VIDEO OF A LONGER VERSION OF THIS AND CONCENTRATE ON THE BODYGUARD!!! THE FBI DID IT!
@berkbbx3 We need to provide convincing evidence of multiple shooters. I believe that JFK's abrupt forward and upward motion from 230-234 demonstrates an additional shooter from behind. I'm familiar with the entire film, but my focus lies on the above frames. The FBI was certainly derelict in investigation of conspiracy, and conveniently "lost" evidence, i.e. Harper Fragment. The Secret Service stand-down occurred at Love Field just after JFK arrived there from Ft. Worth.
@markinator012961 its like evolution, i dont think it will ever be fully prooven, its pretty much a theory, but do both to watch a longer version were the fbi ask the bodyguard to get off jsut before he was shot....
@berkbbx3 It's already obvious, if not proven, that a conspiracy existed. I demonstrated that by showing the video clip that I prepared and posted. The FBI was the investigatory body, and did not order guards to stand down. I think the stand-down to which you refer happened at Love Field. This was well before the murder because the motorcade had to travel all the way through downtown Dallas on Main Street to get to Dealey Plaza. All guards were Secret Service, not FBI.
@fluffydanny Kellerman was the only limo occupant that said he heard JFK say, "My god, I am hit." No one else in the limo heard JFK say anything. Also, his trachea was deviated & would not have been able to speak. Other theories claim it may have been a paralyzing ice bullet to his neck, or even a flechette fired from the umbrella. Interesting comment though, about his possibly feeling heat. Thanks.
This only shows his involuntary reaction to being shot. His hands are first to react, then his elbows are raised (involuntarily), then he lurches forward. If this snippet is to show that a bullet thrust him forward, I don't think that's accurate. his nervous system is responding to the gun shot, not the other way around. I do believe he was shot from behind though. If you watch an extended version of this Zap film, you can make out one of the first shot's hitting the front wind shield.
@kanukster Okay, then you have to explain why Connally is NOT reacting when he emerges from behind the sign. Also, your eyes may be deceived by watching it in slow motion, when you say you doubt that JFK's upward and forward thrust are merely neuromuscular, and not due to bullet impact. Watching it in real time indeed portrays a very accurate depiction of a missile strike at precisely 230.
@markinator012961 But Connally is responding. Watch at normal speed and the two react all most exacly the same time. Kennedy reacts first as I described earlier. Close up of Connally shows his suit jacket being moved right were the wound is found. This move of the jacket corresponds with JFK reaction. Connally's reaction is slower for the simple reason that it didn't trigger a nervous or involintary action like JFK. Thus making the single bullet theory a fact.
@kanukster I understand how you can interpret it that way. But we should be careful about interpretations that incorporate words like "almost". With missile impacts causing wounds, we should be able to precisely determine exact frames. If you try to view it in a differing perspective, there may have been a shooter firing from Dal Tex. A GK shooter fires the first wounding bullet to JFK's throat. Then Oswald shoots Connally in the back. The Dal Tex shooter hits JFK in the back.
@markinator012961 Yes, I agree we should try and make as little assumptions as possible. I also believe there where 3 shots from the Daltex building. The trajectory supports this. Line up the first head shot with this possition. The first head shoot was some what high and to the right of the head. Follow through with this and the alignment with the damage to the wind shield and molding is clear. this will also explain the small injury to the witness Tague, standing in front of the over pass
The first of several shots originate from the Daltex. They couldn't have shot earlier because the limo wasn't in a front position until it started the left turn. The first shot misses. The second shot (caught by the Zap film), hits JFK in the back and also hits GC. The third shot hits JFK in the back of the head. It exits and fragments after hiting skull bone and mushrooming. Pieces fly forward hitting Taque, the wind shield and the inner molding.
@markinator012961@kanukster Cont...The trajectory for the second shot lines up with this area. Witnesses do not assume this, because they can't see anyone there, so logicly their brain seeks for an alternative answer, the knoll, directly behind. Confused, they all run to the assumed position. No one is seen. To risky and to exposed for a shooter. Remember, the official preset story is that only one shooter is responsible LHO. The spent casings and rifle are staged in the book building.
@kanukster Cont...The third shot is fired a split second after the first head shot. He's hit from the front, from the sewer. The bullet enters the opened and damaged skull Having little resistence, exits through the back of the skull. (bullet ends up ?).
Every one knows the eyewitnesses saw a large hole at the back of his head. The witnesses that ran to the knoll, assumed the shot came from there because their eyes were telling them that noone one was visible from the exact spot, the sewer,
@kanukster In my google discussion group, one of the members pointed this out to all --- numerous photos & films show people running to the Grassy Knoll, as they thought that's where a shooter was. If LHO fired from the 6th floor of the TSBD, then we should see spectators running there, and pointing up to the window. No photos nor films show that at all.
@redfoot1995 JFK is reacting to being shot, & there are a couple of theories as to the cause of his hand motion toward his throat. Probability that he's unable to breathe due to his trachea being damaged & deviated. Other's attribute the hand motion to Thorburn's Position, although supporting medical evidence is sketchy.
@MJ4everTheKing I believe your interpretation to be incorrect. It appears to me that JFK was hit in the throat while concealed behind the sign. Upon emergence, he is reacting, & we see him starting to raise his hands. Conally is NOT hit upon emergence, & reacts at 224. Then JFK reacts AGAIN at 230. We're seeing 3 shots within that short period of time. #1 - JFK throat, #2 - Connally, #3 - JFK back
@markinator012961 my previous comment is incorrect. THe first shot missed the car, the second shot went through JFK's Throat and into Connally ( 1 shot 2 hits), the third shot was a fatal headshot. Look it up, there is proof for this.
@MJ4everTheKing Shots that missed are open to a more broad interpretation, in that we can't determine with precision when the shot(s) were fired. There clearly was a missed shot circa 160, & we know this 'cause both JFK & Connally turned to their right respectively. JFK resumed waving & didn't recognize the gunfire. Connally recognized it & his testimony supports it. Connally was 100% certain that the shot that hit JFK in the back did not hit him (Connally). Good bye SBT!
@MJ4everTheKing Then you think Connally apparently was mistaken when he said he heard the first shot. He never waivered from insisting that the shot that hit JFK did not hit him. Nellie's testimony also supported this.
'Throat'. No, see frames 235-240, hands at face and doing something. I realise the drive of this vid is not where I'm at. But we must realise that when Hollywood can pose the questions of who shot him, where, from where with what and how many times, it could be simple misdirection. Zap's movie does not clearly show a man being shot. It shows something decidedly odd, and these frames may usefully show the beginning of the set up. What is Jonny doing in frame 40? See the rest of the vid and
@sxmadrid I'm not sure what you're seeing at 240, although we all interpret things differently. In the full version of the Z film, frame 313 shows red halo of human matter that witnesses described. The blob on his head is a portion of his skull laid inside out. 2 pieces of skull fly up and forward. Jackie did not remember climbing out on the trunk. She did not retrieve any brain or skull from the trunk. She may have been attempting to escape danger, that she thought was in front of her.
@markinator012961 Well, this vid is a useful close-up and slow-mo. I'm throwing out observations that were put to me recently. It refired my interest in something that I had previusly concluded to be inconclusive. I say it is worth moments of one's time to look closely at the film with new eyes: something decidedly odd begins to happen from the moments depicted here to the point of th allegd head shot - it seems quite poss to me that a special effect was used to spirit JK out of the limelight.
What exactly is the man doing in these frames with his hands to his face? The film is never crystal at the best of times, and this is not the best clarity. But it does seem he is doing something odd there, and that perhaps the Zapruder film does not in fact show a man being shot, but the use of a special effect to give the impression. After all, it would be just typical if "Who shot Kennedy" turned out to be nothing more than a highly successful piece of misdirection.
@sxmadrid No credible evidence of alteration has been found, and yes, we all wish the clarity was better. JFK's hands coming up to his throat may indicate Thorburn's Position - a google search will explain that term. Importance here is that IF he was hit while hidden behind the sign, & then Conally is hit at 224, and then JFK is hit again at 230, then clearly there were more shooters than just Oswald.
I tried to leve a note on another Zapruder film clip and it would NOT take no matter how long I tried...Whats up CIA? Monitoring even fucking Youtube...You fucking assholes...Burn in Hell.
@repelghosts It may be that the other youtube clip user had comments enabled, but later disabled them, so that no more comments would be accepted. We can be certain, however, that the intelligence agencies monitor youtube and social networking sites!
This sequence is very obviously where JFK took Oswald's second shot in the upper back. (Oswald's first shot, around Z160, missed because of the oak tree in front of the TSBD.) This bullet hit no bones, but it did lose some velocity and it began to tumble as it exited JFK's throat. When it hit Connally in the back, it did so sideways, leaving an oval entrance wound. It smashed his ribs, left his chest, went through his wrist and lodged in his thigh. The recovered bullet was noticeably flattened.
@ApolloWasReal It's obvious that JFK took a bullet at precisely Z230. However, he's reacting to being hit already when emerging from behind Stemmons. Connally's reaction to being hit clearly shows at Z224. You're mistaken about shot sequencing. If JFK is reacting at Z230, to a transiting wound from his back to his throat, then (1) Why is JFK reacting upon emergence, and (2) Why does Connally react prior to Z230 at Z224?
@markinator012961 No, Z230 is clearly much too late; JFK's elbows are already up. JFK was hit just as he emerged from the sign at Z224. Connally reacts at the same instant because they were hit by the same bullet, Oswald's 2nd shot.
@ApolloWasReal Try to clear your mind of the SBT. I believe you are attempting to fit one shot into 3 separate events. #1 - JFK is hit in the neck at ~210. #2 - Connally receives chest wound at precisely 224. #3 - JFK receives non-transiting back wound at precisely 230. Oswald may have fired one of these shots. These 3 events are the second shot grouping, which explains why most witnesses heard 3 shots. They heard 3 shot groupings.
@markinator012961 There's nothing wrong with the SBT. The single largest group of witnesses were the ones who said three shots all came from the TSBD. Three of Oswald's coworkers were in the windows right below him! They could even hear the shells drop.
#1 at around Z160 missed, but it got Connally's attention. #2 hit both JFK and him from the rear at around Z224, and #3 hit JFK in the head from the rear at Z312-313. All the motions are completely consistent with that.
@ApolloWasReal Okay, we're getting closer. I think you now understand how I can interpret the same events differently. Let's agree the 1st shot was circa 160. There was no wounding, so we can use the "circa" term, or your term "around" 160. However, when the woundings happen next, we can pinpoint exact frames, in which case your claim of "around 224" I find unacceptable, respectfully.
@ApolloWasReal I don't have the stats in front of me, but I agree that a majority of earwitnesses claimed 3 shots. I think the majority of the 3-shot witnesses also indicated they they heard "the 1st shot, followed by a pause, and the last 2 in quick succession." Citation of 3-shot witnesses should be qualified with mention of the uneven shot spacing, which defies the SBT. Kellerman's testimony of a "flurry" of shots I find to be very, very believable. I don't think this man was mistaken.
The only thiing worse than eye-witness testimony * (w/out corroborative evidence) is ear-witness testimony which is basically useless in a DP type set up. So you've followed the pattern perfectly for reverse engineering a conspiracy. Use weak evidence & you're guaranteed to get your conspiracy of choice every time. Intellectually dishonest.
* Justice Frankfurter said "is the greatest cause of miscarriage of justice in the US".
@markinator012961 I hypothesize that those who thought there was a flurry of shots heard multiple reports per shot. Dealy Plaza was an echo chamber, and firing a rifle creates several distinct sounds - the burst of gases from the muzzle, the sonic boom from the supersonic bullet, and the sound of the bullet hitting the target.
Many of those who immediately identified it as a rifle firing 3 shots (e.g, JBC) were familiar with the sound of rifles; JBC was a hunter and so was officer Baker.
@ApolloWasReal When viewing my clip posted here, always be concious of the fact that slow-motion deceives our brains. I remind people to watch in real-time. With that in mind, JFK's abrupt motion at 230 to 234 seems quite plausible as receiving a wound to his back, & if JBC was hit at 224, then 1 more shooter from the rear, likely Dal-Tex.
@markinator012961 I heartily agree; you can definitely miss things if you don't watch them in real time. To me it looks as if someone kicks JFK in the back of the neck at Z224, just as he emerges from behind the sign. Connally begins to react at the same instant. JFK's arm motion at 230-234 is just a continuation of his response that began at about 224.
@ApolloWasReal Actually, we WILL miss things watching in real time. Slo-mo allows scrutiny, but then viewers' minds, IMO, need to be 'reset' with real time. Essentially, both JFK & JBC, after emerging, do undergo some forms of involuntary motion, and for purposes of discussion, the reason(s) may be indeterminate.
@markinator012961 Well, you obviously need to watch it both ways. I think the WC (and maybe the House) probably spent too much time analyzing the still images and not enough on the motion because they didn't have computers or even VCRs in those days. But I don't think there's much that's still unresolved here. It's pretty obvious that both are hit by one bullet around 224, and JFK by another at 313, and both came from behind.
@ApolloWasReal P1 "There's nothing wrong w/the SBT" The problem here isn't the SBT it's Mr. M trying to convince others by having them eventually 'Disprove his Negative' (usually impossible) which is based upon faulty logic grainy film & weak evidence. Example if I asked u "Did u stop beating your wife after u got out of jail for child molestation? Y or N? You'd be pretty hard pressed to answer, even if not married, if u answered either way u'd be incriminating yourself. This is the type of
@auther1046 I understand the concept of disproving a negative. I see no negative that requires disproving. In my posted clip, we all see involuntary motion by at least two passengers in the limo. Concerning 230 - 234, I believe there is at least one other rational explanation for what we observe. Essentially, scrutiny focuses on frame 224, while motion in 230 - 234 remains ignored or downplayed as simple gag reflex.
loaded, rhetorical Q's that are designed to fail. The more individual factors involved exponentially this goes up. And theres a very good reason for this. If Mr. M really wanted to know the truth, we'd not even be here, he could of figured this out long ago w/out Myers or your help. He's grabbed on to JFK as his hero who couldn't possibly be vanquished w/out at least 1 more shooter. Given time this increase has reached 218 assassins per VB. You're wasting your time.
@auther1046 Yes, I frankly agree there are CT's that idolize JFK's presidency, & this may blind them to certain aspects. Overall, his admin was above average, certainly. There are several facts that undeniably will sway opinion to conclude conspiracy. One of 'em is Dr. Burkley. JFK's personal doctor, present in TR1, signed death certificate, present at autopsy, yet apparently said nothing while prosectors "missed" the frontal throat wound. I will not accept that.
@ApolloWasReal "The recovered bullet was noticeably flattened." Yes, it is. However, given the amounts of human flesh, human bone, and various fabrics that it allegely transited, we should expect more signs of this, in terms of damage, as well as imprints of fabric on the outer layer. Specter could not get Tomlinson to pinpoint the stretcher, and badgered him mercilessly. Kantor saw Ruby at Parkland, yet the WC claimed he was "mistaken". Ruby likely planted CE399 when he was at Parkland.
@markinator012961 Why do you say that? Have you conducted any experiments with similar bullets and targets? Those who have, have gotten very similar results - a bullet that is bent, but still intact. Remember, the bullet had a military-style metal jacket designed to keep it from mushrooming in flesh and killing unnecessarily (wounding actually being more effective in a war since it occupies healthy soldiers in an evacuation).
@markinator012961 Sure the nose of the bullet will be flattened if it hit first. But the tumbling motion after striking is random, and CE399 apparently hit Connally flying sideways, as evidenced by the oval entrance wound and by the fact that the bullet was flattened on its side. Those who describe it as a "pristine bulllet" usually don't show its cross section. I consider that dishonest.
@markinator012961 Ruby planted CE399? Why? Give me a break. Ruby's motive was clear from the exhaustive biography of the man - he was a crackpot who though he was being a hero. Any of a thousand people would have done what he did; Ruby just happened to be the one out of that thousand who got "lucky" in entering the police station. He almost missed the transfer.
As for Tomlinson, he never actually handled the bullet. He only discovered it.
@ApolloWasReal Ruby got access to the midnight press conference, so we know that he was able to gain access at extraordinary hours. Testimony of DPD officers directly involved with Oswald's transfer show overwhelming agreement that Ruby did not use the ramp. You minimize the importance of Tomlinson's discovery of CE399. Location of discovery is crucial to evidentiary value, so it is you that needs to learn basic investigative lessons & quit ignoring pertinent testimony. You embarrass yourself.
@markinator012961 Yes, Ruby was a cop fan who liked being at the center of the action. As for Ruby's entrance to the garage, does it really matter? He got in either by slipping past a distracted guard at the top of the ramp (most likely) or through an overlooked unlocked door. As for the bullet, it was matched to Oswald's gun to the exclusion of all guns, so it had to have been found on Connally's stretcher. No one would dare plant such a bullet for fear that the real one might also be found.
@ApolloWasReal Yes, Ruby's means of entry matters greatly. Unlocked door? Transfer of the DPD's most sensational person, & extraordinary security measures, yet they "missed" a door. Really? No surprise on ballistics match to LHO's rifle. A perfect ballistics match does not, & can not indicate which stretcher it was on. Conspirators didn't care what other contrary evidence may show up --- they'd simply lose it, or suppress it, or ignore it. WC would then say person was "mistaken".
@markinator012961 "they'd simply lose it, or suppress it, or ignore it'
Well if I were part of the conspiracy & wasn't put to work by the Apple Dumpling Gang with weapons supplied by the Salvation Army I'd sure as shit get rid of CE399 (pre-experimentation stage) like right off the bat, or at the very least beat it with a hammer for a few hours so it meets the expectations the clueless would expect out of such a bullet.
I don't expect you've ever heard of the words 'counter intuative' eh?.
@auther1046 I understand the reasoning behind LN claims of 399's planting being unnecessary, and even dangerous if exposed as such. A different way of looking at it is that conspirators felt it necessary to have a projectile with clear ballistic connections to the MC rifle, in the event that recovered fragments did not. Once again I must reiterate that the FBI would collect & concentrate all evidence, thus offering the options of producing evidence of their choice.
I seriously doubt it. The only way to figure out what you're doing is by cross referencing. Find out how many ppl who HEARD shots from the GK .. SAW.. the SIDE of his head explode, then find out how many ppl who HEARD shots from the TSBD .. SAW .. the BACK of his head explode. McAdam's web site explains further that this proves INITIAL PERCEPTIONS are faulty most of the time, & after Talking, Listening to others, the Memory is also Modified.
@markinator012961 P2 "I understand the reasoning" Further : When u see a pattern developing where for example GN witness's (ear-audio) r reporting the SIDE of JFK's head explode (eye-visual) instead of the BACK of his head which would be expected, then u know other factors r in play (sequence of events went too fast for humans to record) don't trust weak eye-ear witnesses, stick w/the solid physical evidence & what it says & you won't find yourself staring up from the rabbits hole of no return.
Please watch the Zapruder film carefully, there IS evidence of a second shooter, right after the motorcade passes the sign and before the light pole, a bullet hits the limo's trunk, you can see smoke and the ricochet. It's there if you'd bother to look, as clear as the film.
@brokencasket No, you're just seeing clouds reflected off the shiny trunk of the limo. That's very obvious if you continue to watch the trunk through the period of the head shot. You can also see the reflection of Jean Hill's red dress as the limo passes her.
@brokencasket Apollo is correct -- the trunk was convex and shiny, reflecting items & people to the immediate south. We see the red coat, & the white piece of paper that has been mistaken for a chunk of skull bone sliding across the trunk. That particular object in the Z-film is corrobated by one of the Bothun photos, where we clearly see the object lying in the grass. To my knowledge, actual impact strikes to the limo have not been verified, and are not discernable. We must look at people.
@starlogic99 "he got hit in the throat only can happen from the
front" Impossible shot ! Can't go through a windscreen, miss two people in front of JFK, miss the overhead crossbar and still strike JFK, Impossible ! The throat wound looked so small because JFK's buttoned shirt & tie he wore created 'Supported Skin' exit wound which experimentation by Dr. Lattimer proved can be as small as an entry wound. Live with it. The SBT, DVT rules by 'The Scientific Method' of inquiry & experimentation.
@VinnyDickWad There are more of those leaps of logic necessary to defend the SBT. You assume that JFK's back wound was connected to his throat wound. Humes, Boswell, & Finck failed to probe nor examine it, albeit Humes poking his finger in the back entry. Humes didn't have the body available on 11-23-63 when he GUESSED the two wounds were connected. He uses the words 'presumably of entry' & 'presumably of exit." This is inexcusable, considering it was the POTUS. Humes burned the first draft.
@markinator012961 Leaps of logic? I guess it's a real leap of logic to say that when a bullet exits, it must first enter. Or that bullets generally travel in straight lines except when they ht something hard, like bone.
Humes burned his notes because they were bloodstained and he didn't want them going into some museum. Can't blame him.
@ApolloWasReal Of course a bullet that exits must first enter. The leap of logic surrounds the merely flattened condition of CE399, considering the fabric it had to pierce, & dense bone. You are careful when you state Humes' claim of burning autopsy notes, per Humes himself. Yes, we can blame him, and we do. He also admitted to burning the first draft. No blood on the first draft, so why burn it? He commandeered Boswell's face sheet with blood, and kept that. Where are Finck's notes?
@markinator012961 Merely flattened? Take a full jacketed bullet and pound on it with a hammer. You'll really have to work at it to get it as flat as CE399. It's hardly "pristine". Also, firing tests on targets modeling JFK's neck and JC's chest and arm have produced very similar results.
I couldn't care less about the autopsy surgeons' notes. All that matters is that they certify their final reports as accurate.
@ApolloWasReal I do understand your points regarding CE399. I don't claim that it is "pristine". Take a full-jacketed bullet and fire it into rib bones, then wrist bones, & you'll discover quickly that CE399 is simply not plausible. Also, I note your replies are calculated, i.e. "produced very similar results." Out of how many attempts? Humes' unilateral destruction of notes & draft is very, very serious, and elicits massive suspicion. But you couldn't care less, correct?
@markinator012961 Let's say I shuffle a deck of cards and deal out a 5-card poker hand. Then I exclaim "wow, what were the chances of my dealing this exact hand? Astronomically small!" And they were. But there were also *many* possible hands, all astronomically unlikely, and it was certain that I'd deal one of them.
Same with the bullet. You will never *exactly* repeat CE399, but neither could Oswald. There were many similar outcomes.
@markinator012961 What's so magical about Hume's notes? They were for his own use in writing his report. Had he wanted to, he could have falsified them just as easily as the actual report.
I've noticed that conspiracy freaks often scream for what they know they cannot have. Not that they'd have a clue what to do with the items or what they'd mean. It's just a way to create a false controversy.
@ApolloWasReal Humes was a gov't employee, and all of his notes at autopsy were to be preserved. His role was not to decide on his own what information would be retained or destroyed. With original notes, we could compare accuracy to the extant autopsy report. Recall that he burned the notes AND the first draft. The fact that he did this shortly after Oswald was murdered is not purely idiosynchratic. He burned his own bloodstained notes, yet retained Boswell's stained face sheet. Contradictory?
@ApolloWasReal Yes, I "scream" for things I can't have, but not for false controversy. The Harper Fragment was last in the possession of the FBI. THEY won't allow us to have it. There cannot be an innocent explanation. The issue surrounding notes of Oswald's interrogations also supports suspicions. The DPD & FBI could easily have delayed interrogation for the time it took to acquire a recording device.
@markinator012961 "Can u explain y the WC did not interview numerous close eyewitnesses? Charles Brehm? Bill & Gayle Newman?"
They had better witnesses who didn't contradict themselves. Look at the famous photo of the Newman's laying on the lawn in front of the GK. We're supposed to believe that a shot came from behind them right? Why are they sheilding themselves from the GK w/their children in front of them? If a shot came from the GK their children would be on the opposite side of them.
@auther1046 I disagree strongly with your rationalization re: failure to interview Brehm & Newmans due to better witnesses not contradicting themselves. I simply will not accept this as an excuse. The CLOSEST spectators to the limo at Z313 were not called to testify for the WC. A real possibility is that WC did not want testimony from these particular up-close witnesses that may have refuted shots from elsewhere. Given their proximity, testimony under oath would lend more credence to GK shot(s).
@markinator012961 Huh? The DPD, FBI, Secret Service, WC and HC interviewed MANY assassination witnesses. Just look at the lists. I can't blame them, though, for giving priority to those who actually saw Oswald and/or his rifle firing in the window. No one else saw anything like that anywhere else, and it wasn't because the investigators weren't looking.
As for the closest witnesses to Z313, do we really need to discuss how Jean Hill's testimony flatly conflicted with the Z film?
@neilcrouse Yes, I believe strongly that this is what we're seeing. Braden was arrested in the Dal-Tex building, but then released. He very likely was the other shooter from the rear.
markinator012961 4 months ago
Yes, I agree. To me it looks like he was reacting to one shot by raising his arms and hands to his throat, and then another shot that forced him forward.
NeilCrouse 4 months ago
@barmtrail Researchers like Fetzer and Twyman are incorrect when claiming alteration. We know this due to the between-sprocket images on the extant version, & these were not viewed publicly until MPI released their digital version (with mistakes). Let's pretend you're right though - if the CIA indeed altered it, they did a poor job. They must have missed the portion in my clip that shows 2 shooters firing from the rear.
markinator012961 4 months ago
It happens very quickly, and the slow-motion will deceive you. After watching in slo-mo, then watch it in real time. JFK's chest indeed moves almost violently forward at precisely 230. This causes his chin to raise. This reaction by him certainly does not appear to be voluntary. Do you think JFK could be taking a bullet to his back at 230?
markinator012961 4 months ago
@markinator012961 The film is a CIA alteration. Film frames are just as phony. The CIA is always laughing at you.
Forrest V. Sorrels (in the lead car), WC Testimony: vol.VII, pg345
Sorrels is in the car in front of the limo. Sorrels said that just after the shots, a motorcycle cop had run up on the right-hand side of the lead car to tell Chief Curry what happened. Read it for yourself. The Z film shows NO motorcycle officer passing the limo to the lead car after the shots. The film was altered.
barmtraiI 4 months ago
i don't see a "thrust". i see a reaction to being shot, a voluntary movement to what must have felt like choking with a bullet going thought the throat. and as was mentioned by someone else, kennedy could have made no other movement, being already against the seat.
aside from that, the autopsy photos do show a larger exit wound in the front, but many make the false conclusion a shot from behind implicates oswald as the shooter.
tomitstube 4 months ago
too bad this isnt the shot that the warren commission, dan rather and other researchers argue about. this is the throat/ back/ neck wound aka the magic bullet because it supposedly hit connally and made 5 wounds on him. the JFK headshot sometimes referred to as bullet 3 is the shot that everyone argues about and the famous movie line of "back and to the left" comes from. every1 agrees JFK moves forward in the shot shown in ur video, its the other shot occurring at frame 312-313 in the Z-film
pat442389 5 months ago
@pat442389 @pat442389 This sequence in my clip occurs well before the headshot at 313. I strongly believe the best explanation for what JFK is doing between 230 & 234, is reacting to a bullet impact in his upper back. If Oswald was acting alone, then too many bullets are entering that car when it passed the Stemmons freeway sign. Also, due to the cartridges, if Oswald was acted alone, then ALL theories must include 3 shots only, and must account for all wounds on all people, plus James Tague.
mark012961 5 months ago
You mean Connaly "clearly" isn't hit based on his reaction? How do you know how soon people react when they are shot?
xarzu 6 months ago
@xarzu This isn't about Connally at all. This video demonstrates two things: First, JFK has already been hit when he emerges from behind the sign. About one-third of a second later, at precisely frame 230, it sure looks to me like JFK takes an additional bullet to his back. When viewing the Z-film overall, Connally is hit in the back at precisely frame 224. That's 3 shots just in this span of time --- JFK hit behind the sign, Connally at 224, then JFK again at 230.
mark012961 6 months ago
He was first shot in the neck.
xarzu 8 months ago
@xarzu It's more sensible that JFK was hit in his frontal neck just as he passed behind that sign. My clip focuses only on JFK, but Connally clearly isn't hit until frame 224, nearly a full second later, but still too fast for Oswald to get off 2 sequential shots.
markinator012961 8 months ago
JFK is thrust forward ??? But first he is pushed violently backwards against the seat then he bounced forward. As we can see at video " Zapruder Film Closeup" Is this video suggesting that the shot came from behind ? If so we have another lone assassin theorist nut.
Verdelufe 9 months ago
@Verdelufe Watch the slowest version of my clip carefully. His upper torso moves forward at 230, causing his chin to raise. It looks very much like JFK took a bullet to his back at that moment. If so, then based on Connally's obvious wounding at 224, which happens one-third of second sooner than JFK's motion, then there had to be an additional shooter located rearward.
markinator012961 9 months ago
@markinator012961 Please just answer this question YES or NO. On " Zapruder Film Closeup" was JFK
pushed violently against the seat then bounced back ?
Verdelufe 9 months ago
@Verdelufe No.
mark012961 9 months ago
@mark012961 I accepted your answer as I accept history forged with lies.
Verdelufe 9 months ago
@adiostraitorobama I'm not familiar with that. Do you have a link to it? Thanks!
markinator012961 1 year ago
This proves that JFK was shot from behind.
Oswald did it and he did it by himself.
George Vreeland Hill
GeorgeVreelandHill 1 year ago
@GeorgeVreelandHill Of course it proves JFK was shot from behind, by at least two shooters, one of whom was likely Oswald. JFK emerges from behind the sign, and has been hit, & the Warren Commission said this happened circa 210. Connally shows bullet impact at 224, then JFK shows the abrupt movement in my video at 230. That's 3 shots in the span of just over one second, & fired in a "flurry". That's why Kellerman reported a flurry, and why spectators heard 3 shot groupings, not separate shots.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@GeorgeVreelandHill If Oswald was a mere lone nut assassin, can you explain why his address in NOLA was the same building as Bannister's office? You know, Bannister, of the FBI. Clearly Oswald had connections as a low-level informant or operative in some way. Also, why would Humes choose to burn his 1st draft of the autopsy report on Sunday morning, AFTER learning Oswald had been killed? Also, you must consider the ease in which Oswald defected from, & then repatriated to the US.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 I've also found that odd, that at the height of the cold war, an announced communist defector is allowed to return to his country with his Russian bride. These days nobody would protest, but back then it wouldn't have happened so easily.
cyberwing777 1 year ago
@cyberwing777 Correct. It's all too easy for someone to believe the Single Bullet fantasy, and the ways in which it's demonstrated to be "possible", then claim that it's the simplest version so it must be correct. Conspiracy does not seem to be the most simple solution, so it's disregarded by some. However, if we consider a very small group of people in a few key positions of power, conspiracy makes most sense. Thanks!
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "then claim that it's the simplest version"
No one claims that at all. "it's the simplest version" when you take into consideration all the avaiilable evidence. It's counter-intuative in the fact that :
* No 2 gunshot woudings can be duplicated exactely. ESPECIALLY WHEN 2 PPL ARE INVOLVED !
* A FMJ bullet like CE-399 as it's slowed going thru 2 ppl can go fast enough to break bones but not fast enough to deform the bullet
You're just going to learn to live with it !
JgarfbiHoover 1 year ago
@JgarfbiHoover I've often stated that I'll accept the SBT fantasy when several items of concern are put to rest for me: Dr. Burkley and/or the FBI's gross ineptitude concerning their "loss" of the Harper Fragment. Burkley told us years later through his attorney that he had "information" that demonstrated others' involvement. I want another independent investigation that issues subpoena for his records. Rather than mere "loss" of evidence, the limo was hastily rebuilt, "destroying evidence".
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "I've often stated that I'll accept the SBT fantasy when several items of concern are put to rest for me"
The Single Bullet Fact doesn't need Burkley or the Harper Fragment to stand as a verifiable theory. It's been proven in feild test experimentations a 1000 times. The Harper Fragment is a rather poor excuse to dismiss the SBT to say the least.
auther1046 1 year ago
@cyberwing777 "I've also found that odd"
It's not odd at all. At the time the USSR was behind us 10 to 1 in megatonnage H-Bombs & were looking for ways of detente AND THEY DIDN'T WANT ANY SCANDELS. like has been proven when a letter showed up in a recentely deceased Sen. file from LHO saying the Russian's were holding him hostage in Minsk. Ozzie was 1 of 3 ppl who returned back home from the USSR that same year.
JgarfbiHoover 1 year ago
@JgarfbiHoover Did the other 2 defectors also have Russian wives with relatives connected to the KGB? Were they former US Marines? Did they operate at Atsugi for covert surveillance aircraft? Were their Pentagon files destoyed? The letter you mention means squat. A document such as that could easily have been forged to deflect attention, and somehow rationalize what otherwise presents itself as inept COINTEL. After we can destroy earth once, extra mega-tonnage is moot.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Did the other 2 defectors also have Russian wives w/relatives connected to the KGB?"
If you're implying that the Ruskies Dood It I'll support u on that CONspiracy theory, there's no doubt they were worried that JFK was about to 'Turn American'. "A doc such as that could easily have been forged" Y bury it in private papers, easily lost forever, so it takes an accident to find it? "inept COINTEL" More like inept CONspiracy MONgering by the Criminal Research Community !
JgarfbiHoover 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "can you explain why"
Thats the most explainable of all, he went thru that building until he found a vacant office and used that address for his pamphlet passing COMMY support of Cuba. No more complicated than that. He needed an address and he stole one.
JgarfbiHoover 1 year ago
@JgarfbiHoover Jim Garrison realized the ridiculous nature of the idiosyncrasies of stealing an address that just so happened to be the same as Bannister's. It seems as though you're attempting to convince yourself. I'll need citation on your assertion about stealing the address. Also, I'll need your explanation of why Oswald was observed IN the office. Stealing the address of an office is one thing. You're saying he stole the address, & then used the office, which is totally absurd. Try again.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "I'll need ur explanation of Y Oz was observed IN the office"
You have your JFK CONspiracy FACtoids mixed up. No one ever said or testified that he was in the office that was on his phamplets. Delphine Roberts, without corobboration from anyone else said on certain dates that Oz was seen in Bannisters office which was not connected to the rest of the building that Oz stole his address from. Pay attention and get with the CONspiracy PROgram would ya? Try again.
JgarfbiHoover 1 year ago
@JgarfbiHoover I have no need to refute your claim here, as Delphine Roberts already did. Semantics reigns supreme with the hair-splitting of differentiation between Bannister's office and the Camp street address. You didn't explain how you believe LHO stole the address. If speculation and innuendo works for your side of the argument, you must allow it from mine. Please provide me with your idea of why the Harper Fragment was lost, Burkley's claim of conspiracy, & the haste to rebuild the limo.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "You didn't explain how you believe LHO stole the address"
THE OFFICE ADDRESS ON HIS PHAMPLETS WAS VACANT AT THE TIME IN QUESTION. WE CAN RIGHTLY ASSUME WITH GREAT JUSTIFICATION, SINCE HE STOLE, LIED, BLACKMAILED EVERONE HE CAME INTO CONTACT WITH, THAT HE ALSO 'BORROWED' THE VACANT ADDRESS, RIGHT? WHAT OTHER EXPLANATION IS THERE?
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 No need to type in caps, unless your eyesight is going bad, along with your reasoning. The other explanation is that Oswald was being handled in some way through Bannister. Although since you bring it up, what did Oswald steal? Certainly he lied. Who did he blackmail?
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "The other explanation is that Oswald was being handled in some way through Bannister"
Unqualified NO ! Everyone who knew him flatly rejects the notion that he'd follow instructions from anyone after leaving the Marine Corp.'s
"what did Oswald steal?"
The 544 Camp St. Address
"Who did he blackmail?"
Russians by cutting his wrists to get in and threathening a scandal unless he got permission to leave. Since his citizenship had not been revoked he was allowed to leave
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Harper Fragment"
As I recall that arrived late in the autopsy & was probably put in the evidence bag with JFK's brain, tissue slides, etc. RFK had all those destroyed to prevent public expose in the future.
"Burkley's claim"
He's one of the Kennedy family legacy keepers that didn't have any evidence at all. Being JFK's personal Dr. he'd be the last person on Earth to ask and get a truthful statement from.
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 Your recollection is not correct. The Harper Fragment didn't arrive in Washington until Sunday. He said he gave it back to the FBI, and there the chain of evidence is halted. Simple dismissal by RFK with the brain is not a viable explanation. I don't expect you to have a reasonable explanation for disposition of the Harper Fragment, because the FBI itself never gave one. Burkley, regardless of his personal connections to the family, was a key witness & wasn't called to the WC.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "He said he gave it back to the FBI"
Who said? Citation ..
"Burkley was a key witness & wasn't called to the WC"
Nonsense! Burkley wasn't a pathologist, clinical pathologist, forensic pathologist, wounds ballistic engineer or any other designation that would make him a "key witness" so anything he'd have to say is irrelevent to this case, and lay opinion. Prosectors Humes Boswell & Finck were "key witness"s.
WTF cares about the "Harper Fragment"? It's also irrelevent
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 Your citation can be found at ARRB Master Set of Medical Exhibits, interviews w/ Harper, p. 6. Burkley was a doctor, saw the wounds in Parkland, saw the autopsy, yet apparently said nothing to Humes re: the throat wound obliteration by trach, & Humes missed that wound completely. Location of discovery in DP is not relevant because hundreds of people strolled the grass overnight & could have kicked it somewhere. Claims of location demonstrating LHO firing from rear are then moot.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "the haste to rebuild the limo"
Go to conspiracy site JFK Lancer, the limo was taken to a Wash.DC garage were it was thoughally examined, fragments recovered, and photographed. What haste?
Oooops !
Another TMWKK Big Whopper !
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 The haste that you simply fail to understand is that LBJ had other limousines at his disposal. The SS100X should have been kept as evidence. Complete refurbishment within the first two weeks of the murder is indeed haste, and reeks of quick disposal of evidence of number and direction of gunfire.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "LBJ had other limousines at his disposal"
The president had to make do with one limo, JEH had two, one was formally owned by Al Capone.
"quick disposal of evidence"
Nonsense! FBI recovered all bullet fragments from the car, all were found in the forward compartments, which is strong evidence (That you don't like) that all shots originated from behind. Blood splatter analysis would of been unhelpful because the limo was moving into a headwind & his brain mat. was all over
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 Only one limousine at LBJ's disposal is so absurd its laughable. Also, you cling to bullet fragments being discovered & documented. Yes, correct. What about the chrome molding? What happened to it? The damaged rear view mirror? The chrome molding was direct evidence of direction & type of ammo, & they knew it because they photographed it. You are mistaken about my theory of origin of gunfire. My video posted here SHOWS additional gunfire from behind. I make no claims re: a GK shooter
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "What about the chrome molding? What happened to it? The damaged rear view mirror?"
They're all in the National Archives along with the windscreen.
"My video posted here SHOWS additional gunfire from behind"
BTW you're also wrong about 'JFK's Forward Thrust'??? That's been attributed to CE-399 grazing his vertebrae causing 'Thornburn Position', elbows raised at a 45 degree angle to body, fists clenched & under chin, 1st noted in Civil War injuries by Dr. Thornburn, get w/it
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Only one limousine at LBJ's disposal is so absurd its laughable"
* PBS Frontline 'The Secret Files on/of JEH' : "the president had to make do with only one such vehicle, JEH had two ^, each had to have their air-conditioning preset. Each day he would pick up Clyde Tolsen and they would" ..... so on and so forth.
^ It's a well known fact his second was taken from Al Capone after his conviction for tax evasion. It had the added benefit of also being bomb proof.
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 There can be no innocent explanation for destruction of limo evidence. As the new POTUS, LBJ could have ordered a new limo and had in the White House garage in just days. When dealing with other CT's, they indeed make claims of conspiracy with very little if any, physical evidence. My video, IMO, at least provides a visual film record of what can be JFK taking a bullet in his back at Z230. This seems more believable than the neuro-physiological delays used to rationalize the SBT.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@auther1046 We both possess extensive knowledge of the JFK case, but I must apologize for not realizing that the chrome molding had indeed been preserved at the Nat'l Archives. Robert Groden, upon examination, claimed that the dent in the molding fits perfectly with a rounded nose missile, and therefore this must have been caused by a missed shot. If that shot was separate, it becomes even more difficult to rationalize the SBT.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Robert Groden, upon examination"
BIG MISTAKE LISTENING TO GRODEN. Do you want his foul ups in alphabetical or CONillogical order?
Amazing person, I've never seen anyone turn a shotgun into a rifle so deftly as he did eh?
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 Any order in which you wish to list them. Groden viewed the above portion of the Z-film correctly --- JFK is taking a missile to his back at Z230, & this is firm visual evidence of at least one additional shooter from the rear. Through your repeated visiting me here to comment, it does appear that you also have some doubts about the missile strike at Z230. That explains your attempt to reassure yourself by rehashing other mistakes and reiterating mistakes made by others.
markinator012961 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@markinator012961 "Groden viewed the above portion of the Z-film correctly"
Huh? Groden stated that the the fatal shot came from the front. HE WAS WRONG !
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "rehashing other mistakes and reiterating mistakes made by others"
Dale Myers is an award winning forensic animator, I don't consider his work a mistake..
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 I've seen Myers' program & animations, although I don't own a copy. I just reviewed the portion that contains the same frames as my clip, & Myers' simple melded JFK's abrupt motion into frame 224. He FAILS to cite and explain the time delay from 224 to 230. Tague's wound certainly wasn't caused by a missed shot circa 160. CE399 didn't wound Tague, and I simply cannot accept that a fragment of the headshot missile was big enough to cause the concrete mark, & then wound Tague.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "I simply cannot accept that a fragment of the headshot missile was big enough to cause the concrete mark, & then wound Tague"
* Well then a tiny fragment must of hit him seperately?
Or
* When Tague ducked around the conc, embankment he might of brushed his face against the conc. itself?
What I see is too quick an analysis to come to a decisive conclusion you want to hear to be of any possible use in this case. Another amatuer reaching for an amatuerish conclusion.
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "He FAILS to cite and explain the time delay from 224 to 230"
Reaching again. His work has been checked for accuracy by Z-Axis Corp. good enough to be submittible into a court of law world wide. Maybe you ougth to get yours checked out the same eh?
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 If you are an acquaintance of Dale Myers, perhaps you can show him my clip. He is certainly a professional in every sense, although others have taken issue with some of his positioning. His animations offered a different perspective for all of us, & it was a valuable contribution. But for some reason, his figure of JFK seems to have a long neck. This likely would not affect his conclusions concerning the SBT.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "His animations offered a different perspective for all of us"
Thats an odd statement. It reflects accurately what the USG's WR said 47 yrs ago. I for one didn't see it as "a different perspective" it was more like 'confiming animation' of what has been painfully obvious to anyone not harboring an agenda and those who twist the truth for whatever reason.
auther1046 11 months ago
@auther1046 Do you understand the latin term, "ad nauseum"?
markinator012961 11 months ago
@markinator012961 "Myers' simple melded JFK's abrupt motion into frame 224"
I'm afraid you'd have to be a medical Dr. & a wounds ballistic engineer to make that broad sweeping comment and have it mean anything.
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "I simply cannot accept"
Correction, I think you don't want to accept some conclusions that are apparent. After all belonging to a JFK analysis is a powerful and strong attraction. Accepting means declining your own preconcieved notions of what happened. There is abundant, interlocking, redundent and overwhelming evidence that the assassination happened exactely the way the USG characterised it. I just can't see my way past any of your objections.
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 The Z160 shot missed. Tague was not likely wounded from that shot. CE399 didn't hit Tague. Process of elimination leaves you with the headshot to deposit the 6.5mm artifact on the A-P X-ray, as well as striking the chrome molding, & leaving the trail of opacities on the right lateral X-ray. That headshot had to exhibit both its military-jacketed characteristices by staying intact enough to cause the strike to the molding, as well as fragmenting enough to deposit the tiny opacities.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "That headshot had to exhibit both its military-jacketed characteristices by staying intact enough to cause the strike to the molding, as well as fragmenting enough to deposit the tiny opacities"
Why? The "tiny opacities" as well as the fragments left in JBC's wrist in total still would of weighed less than that of a postage stamp. There's plenty of weight left over even after tague to account for everything posited by the WR.
auther1046 11 months ago
@auther1046 You are referring to CE399, which was alleged to be the transiting projectile. My statement, quoted by you, directly references the headshot -- a different shot. I've demonstrated to you that the Z160 shot missed. I'll give you the SBT & 399. However, then the headshot must account for the following: 1) Trail of opacities in the brain; 2) 6.5mm artifact in the A-P X-ray; 3) Strike to the chrome molding; 4) Windshield strike & mirror dent; 5) Tague wound Yet another magic bullet, eh?
markinator012961 11 months ago
@markinator012961 "Groden .. claimed .. therefore .. must have been .. difficult to rationalize"
Hyper leaping? The dent was caused by a head shot fragment.
BTW are you going to quote a copymachine repairman on ballistics in this case?
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "that just so happened to be the same as Bannister's"
The 544 Camp St. address was one given to a building that had 2 completely seperate entrances but shared the same facade or roof enclosure. You could not get to Bannisters office from the one on Ozzie's Phamplet. See Frontline video 'Who Was LHO"?
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 It's called a street corner, and people use them to walk around to other entrances.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Also, I'll need your explanation of why Oswald was observed IN the office"
* He was observed in the Bannisters office by one Delphine Roberts who recalled the incident years after the event
* She had no one else to corobborate her rather improbable story
* If by a rather silly co-incidence Ozzie had been there we can assume he was trying to infiltrate another anti-cuban organization to put in his resume for entrance to cuba, he tried that once before remember?
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 He was infiltrating per his handlers, as a low-level operative.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "You're saying he stole the address, & then used the office, which is totally absurd"
He didn't say anything like that. He said LHO stole the address used on his phamplets, and was seen in Bannisters office (TWO SEPERATE BUILDINGS) by uncorobborated and unsworn testimony. We seem to get alot of that in this case, no?
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 Whose testimony do we have that says he did NOT use the office?
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Whose testimony do we have that says he did NOT use the office?"
This was at a point in time when he could barely afford the apt he had rented in order to get his wife to come back and live with him. There's no record that he ever rented the office, no rental receipts were ever produced to even remotely suggest he ever occupied that office. The burden of proof is on you to prove it not on anyone else to prove or disprove "he did NOT use the office"
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 His NOLA activities are moot. I demonstrate through my video posted here, at least one other gunman firing from the rear. LN's seem to demand physical and verifiable proof of conspiracy, & this video indeed provides that. Also, I must deduce that you believe I have valid points, which is why you come here to debate with me. If I was completely off the mark, you wouldn't come here and waste your time. Frankly, I prefer to have you challenge me, & as you see, I can back up my claims.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "LN's seem to demand physical and verifiable proof of conspiracy, & this video indeed provides that"
YES SOLID PHYSICAL EVIDENCE ! GOT A GUN? ASSASSIN IN CUSTODY? A SHELL CASING IF THOSE OTHERS ARE TOO HARD TO CONJURE UP ? NO? THEN YOUR ASSERTION OF "this video indeed provides that" is "moot"
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "u believe I have valid points, which is y u come here to debate w/me"
I came here to correct your mistakes and misperceptions that have lead other ppl to conclude JFK was killed by a conspiracy when nothing could be further from the truth. I'm no fan of JFK the man but the office he held shouldn't be besmirched by half arsed science and hoaxers who think they best gain notoriety by continung 'The Great JFK Assassination Tragedy Hoaxing of America' in perpetuity. Thats BS !
auther1046 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GeorgeVreelandHill "This proves that JFK was shot from behind. Oswald did it and he did it by himself George Vreeland Hill"
You betcha he dd ! Only 'KGB VERMIN' supporters could think otherwise.
JgarfbiHoover 1 year ago
so this means there were 2 shooters? i dont think we will ever know the truth behind the assassination.
MrPatron79 1 year ago
@MrPatron79 Yes, I'm definitely convinced due to the above footage that I posted, that there was at least one more shooter to the rear, likely atop Dal-Tex building. Even if there wasn't a Grassy Knoll shooter, this footage demonstrates multiple shooters, with Oswald likely one of them. You may be right that we'll never know for sure, & the ones that DO know are dwindling. Thanks!
markinator012961 1 year ago
A minute before this the FBI agents told the bodyguard located at the back of the limo to get off, WHY??? THE FBI DID IT, WATCH A VIDEO OF A LONGER VERSION OF THIS AND CONCENTRATE ON THE BODYGUARD!!! THE FBI DID IT!
berkbbx3 1 year ago
@berkbbx3 no one knows who did it...
shizzel122 1 year ago
@berkbbx3 We need to provide convincing evidence of multiple shooters. I believe that JFK's abrupt forward and upward motion from 230-234 demonstrates an additional shooter from behind. I'm familiar with the entire film, but my focus lies on the above frames. The FBI was certainly derelict in investigation of conspiracy, and conveniently "lost" evidence, i.e. Harper Fragment. The Secret Service stand-down occurred at Love Field just after JFK arrived there from Ft. Worth.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 its like evolution, i dont think it will ever be fully prooven, its pretty much a theory, but do both to watch a longer version were the fbi ask the bodyguard to get off jsut before he was shot....
berkbbx3 1 year ago
@berkbbx3 It's already obvious, if not proven, that a conspiracy existed. I demonstrated that by showing the video clip that I prepared and posted. The FBI was the investigatory body, and did not order guards to stand down. I think the stand-down to which you refer happened at Love Field. This was well before the murder because the motorcade had to travel all the way through downtown Dallas on Main Street to get to Dealey Plaza. All guards were Secret Service, not FBI.
markinator012961 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@markinator012961 >>"It's already obvious, if not proven, that a conspiracy existed."<<
You conspiracists have had almost 50 years.... 50 YEARS.... to come up with solid evidence of a conspiracy and you can't do it!!
teddysalad65 1 year ago 7
Comment removed
zubzero1 1 year ago
The hot round went through his neck and he is opening his shirt to get it out. he felt the heat from the bullet before knowing that he had been shot.
fluffydanny 1 year ago
@fluffydanny Kellerman was the only limo occupant that said he heard JFK say, "My god, I am hit." No one else in the limo heard JFK say anything. Also, his trachea was deviated & would not have been able to speak. Other theories claim it may have been a paralyzing ice bullet to his neck, or even a flechette fired from the umbrella. Interesting comment though, about his possibly feeling heat. Thanks.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 That is what it looked like to me. I have had hot rounds down my collar.
fluffydanny 1 year ago
This only shows his involuntary reaction to being shot. His hands are first to react, then his elbows are raised (involuntarily), then he lurches forward. If this snippet is to show that a bullet thrust him forward, I don't think that's accurate. his nervous system is responding to the gun shot, not the other way around. I do believe he was shot from behind though. If you watch an extended version of this Zap film, you can make out one of the first shot's hitting the front wind shield.
kanukster 1 year ago
@kanukster Okay, then you have to explain why Connally is NOT reacting when he emerges from behind the sign. Also, your eyes may be deceived by watching it in slow motion, when you say you doubt that JFK's upward and forward thrust are merely neuromuscular, and not due to bullet impact. Watching it in real time indeed portrays a very accurate depiction of a missile strike at precisely 230.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 But Connally is responding. Watch at normal speed and the two react all most exacly the same time. Kennedy reacts first as I described earlier. Close up of Connally shows his suit jacket being moved right were the wound is found. This move of the jacket corresponds with JFK reaction. Connally's reaction is slower for the simple reason that it didn't trigger a nervous or involintary action like JFK. Thus making the single bullet theory a fact.
kanukster 1 year ago
@kanukster I understand how you can interpret it that way. But we should be careful about interpretations that incorporate words like "almost". With missile impacts causing wounds, we should be able to precisely determine exact frames. If you try to view it in a differing perspective, there may have been a shooter firing from Dal Tex. A GK shooter fires the first wounding bullet to JFK's throat. Then Oswald shoots Connally in the back. The Dal Tex shooter hits JFK in the back.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Yes, I agree we should try and make as little assumptions as possible. I also believe there where 3 shots from the Daltex building. The trajectory supports this. Line up the first head shot with this possition. The first head shoot was some what high and to the right of the head. Follow through with this and the alignment with the damage to the wind shield and molding is clear. this will also explain the small injury to the witness Tague, standing in front of the over pass
kanukster 1 year ago
@markinator012961 My theory;
The first of several shots originate from the Daltex. They couldn't have shot earlier because the limo wasn't in a front position until it started the left turn. The first shot misses. The second shot (caught by the Zap film), hits JFK in the back and also hits GC. The third shot hits JFK in the back of the head. It exits and fragments after hiting skull bone and mushrooming. Pieces fly forward hitting Taque, the wind shield and the inner molding.
kanukster 1 year ago
@markinator012961 @kanukster Cont...The trajectory for the second shot lines up with this area. Witnesses do not assume this, because they can't see anyone there, so logicly their brain seeks for an alternative answer, the knoll, directly behind. Confused, they all run to the assumed position. No one is seen. To risky and to exposed for a shooter. Remember, the official preset story is that only one shooter is responsible LHO. The spent casings and rifle are staged in the book building.
kanukster 1 year ago
@kanukster Cont...The third shot is fired a split second after the first head shot. He's hit from the front, from the sewer. The bullet enters the opened and damaged skull Having little resistence, exits through the back of the skull. (bullet ends up ?).
Every one knows the eyewitnesses saw a large hole at the back of his head. The witnesses that ran to the knoll, assumed the shot came from there because their eyes were telling them that noone one was visible from the exact spot, the sewer,
kanukster 1 year ago
@kanukster In my google discussion group, one of the members pointed this out to all --- numerous photos & films show people running to the Grassy Knoll, as they thought that's where a shooter was. If LHO fired from the 6th floor of the TSBD, then we should see spectators running there, and pointing up to the window. No photos nor films show that at all.
markinator012961 1 year ago
what is he doing with his hands?
redfoot1995 1 year ago
@redfoot1995 JFK is reacting to being shot, & there are a couple of theories as to the cause of his hand motion toward his throat. Probability that he's unable to breathe due to his trachea being damaged & deviated. Other's attribute the hand motion to Thorburn's Position, although supporting medical evidence is sketchy.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@redfoot1995 the first shot went throught his neck and throat, the second shot was a headshot
MJ4everTheKing 1 year ago
@MJ4everTheKing thanks ive never noticed that
redfoot1995 1 year ago
@MJ4everTheKing I believe your interpretation to be incorrect. It appears to me that JFK was hit in the throat while concealed behind the sign. Upon emergence, he is reacting, & we see him starting to raise his hands. Conally is NOT hit upon emergence, & reacts at 224. Then JFK reacts AGAIN at 230. We're seeing 3 shots within that short period of time. #1 - JFK throat, #2 - Connally, #3 - JFK back
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 my previous comment is incorrect. THe first shot missed the car, the second shot went through JFK's Throat and into Connally ( 1 shot 2 hits), the third shot was a fatal headshot. Look it up, there is proof for this.
MJ4everTheKing 1 year ago
@MJ4everTheKing Shots that missed are open to a more broad interpretation, in that we can't determine with precision when the shot(s) were fired. There clearly was a missed shot circa 160, & we know this 'cause both JFK & Connally turned to their right respectively. JFK resumed waving & didn't recognize the gunfire. Connally recognized it & his testimony supports it. Connally was 100% certain that the shot that hit JFK in the back did not hit him (Connally). Good bye SBT!
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 I have one word for your theory...WRONG
MJ4everTheKing 1 year ago
@MJ4everTheKing Then you think Connally apparently was mistaken when he said he heard the first shot. He never waivered from insisting that the shot that hit JFK did not hit him. Nellie's testimony also supported this.
markinator012961 1 year ago
'Throat'. No, see frames 235-240, hands at face and doing something. I realise the drive of this vid is not where I'm at. But we must realise that when Hollywood can pose the questions of who shot him, where, from where with what and how many times, it could be simple misdirection. Zap's movie does not clearly show a man being shot. It shows something decidedly odd, and these frames may usefully show the beginning of the set up. What is Jonny doing in frame 40? See the rest of the vid and
sxmadrid 1 year ago
@sxmadrid notice that thing roll up the side of his face and fly off the top of his head. Is that really his brain that Jackie leaps to collect?
sxmadrid 1 year ago
@sxmadrid I'm not sure what you're seeing at 240, although we all interpret things differently. In the full version of the Z film, frame 313 shows red halo of human matter that witnesses described. The blob on his head is a portion of his skull laid inside out. 2 pieces of skull fly up and forward. Jackie did not remember climbing out on the trunk. She did not retrieve any brain or skull from the trunk. She may have been attempting to escape danger, that she thought was in front of her.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Well, this vid is a useful close-up and slow-mo. I'm throwing out observations that were put to me recently. It refired my interest in something that I had previusly concluded to be inconclusive. I say it is worth moments of one's time to look closely at the film with new eyes: something decidedly odd begins to happen from the moments depicted here to the point of th allegd head shot - it seems quite poss to me that a special effect was used to spirit JK out of the limelight.
sxmadrid 1 year ago
What exactly is the man doing in these frames with his hands to his face? The film is never crystal at the best of times, and this is not the best clarity. But it does seem he is doing something odd there, and that perhaps the Zapruder film does not in fact show a man being shot, but the use of a special effect to give the impression. After all, it would be just typical if "Who shot Kennedy" turned out to be nothing more than a highly successful piece of misdirection.
sxmadrid 1 year ago
@sxmadrid No credible evidence of alteration has been found, and yes, we all wish the clarity was better. JFK's hands coming up to his throat may indicate Thorburn's Position - a google search will explain that term. Importance here is that IF he was hit while hidden behind the sign, & then Conally is hit at 224, and then JFK is hit again at 230, then clearly there were more shooters than just Oswald.
markinator012961 1 year ago
Comment removed
auther1046 1 year ago
I tried to leve a note on another Zapruder film clip and it would NOT take no matter how long I tried...Whats up CIA? Monitoring even fucking Youtube...You fucking assholes...Burn in Hell.
repelghosts 1 year ago
@repelghosts It may be that the other youtube clip user had comments enabled, but later disabled them, so that no more comments would be accepted. We can be certain, however, that the intelligence agencies monitor youtube and social networking sites!
markinator012961 1 year ago
This sequence is very obviously where JFK took Oswald's second shot in the upper back. (Oswald's first shot, around Z160, missed because of the oak tree in front of the TSBD.) This bullet hit no bones, but it did lose some velocity and it began to tumble as it exited JFK's throat. When it hit Connally in the back, it did so sideways, leaving an oval entrance wound. It smashed his ribs, left his chest, went through his wrist and lodged in his thigh. The recovered bullet was noticeably flattened.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal It's obvious that JFK took a bullet at precisely Z230. However, he's reacting to being hit already when emerging from behind Stemmons. Connally's reaction to being hit clearly shows at Z224. You're mistaken about shot sequencing. If JFK is reacting at Z230, to a transiting wound from his back to his throat, then (1) Why is JFK reacting upon emergence, and (2) Why does Connally react prior to Z230 at Z224?
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 No, Z230 is clearly much too late; JFK's elbows are already up. JFK was hit just as he emerged from the sign at Z224. Connally reacts at the same instant because they were hit by the same bullet, Oswald's 2nd shot.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Try to clear your mind of the SBT. I believe you are attempting to fit one shot into 3 separate events. #1 - JFK is hit in the neck at ~210. #2 - Connally receives chest wound at precisely 224. #3 - JFK receives non-transiting back wound at precisely 230. Oswald may have fired one of these shots. These 3 events are the second shot grouping, which explains why most witnesses heard 3 shots. They heard 3 shot groupings.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 There's nothing wrong with the SBT. The single largest group of witnesses were the ones who said three shots all came from the TSBD. Three of Oswald's coworkers were in the windows right below him! They could even hear the shells drop.
#1 at around Z160 missed, but it got Connally's attention. #2 hit both JFK and him from the rear at around Z224, and #3 hit JFK in the head from the rear at Z312-313. All the motions are completely consistent with that.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Okay, we're getting closer. I think you now understand how I can interpret the same events differently. Let's agree the 1st shot was circa 160. There was no wounding, so we can use the "circa" term, or your term "around" 160. However, when the woundings happen next, we can pinpoint exact frames, in which case your claim of "around 224" I find unacceptable, respectfully.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal I don't have the stats in front of me, but I agree that a majority of earwitnesses claimed 3 shots. I think the majority of the 3-shot witnesses also indicated they they heard "the 1st shot, followed by a pause, and the last 2 in quick succession." Citation of 3-shot witnesses should be qualified with mention of the uneven shot spacing, which defies the SBT. Kellerman's testimony of a "flurry" of shots I find to be very, very believable. I don't think this man was mistaken.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Citation of 3-shot ... which defies the SBT"
The only thiing worse than eye-witness testimony * (w/out corroborative evidence) is ear-witness testimony which is basically useless in a DP type set up. So you've followed the pattern perfectly for reverse engineering a conspiracy. Use weak evidence & you're guaranteed to get your conspiracy of choice every time. Intellectually dishonest.
* Justice Frankfurter said "is the greatest cause of miscarriage of justice in the US".
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 I hypothesize that those who thought there was a flurry of shots heard multiple reports per shot. Dealy Plaza was an echo chamber, and firing a rifle creates several distinct sounds - the burst of gases from the muzzle, the sonic boom from the supersonic bullet, and the sound of the bullet hitting the target.
Many of those who immediately identified it as a rifle firing 3 shots (e.g, JBC) were familiar with the sound of rifles; JBC was a hunter and so was officer Baker.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal When viewing my clip posted here, always be concious of the fact that slow-motion deceives our brains. I remind people to watch in real-time. With that in mind, JFK's abrupt motion at 230 to 234 seems quite plausible as receiving a wound to his back, & if JBC was hit at 224, then 1 more shooter from the rear, likely Dal-Tex.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 I heartily agree; you can definitely miss things if you don't watch them in real time. To me it looks as if someone kicks JFK in the back of the neck at Z224, just as he emerges from behind the sign. Connally begins to react at the same instant. JFK's arm motion at 230-234 is just a continuation of his response that began at about 224.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Actually, we WILL miss things watching in real time. Slo-mo allows scrutiny, but then viewers' minds, IMO, need to be 'reset' with real time. Essentially, both JFK & JBC, after emerging, do undergo some forms of involuntary motion, and for purposes of discussion, the reason(s) may be indeterminate.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Well, you obviously need to watch it both ways. I think the WC (and maybe the House) probably spent too much time analyzing the still images and not enough on the motion because they didn't have computers or even VCRs in those days. But I don't think there's much that's still unresolved here. It's pretty obvious that both are hit by one bullet around 224, and JFK by another at 313, and both came from behind.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal P1 "There's nothing wrong w/the SBT" The problem here isn't the SBT it's Mr. M trying to convince others by having them eventually 'Disprove his Negative' (usually impossible) which is based upon faulty logic grainy film & weak evidence. Example if I asked u "Did u stop beating your wife after u got out of jail for child molestation? Y or N? You'd be pretty hard pressed to answer, even if not married, if u answered either way u'd be incriminating yourself. This is the type of
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 I understand the concept of disproving a negative. I see no negative that requires disproving. In my posted clip, we all see involuntary motion by at least two passengers in the limo. Concerning 230 - 234, I believe there is at least one other rational explanation for what we observe. Essentially, scrutiny focuses on frame 224, while motion in 230 - 234 remains ignored or downplayed as simple gag reflex.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal P2 "SBT"
loaded, rhetorical Q's that are designed to fail. The more individual factors involved exponentially this goes up. And theres a very good reason for this. If Mr. M really wanted to know the truth, we'd not even be here, he could of figured this out long ago w/out Myers or your help. He's grabbed on to JFK as his hero who couldn't possibly be vanquished w/out at least 1 more shooter. Given time this increase has reached 218 assassins per VB. You're wasting your time.
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 Yes, I frankly agree there are CT's that idolize JFK's presidency, & this may blind them to certain aspects. Overall, his admin was above average, certainly. There are several facts that undeniably will sway opinion to conclude conspiracy. One of 'em is Dr. Burkley. JFK's personal doctor, present in TR1, signed death certificate, present at autopsy, yet apparently said nothing while prosectors "missed" the frontal throat wound. I will not accept that.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal "The recovered bullet was noticeably flattened." Yes, it is. However, given the amounts of human flesh, human bone, and various fabrics that it allegely transited, we should expect more signs of this, in terms of damage, as well as imprints of fabric on the outer layer. Specter could not get Tomlinson to pinpoint the stretcher, and badgered him mercilessly. Kantor saw Ruby at Parkland, yet the WC claimed he was "mistaken". Ruby likely planted CE399 when he was at Parkland.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Why do you say that? Have you conducted any experiments with similar bullets and targets? Those who have, have gotten very similar results - a bullet that is bent, but still intact. Remember, the bullet had a military-style metal jacket designed to keep it from mushrooming in flesh and killing unnecessarily (wounding actually being more effective in a war since it occupies healthy soldiers in an evacuation).
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Dr. Olivier fired WCC ammo for the MC rifle into cadaver wrists, & results yielded consistently greater damage:
SPECTER. Would you describe that bullet for the record, please?
OLIVIER. The nose of the bullet is quite flattened from striking the radius.
SPECTER. How does it compare, for example, with Commission Exhibit 399?
OLIVIER. It is not like it at all. I mean, Commission Exhibit 399 is not flattened on the end. This one is very severely flattened on the end.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Sure the nose of the bullet will be flattened if it hit first. But the tumbling motion after striking is random, and CE399 apparently hit Connally flying sideways, as evidenced by the oval entrance wound and by the fact that the bullet was flattened on its side. Those who describe it as a "pristine bulllet" usually don't show its cross section. I consider that dishonest.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Ruby planted CE399? Why? Give me a break. Ruby's motive was clear from the exhaustive biography of the man - he was a crackpot who though he was being a hero. Any of a thousand people would have done what he did; Ruby just happened to be the one out of that thousand who got "lucky" in entering the police station. He almost missed the transfer.
As for Tomlinson, he never actually handled the bullet. He only discovered it.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Ruby got access to the midnight press conference, so we know that he was able to gain access at extraordinary hours. Testimony of DPD officers directly involved with Oswald's transfer show overwhelming agreement that Ruby did not use the ramp. You minimize the importance of Tomlinson's discovery of CE399. Location of discovery is crucial to evidentiary value, so it is you that needs to learn basic investigative lessons & quit ignoring pertinent testimony. You embarrass yourself.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Yes, Ruby was a cop fan who liked being at the center of the action. As for Ruby's entrance to the garage, does it really matter? He got in either by slipping past a distracted guard at the top of the ramp (most likely) or through an overlooked unlocked door. As for the bullet, it was matched to Oswald's gun to the exclusion of all guns, so it had to have been found on Connally's stretcher. No one would dare plant such a bullet for fear that the real one might also be found.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Yes, Ruby's means of entry matters greatly. Unlocked door? Transfer of the DPD's most sensational person, & extraordinary security measures, yet they "missed" a door. Really? No surprise on ballistics match to LHO's rifle. A perfect ballistics match does not, & can not indicate which stretcher it was on. Conspirators didn't care what other contrary evidence may show up --- they'd simply lose it, or suppress it, or ignore it. WC would then say person was "mistaken".
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "they'd simply lose it, or suppress it, or ignore it'
Well if I were part of the conspiracy & wasn't put to work by the Apple Dumpling Gang with weapons supplied by the Salvation Army I'd sure as shit get rid of CE399 (pre-experimentation stage) like right off the bat, or at the very least beat it with a hammer for a few hours so it meets the expectations the clueless would expect out of such a bullet.
I don't expect you've ever heard of the words 'counter intuative' eh?.
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 I understand the reasoning behind LN claims of 399's planting being unnecessary, and even dangerous if exposed as such. A different way of looking at it is that conspirators felt it necessary to have a projectile with clear ballistic connections to the MC rifle, in the event that recovered fragments did not. Once again I must reiterate that the FBI would collect & concentrate all evidence, thus offering the options of producing evidence of their choice.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "I understand the reasoning"
I seriously doubt it. The only way to figure out what you're doing is by cross referencing. Find out how many ppl who HEARD shots from the GK .. SAW.. the SIDE of his head explode, then find out how many ppl who HEARD shots from the TSBD .. SAW .. the BACK of his head explode. McAdam's web site explains further that this proves INITIAL PERCEPTIONS are faulty most of the time, & after Talking, Listening to others, the Memory is also Modified.
auther1046 1 year ago
@markinator012961 P2 "I understand the reasoning" Further : When u see a pattern developing where for example GN witness's (ear-audio) r reporting the SIDE of JFK's head explode (eye-visual) instead of the BACK of his head which would be expected, then u know other factors r in play (sequence of events went too fast for humans to record) don't trust weak eye-ear witnesses, stick w/the solid physical evidence & what it says & you won't find yourself staring up from the rabbits hole of no return.
auther1046 1 year ago
Please watch the Zapruder film carefully, there IS evidence of a second shooter, right after the motorcade passes the sign and before the light pole, a bullet hits the limo's trunk, you can see smoke and the ricochet. It's there if you'd bother to look, as clear as the film.
brokencasket 1 year ago
@brokencasket No, you're just seeing clouds reflected off the shiny trunk of the limo. That's very obvious if you continue to watch the trunk through the period of the head shot. You can also see the reflection of Jean Hill's red dress as the limo passes her.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@brokencasket Apollo is correct -- the trunk was convex and shiny, reflecting items & people to the immediate south. We see the red coat, & the white piece of paper that has been mistaken for a chunk of skull bone sliding across the trunk. That particular object in the Z-film is corrobated by one of the Bothun photos, where we clearly see the object lying in the grass. To my knowledge, actual impact strikes to the limo have not been verified, and are not discernable. We must look at people.
markinator012961 1 year ago
he got hit in the throat only can happen from the front
starlogic99 1 year ago
@starlogic99 "he got hit in the throat only can happen from the
front" Impossible shot ! Can't go through a windscreen, miss two people in front of JFK, miss the overhead crossbar and still strike JFK, Impossible ! The throat wound looked so small because JFK's buttoned shirt & tie he wore created 'Supported Skin' exit wound which experimentation by Dr. Lattimer proved can be as small as an entry wound. Live with it. The SBT, DVT rules by 'The Scientific Method' of inquiry & experimentation.
VinnyDickWad 1 year ago
@VinnyDickWad There are more of those leaps of logic necessary to defend the SBT. You assume that JFK's back wound was connected to his throat wound. Humes, Boswell, & Finck failed to probe nor examine it, albeit Humes poking his finger in the back entry. Humes didn't have the body available on 11-23-63 when he GUESSED the two wounds were connected. He uses the words 'presumably of entry' & 'presumably of exit." This is inexcusable, considering it was the POTUS. Humes burned the first draft.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Leaps of logic? I guess it's a real leap of logic to say that when a bullet exits, it must first enter. Or that bullets generally travel in straight lines except when they ht something hard, like bone.
Humes burned his notes because they were bloodstained and he didn't want them going into some museum. Can't blame him.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Of course a bullet that exits must first enter. The leap of logic surrounds the merely flattened condition of CE399, considering the fabric it had to pierce, & dense bone. You are careful when you state Humes' claim of burning autopsy notes, per Humes himself. Yes, we can blame him, and we do. He also admitted to burning the first draft. No blood on the first draft, so why burn it? He commandeered Boswell's face sheet with blood, and kept that. Where are Finck's notes?
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Merely flattened? Take a full jacketed bullet and pound on it with a hammer. You'll really have to work at it to get it as flat as CE399. It's hardly "pristine". Also, firing tests on targets modeling JFK's neck and JC's chest and arm have produced very similar results.
I couldn't care less about the autopsy surgeons' notes. All that matters is that they certify their final reports as accurate.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal I do understand your points regarding CE399. I don't claim that it is "pristine". Take a full-jacketed bullet and fire it into rib bones, then wrist bones, & you'll discover quickly that CE399 is simply not plausible. Also, I note your replies are calculated, i.e. "produced very similar results." Out of how many attempts? Humes' unilateral destruction of notes & draft is very, very serious, and elicits massive suspicion. But you couldn't care less, correct?
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Let's say I shuffle a deck of cards and deal out a 5-card poker hand. Then I exclaim "wow, what were the chances of my dealing this exact hand? Astronomically small!" And they were. But there were also *many* possible hands, all astronomically unlikely, and it was certain that I'd deal one of them.
Same with the bullet. You will never *exactly* repeat CE399, but neither could Oswald. There were many similar outcomes.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal I agree with you here.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Wow. And I was gearing up for a detailed explanation.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal We have more common ground than we realize.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 What's so magical about Hume's notes? They were for his own use in writing his report. Had he wanted to, he could have falsified them just as easily as the actual report.
I've noticed that conspiracy freaks often scream for what they know they cannot have. Not that they'd have a clue what to do with the items or what they'd mean. It's just a way to create a false controversy.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Humes was a gov't employee, and all of his notes at autopsy were to be preserved. His role was not to decide on his own what information would be retained or destroyed. With original notes, we could compare accuracy to the extant autopsy report. Recall that he burned the notes AND the first draft. The fact that he did this shortly after Oswald was murdered is not purely idiosynchratic. He burned his own bloodstained notes, yet retained Boswell's stained face sheet. Contradictory?
markinator012961 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal Yes, I "scream" for things I can't have, but not for false controversy. The Harper Fragment was last in the possession of the FBI. THEY won't allow us to have it. There cannot be an innocent explanation. The issue surrounding notes of Oswald's interrogations also supports suspicions. The DPD & FBI could easily have delayed interrogation for the time it took to acquire a recording device.
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 "Can u explain y the WC did not interview numerous close eyewitnesses? Charles Brehm? Bill & Gayle Newman?"
They had better witnesses who didn't contradict themselves. Look at the famous photo of the Newman's laying on the lawn in front of the GK. We're supposed to believe that a shot came from behind them right? Why are they sheilding themselves from the GK w/their children in front of them? If a shot came from the GK their children would be on the opposite side of them.
auther1046 1 year ago
@auther1046 I disagree strongly with your rationalization re: failure to interview Brehm & Newmans due to better witnesses not contradicting themselves. I simply will not accept this as an excuse. The CLOSEST spectators to the limo at Z313 were not called to testify for the WC. A real possibility is that WC did not want testimony from these particular up-close witnesses that may have refuted shots from elsewhere. Given their proximity, testimony under oath would lend more credence to GK shot(s).
markinator012961 1 year ago
@markinator012961 Huh? The DPD, FBI, Secret Service, WC and HC interviewed MANY assassination witnesses. Just look at the lists. I can't blame them, though, for giving priority to those who actually saw Oswald and/or his rifle firing in the window. No one else saw anything like that anywhere else, and it wasn't because the investigators weren't looking.
As for the closest witnesses to Z313, do we really need to discuss how Jean Hill's testimony flatly conflicted with the Z film?
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago