"ON TRIAL: LEE HARVEY OSWALD" -- A Personal Review (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Gatie]

My, Neil and phil seem to have abandoned the thread. Perhaps the conspiracy police got to them and shipped them off in black helicopters to attend LNT brainwashing classes.

 

[phil*]

LHO, who had means, motive and opportunity, shot JFK?

To suggest that LHO had "motive" to shoot JFK simply because he supposedly had socialist leanings and had lived in the Soviet Union for awhile is utterly preposterous and smacks of McCarthyism. If you use that line of logic, EVERYBODY who had socialist views and had lived in the USSR would have had a motive to kill the President of the US.

And you actually think LHO wouldn't be convicted? Please, phil.

There was a TON of more viable evidence against OJ than there was against LHO, and he was acquitted. (And yes,OJ was guilty.)

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie

phil, there was blood or some other substance on the bullet and the bullet fragments. As testified by FBI agent Robert Frazier, they were wiped clean before examining. As far as I know, the bullet was never tested for any microscopic blood or tissue residue, if you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.

This is a typical example of either the worst case of forensic examination incompetence, or, more likely, a deliberate attempt not to CLOSELY examine CE399 because the blood(if there really was any to begin with) would not have matched that of the victims.

So, to reiterate..Oswald had NO motive..and please, don't fall back on that tired cliche that he was a nut so he didn't need a motive. It is SO incredibly weak.


If Oswald was sane,and I believe he was, and if he was the sole assassin of JFK, then we must believe that he wanted to get caught...not wearing gloves,not picking up and disposing the 3 cartridge shells which were lying at his feet, or not SIMPLY wiping off the rifle which had his prints on it. THINK OF IT...if he had taken these SIMPLE precautions, would he have even been charged with the assassination? It wouldn't have been that difficult for someone to have planted his rifle at the Depository if he was in fact being set up. But of course,we ALL know he didn't want to get caught because he denied having anything to do with it.


What was Oswald's motive in shooting police officer JD Tippit? This happened approximately 60-90 minutes after the assassination and it was way too early for Oswald to be even considered a suspect in JFK's murder by the Dallas police department whose proclivity for incompetence that weekend is well documented. Why WOULD Oswald shoot him? There was NO evidence against Oswald at all to that point. If an APB was issued describing LHO's general description that quickly, that would probably have fit the description of half the male population of Dallas. But Officer Tippit apparently honed in to this particular man. Why? The implications are ominous. I believe Oswald was supposed to have been murdered the day of the assassination, and this probably dawned on him as well.


Why did Oswald not pay for his movie ticket,breaking the law,thereby guaranteeing that he would in fact draw the attention of legal enforcers. Again,did he in fact want to get caught? Obviously not.


Who got Oswald the job at the Depository? Ruth Paine. The SAME Ruth Paine who, when later questioned by authorities claimed she "forgot" that her sister was employed by the CIA. Yeah,right.


Who owned the Texas School Book Depository? David Harold Byrd. Who was this man? Only a VERY close friend of Lyndon Baines Johnson, the President in waiting.


So you see, there are just too many strange circumstances involving the assassination which cannot simply be chalked up to a "coincidence". To attribute basically all of them to coincidence or LHO being a "nut" is wishful thinking at best.


It is absolutely incredible how so many people delude themselves into believing that a violent overthrow of the government just isn't possible in the US.


In fact,without a doubt, just such a "coup d'etat" occurred on November 22,1963 with Lyndon Johnson as its immediate and main beneficiary.

 

[Jack P]

*****To suggest that LHO had "motive" to shoot JFK simply because he supposedly had socialist leanings and had lived in the Soviet Union for awhile is utterly preposterous and smacks of McCarthyism*****


Um, Phil, the reason his ideological motive factors into this is *because* of the physical evidence that points to him as the killer and not the other way around. OTOH, it amuses me to hear this "McCarthyism" charge trotted out when it comes to defending the honor and virtue of communists and defectors to Russia whereas buffdom by contrast is so anxious to impugn every aspect of investigative work done by the American government on this or to (as we shall see) use a more blatant case of "McCarthyism" when it comes to invoking the dreaded CIA as their boogeyman.


*****What was Oswald's motive in shooting police officer JD Tippit?****

Try something as simple as being stopped because he answered the description of the President's killer as broadcast over the police radio and trying to avoid capture, and should I then point out that when Oswald was apprehended in the Texas Theatre, he resisted arrest and tried to use that same pistol used to kill Officer Tippit to try and kill arresting officer N.M. McDonald?


*****Why did Oswald not pay for his movie ticket,breaking the law,thereby guaranteeing that he would in fact draw the attention of legal enforcers.*****


More than once Phil, I have mentioned the name Johnny Calvin Brewer in this thread, and I wonder why you are now asking a question that requires you (in the tradition of Mark Lane) to pretend that he doesn't exist. Oswald drew attention of law enforcement because of Johnny Brewer's observations of Oswald after he tried to elude police sirens following news of the Tippit murder being broadcast and it was Brewer following Oswald to the theater that set events in motion, not the fact that he didn't buy a ticket. That you don't seem to be aware of Brewer is another indicator that you get your information on the assassination spoonfed by buffdom.


******Who got Oswald the job at the Depository? Ruth Paine. The SAME Ruth Paine who, when later questioned by authorities claimed she "forgot" that her sister was employed by the CIA. Yeah,right.*****

I'll get back to the absurdity of this point but first, I want to note the even greater absurdity of how you are so anxious to use the epithet of "McCarthyism" in regards to the potential guilt of a Communist and defector to Russia and say that's no big deal but then you decide to ominously invoke the initials "CIA" as your boogeyman. Again, that's the strange thing about buffdom!

But to get back to the other point, it was Mrs. Paine's neighbor Linnie Mae Randell, the sister of Wesley Frazier who told her about the job availability at the TSBD and was then passed on to Oswald. Mrs. Paine had nothing to do with Oswald being hired. Now is it your contention that Linnie Mae Randell and Wesley Frazier are CIA spooks involved in the assassination? That's the logical conclusion your questions lead to, and they are about as silly as you can get.


*****In fact,without a doubt, just such a "coup d'etat" occurred on November 22,1963 with Lyndon Johnson as its immediate and main beneficiary.*****


Phil, I think you'd better stop repeating silly dialogue from Oliver Stone's movie. I have to admit, it amuses me to hear this stuff about a "coup" to make LBJ president, because if that's true then these coup plotters had to be people who really wanted to see the Great Society and the Civil Rights Acts come about and saw JFK as an obstacle to the same! (people who use the term "coup" and think the murder of JFK was some big "right wing" thing usually are ignorant of the fact that on all things domestic, LBJ was to the left of JFK).

 

[Jack P]

Oh, one other thing Phil. If this matter of the Depository ownership (a silly red herring) is such a big deal to you, then why don't you ask who was responsible ultimately for JFK riding past that building? Had to be someone with a vested interest in wanting JFK dead right? Had to show someone involved with the conspiracy?


Well, the reason the motorcade went by that building was because that's the only way you can get to the Trade Mart, the site of the luncheon speech. Once the Trade Mart was decided as the locale, then Dallas traffic law said you had to go by that building.


Aha then! Who was responsible for picking the Trade Mart site when the speech could have been given at other locations? Now we're onto something, because there was someone who DID insist on the Trade Mart as the place where the luncheon and speech should take place, and thus insure that there would be a motorcade through Dealey Plaza that would result in JFK's murder. That someone must have been part of the coup plot!!!!!!


Oops. The individual who insisted on the Trade Mart site, and thus was the reason why there was a motorcade that went past that building was none other than.......Governor John Connally.


So I guess then, according to Buffdom 101, Connally was in on this so much that he was willing to give ultimate meaning to the concept of "taking one for the team"? "

 

[Jeff Gatie]

phil, do you read anything anyone else posts, or do you just conveniently ignore anything which destroys your distorted view of the evidence? Above I listed both field and experimental studies which state FMJ bullets do not pick up visible traces of blood or tissue when they pass through a body. In fact, in most cases the bullet does not even pick up traces which are visible under a microscope.


Read it again phil . . . FMJ bullets do not pick up visible traces of blood or tissue when they pass through a body. In fact, in most cases the bullet does not even pick up traces which are visible under a microscope.


It is only after DNA analysis of sub-microscopic amounts of matter is the bullet able to be linked to whom it passed through. DNA analysis which was not available in 1963, so lack of consideration for these sub-microscopic amounts when handling the bullet is not negligence or evidence of a frameup, it is simply standard procedure.


By the way phil, FMJ stands for Full Metal Jacket, the type of ammunition in Oswald's rifle, and the type definitively linked beyond all reasonable doubt to the wounds in both Connally and JFK. So stop with the "blood on the bullet" nonsense phil, it has been scientifically debunked.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Oh and phil, your continued insistence that a "sane" person would not leave evidence behind so therefore LHO is innocent is counter to every crime ever solved by evidence that was left behind. It's an absolutely absurd argument, putting you in the same league as those who acquitted OJ.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

To turn it around on you phil, exactly what was Oswald's motive for killing Tippett if he didn't kill JFK? 11 eyewitnesses who saw him shoot or flee, plus the gun Tippett was shot with is found on him, and he resisted arrest and tried to shoot another cop . . . that's as open and shut as it gets. So why did LHO, a hapless innocent dupe, shoot a cop in cold blood then flee the scene and later resist arrest, unless he was guilty of something? If someone had set me up and I was aware of it, being a smart guy like you claim Oswald was, I'd surrender to the first cop I saw and proclaim my innocence, then get a lawyer. Shooting a cop, fleeing the scene, and resisting arrest are not the actions of an innocent man. Oh and phil, I love the way you describe a hardcore, devout communist and fanatical follower of Stalinist dictator Fidel Castro as having "socialist leanings." That's like calling McCarthy himself a "moderate republican".

 

[phil*]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie /forum/thread/278047/on-trial-lee-harvey-oswald-a-personal-review/360#post_3787935

Only two Commission witnesses were identified as actually having seen the shooting, Helen Markham and Domingo Benavides. Joseph Ball, senior counsel to the COMMISSION, has referred to Markham's testimony as "full of mistakes," and characterized her as "utterly unreliable."

Benavides was not taken to a police lineup. He later testified that he had told police after the killing that he did not think he could identify the assailant, but he did say that the killer resembled pictures he had seen of Oswald. The lineups have been criticized as flawed in that they consisted of only four people, one of whom was Oswald, that most or all of the people in the lineups were either much older than Oswald, teenagers, or a Mexican, and that the older people were better dressed than Oswald... all of this enabling the witnesses to know who the suspect was (i.e., which of the men in the lineups was the man arrested near the murder scene and quickly identified as a Communist on television), and to easily pick him out.

Additionally, certain witnesses who did not appear before the Commission identified an assailant who was not Oswald. Both Acquilla Clemons and Frank Wright witnessed the scene from their respective homes within one block of the murder. Clemons saw two men near Tippit’s car just before the shooting. After the shooting she ran outside and saw a man with a gun, whom she described as "kind of heavy". He waved to the second man, urging him to "go on". Frank Wright also emerged from his home and observed the scene seconds after the shooting. He described a man standing by Tippit’s body who had on a long coat, and who immediately ran to a car and left the scene.

There is also evidence to indicate that the cartridge shells recovered from the scene may not have been those subsequently entered into evidence. Two of the shells recovered at the scene were given to police officer J.M. Poe. Poe testified to the Commission that he believed that he had marked the shells with his initials, although he couldn’t "swear to it". However, no initials were found on the shells later produced by the police. Poe later told researchers that he was absolutely certain that he had marked the shells. Further the appearance of cartridge shells at the crime scene raises question for some because, according to Officer Hill, who took possession of Oswald's revolver at his arrest, the gun's six chambers were fully loaded with unspent cartridges and that Oswald had no ammunition on his person.

William Alexander, the Dallas assistant district attorney who had recommended that Oswald be charged with the Kennedy and Tippit murders, has also been critical of the Commission's version of the murder, stating that its conclusions on Oswald's movements "did not add up", and that "certainly, he may have had accomplices."

Read it again phil . . . FMJ bullets do not pick up visible traces of blood or tissue when they pass through a body. In fact, in most cases the bullet does not even pick up traces which are visible under a microscope.

And of course, this just happened to be one of those cases. How convenient.

phil, do you read anything anyone else posts, or do you just conveniently ignore anything which destroys your distorted view of the evidence?

[SIZE= 14px]Of course I read your posts, Jeff. I particularly enjoy reading your posts concerning the absolute infallible nature of computer simulations;defying anyone to debunk the computer simulation of Dale Myers..and then of course having it COMPLETELY and UTTERLY debunked because of Myers' deliberate mispositioning of Kennedy and Connally.[/SIZE]



[SIZE= 14px]I also enjoy reading your posts re: gunsmoke odors. Well Jeff, acrid and pungent odors such as gunsmoke do NOT disappear at the snap of one's fingers despite your assertions to the contrary.[/SIZE]



[SIZE= 14px]What would be Oswald's motive in shooting Tippit if he in fact didn't kill JFK? As I've already mentioned, Oswald probably knew that he was being set up as "the patsy" and was probably targeted for execution himself. As proof of this, when Oswald was arrested at the Texas Theatre, what were the first words he yelled when being led out of the theatre by the police? "I am not resisting arrest! I am not resisting arrest!" Why did he yell these words out to the crowd that was watching? Because he KNEW that there was a good chance he would be killed in police custody (which is what ultimately happened)...and he thought by yelling these words out..those odds would be decreased. Unfortunately for him, and for history, they weren't. When you combine the phrases "I am not resisting arrest" with "I'm just a patsy"..it makes for a rather interesting combination leading to but one conclusion: he was set up.[/SIZE]

 

[Jack P]

*****Only two Commission witnesses were identified as actually having seen the shooting, Helen Markham and Domingo Benavides.****

Cab driver William Scoggins was closer than Markham and saw Tippit stop Oswald. He did not see Oswald pull the trigger because he was eating his lunch in his cab but when he heard the shots and looked up, he then saw Oswald running toward him and ducked down in his cab. Oswald then passed close enough for Scoggins to hear him muttering, "Poor dumb cop." As the WC noted, Scoggins was in that respect an even more important witness and he without hesitation identified Oswald in the lineup. As did other witnesses that day who saw him flee the scene (Ted Callaway, Sam Guinyard, Virginia and Barbara Davis; Testifying in the 1986 mock trial on this matter of whether his ID of Oswald was somehow suspect because of the lineup, Callaway said, "I could have recognized him nekkid.")


Incidentally, Scoggins is yet another case of a key witness that Mark Lane, Oliver Stone etc. choose to zap out of existence because to acknowledge his presence causes all of their silly efforts to get Oswald off the hook for killing Tippit to come crashing down with a giant thud. I have a sneaking feeling Phil, that just as you are incapable of grasping the existence of Johnny Brewer in regards to Oswald's arrest, you don't know who William Scoggins is because you keep relying on buff authors who try to pretend he doesn't exist.


As for Acquilla Clemons, let's see now, she claims two men, but strangely enough the other eleven eyewtinesses don't see a second man. And you're saying she's more believable than Helen Markham? Here's another strange case of how buffdom never knows how to adopt consistent standards of evaluating evidence, because it's always hit the square peg into the round hold of conspiracy! Plus, who did she first go to with her story? Mark Lane, a certified liar and fraud.


Jeff, I'm sure will have more, but again, I'm just laughinig at how you keep recycling the same old nonsense that hasn't been valid since about 1965!

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Phil, the gunsmoke is done, over, period. You can't accept it, but I've given a rational and probable explanation. Besides, you haven't explained how a gun that you claim was not fired because there was no gunsmoke in a room could be linked to bullet fragments found inside the bodies of two people. Answer that phil, and then we'll take your decidedly biased and non-technical "analysis" of odor dispersion from a barrel that is pointed out the window seriously.

The other bullet BS has been definitely debunked by not one, but two peer reviewed studies. Once again, you can't accept it, but that is only because it doesn't fit your decidedly biased and delusional view of what happened that day. But hey, at least you aren't arguing bullets from the front exploding his head, modern firearms, smokeless powder and Mausers anymore. Baby step phil, baby steps.


And no need for the bold, colored, large font, phil. We are on to your deflection techniques, no need to be so obvious.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Hey phil, why in the same post are you arguing against LHO shooting Tippett by discrediting witnesses, and simultaneously arguing his motive for killing him was he knew he was going to be assassinated so he had to protect himself? Either the witnesses saw him shoot him or they didn't, phil. Arguing two opposite scenarios may seem logical to you, but in reality it is the most illogical thing you can do if you are looking for the truth, instead of obscuring it. Sorry phil, but Schrodinger's cat was nowhere near Dallas that day, and it only happened one way.

 

[Neil Brock]

Mark Lane, a certified liar and fraud.

Can you LNT people go through any posts without the name-calling and constant demeaning of anyone who doesn't buy your theory of the events? Like third grade - I know you are but what am I. Please. Because J. Edgar Hoover was such paragon of virtue and above reproach.


So, where were the rest of the rifle shells? You can't go into a store and buy 4 shells. What happened to the rest of the box? What happened to the box? Never found. What are you going to say, he was meticulous enough to dispose of the rest of the bullets but at the same time not pick up the spent cartridges on the 6th floor? His motive was that he was a staunch communist who hated Kennedy and hated America, yet he makes no statements to that effect while in custody, other than proclaiming his innocence. Still also waiting to hear how CE399 wound up on a stretcher in the hospital other than the one Gov. Connally was on. Did these things get put to rest in 1965 as well?

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Oh now there were 4 shells Neil? Because a few posts back you claimed LHO only brought the exact amount he needed to do the job. Make up your mind Neil. As far as the box of shells is concerned, who knows? One was used to shoot at Walker. Maybe he bought them piecemeal at a gun show. Maybe he practiced with the rest. Never the less, it was his rifle, with his prints, he was identified as the man in the window, two people on the floor below heard the shots and the casings fall, and his bullets are linked to the victims. He was there, he fled the scene, he killed Tippett, he resisted arrest. Answer those questions before worrying about a box of shells that may not have even existed. Oh and Neil, Mark Lane is a proven liar and fraud. Saying so is not demeaning or name calling, it is simply stating a fact.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Proof of Mark Lane's lies: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt

Conspiracy books often claim that Mrs. Markham described the Tippit killer as "short, heavy, and with bushy hair." It's Mark Lane who is responsible for this factoid. The following is excerpted from David Belin's NOVEMBER 22, 1963: YOU ARE THE JURY. What did Mark Lane tell the WC: ---------------------------------------------------------- I spoke with the deponent, the eyewitness, Helen Louise Markham, and Mrs. Markham told me--Miss or Mrs., I didn't ask her if she was married--told me that she was a hundred feet away from the police car, not the fifty feet which appears in the affidavit. She gave me a more detailed description of the man who she said shot Officer Tippit. She said he was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy. I think it is fair to state that an accurate description of Oswald would be average height, quite slender with thin and receding hair. ------------------ Lane then (after some wrangling) presented the WC with a tape that supposedly supported Lane's account of her testimony. And what did his taped conversation with Mrs. Markham actually show? ----------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Lane. But, well, just, could you just give me one moment and tell me. I read that you told some of the reporters that he was short, stocky, and had bushy hair. Mrs. Markham. No, no. I did not say this. Mr. Lane. You did not say that? Mrs. Markham. No, sir. Mr. Lane. Well, would you say that he was stocky? Mrs. Markham. Uh, he was short. Mr. Lane. He was short. Mrs. Markham. Yes. Mr. Lane. And was he a little bit on the heavy side? Mrs. Markham. Uh, not too heavy. Mr. Lane. Not too heavy, but slightly heavy? Mrs. Markham. Oh, well, he was, no he wasn't, didn't look too heavy, uh-uh. Mr. Lane. He wasn't too heavy, and would you say that he had rather bushy hair, kind of hair? Mrs. Markham. Yeh, just a little bit bushy, uh huh. Mr. Lane. It was a little bit bushy. Mrs. Markham. Yes. [Then Lane questioned her about the police lineup. Mrs. Markham stated that she identified Oswald in the police lineup. Lane asked whether the police had told her who it might be. Mrs. Markham replied, "They didn't tell me one thing." Lane then returned to the events of the Tippit shooting and once again went back to Mrs. Markham's description of the gunman] Mr. Lane. Did you say that he was short and a little bit on the heavy side and had slightly bushy hair? Mrs. Markham. Uh, no, I did not. They didn't ask me that. [Then Lane asked her again about how she had described Oswald when she made the affidavit.] Mr. Lane. And when you were there, did they ever ask you anything else about Oswald? About whether he was tall or short? Mrs. Markham. Uh, yes, sir. They asked me that. Mr. Lane. And you said he was short, eh? Mrs. Markham. Yes, sir, he is short. He was short. Mr. Lane. He was short. And they asked if he was thin or heavy, and you said he was a little on the heavy side? Mrs. Markham. And he was, uh, uh, well not too heavy. Uh, say around 160, maybe 150. Mr. Lane. Well, did you say he wasn't too heavy, but he was a little heavy? Mrs. Markham. Uh-huh. Mr. Lane. You did say that? Mrs. Markham. I did identify him in the lineup. Mr. Lane. Yes, and did you say that the man who shot, did you tell the officers that the man who shot Tippit had bushy hair? Mrs. Markham. Uh, no, I did not. Mr. Lane. But, but he did have bushy hair you said, just a little bushy? Mrs. Markham. Well, you wouldn't say it hadn't been combed you know or anything. Mr. Lane. Yes. Mrs. Markham. Of course, he probably had been through a lot, and was kind of tore up a little . . . [Lane returned to the shooting of Officer Tippit and what Mrs. Markham saw and then he asked her about her identification of the gunman in the police station. She said that she wanted to be sure, so she had had the police turn the man in the lineup "and they turned him, and it was him." For a third time Lane tried to have Mrs. Markham state that the person that shot Tippit was short, stocky and had bushy hair.] Mr. Lane. Have you told any reporters about anything? Mrs. Markham. Well, one. They worried me to death. Mr. Lane. I'm sure they are after you because you're a very important witness. Mrs. Markham. Uh-huh. Mr. Lane. Did any of the reporters, did you tell any reporter that the person that shot Oswald, shot Tippit was short, stocky, and had bushy hair? Mrs. Markham I did not. Mr. Lane. You don't remember telling it because one of the reporters reported that in the newspaper. Mrs. Markham. Yes, I read that. Mr. Lane. You read that. What paper was that, do you recall? Mrs. Markham. Uh, I believe it was in the Herald. Mr. Lane. The Herald? Mrs. Markham. I believe, it might have been the News. Mr. Lane. It was one of the Dallas papers, uh? Mrs. Markham. Yes, sir. Mr. Lane. And, do you know what day that was? Mrs. Markham. No, sir. Mr. Lane. That was shortly after, though, wasn't it? Mrs. Markham. Yes, sir. They gave my address, name and everything. Mr. Lane. Yes, and they had you quoted as saying that he was short, stocky, and had bushy hair. Mrs. Markham. Well, they are just not right. Mr. Lane. But that's what they said, though. Mrs. Markham. I know it. They can put anything in papers.

 

[Jack P]

Originally Posted by Neil Brock




Can you LNT people go through any posts without the name-calling and constant demeaning of anyone who doesn't buy your theory of the events?

Neil, I don't even have to cite Lane's lies and deceit in his JFK work to justify that comment (though I could cite how Lane tried to use eyewitness Charles Brehm as evidence for a shot from the knoll when Brehm angrily denied he ever thought shots came from the knoll and said "The nicest thing that can be said about Mark Lane is that he is a certified liar". Yet amazingly, despite Brehm's characterization of Lane as a liar and DESPITE his testimony in the 1986 mock trial where he insisted that he thought shots came from behind, Oliver Stone used Brehm's name anyway to argue a shot from the knoll in "JFK" because Stone relied entirely on Lane and didn't bother to check with Brehm!). Try googling the term "Winter Soldier Investigation" sometime for an example of Lane the liar in something non-JFK.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

I love the concern being shown for demeaning a fraud like Mark Lane. It's quite ironic coming from a guy who a few posts back was giggling like a third grader over the oh so clever "collective nuts" moniker.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

By the way Neil, the question about the stretcher has already been answered (pay attention Neil, we move fast). The original WC testimony of Darrell Tomlinson was that he could not identify the gurney he found it on, due to the gurneys having been moved since the admission of Connally. He later changed his story, like many witnesses, who may or may not have been caught up in post-WC conspiracy fever. So Neil, give me a good reason why he suddenly remembered the exact gurney, when he was unable to identify the gurney for the FBI or WC interviews?

 

[phil*]

A gunshot in Dealey Plaza was reported to the Dallas Police approximately one week before the assassination. Mrs. Joe Baily Blackwell, of Dallas, and her sister were approaching the Triple Underpass when they were shot at and a bullet lodged in their car. The police were unable to determine the source of the shot.


The HSCA investigated bullet fragments that were unavailable to the Warren Commission. In 1974, near the triple overpass in Dealey Plaza, Richard Lester found a bullet fragment. The FBI determined that the Lester bullet fragment was of a 6.5 millimeter caliber but was not "jacketed, softpoint or jacketed, hollow-point sporting bullet, whereas the Mannlicher-Carcano bullet was to be a full metal-jacketed, military-type." The laboratory concluded that the bullet had not been fired from Oswald's Mannlicher Carcano. The second item of evidence was a bullet found in 1967 on top of the Massey Roofing Co. building by Richard Haythorne. The HSCA investigation found that the jacketed, soft-point .30 calibre bullet was consistent with Remington-Peters ammunition. The bullet was not fired from the Mannlicher-Carcano.


In 1975 a maintenance worker on the roof of the Dallas County Records Building, located diagonally from the Texas School Book Depository, found a 30.06 shell under a lip of roofing tar at the base of the roof's parapet on the side facing Dealey Plaza. The shell casing was dated 1953. The condition of the shell indicated it had been on the roof for a long period of time. The HSCA made no mention of this shell.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

So I guess it WAS a conspiracy, given that someone took a shot at the president a week before he got there, or possibly 10 years before he got there. Good thing LHO was such a good shot, because his "conspirators" were a little off in their lead time.

 

[phil*]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie /forum/thread/278047/on-trial-lee-harvey-oswald-a-personal-review/390#post_3788536

I knew this would elicit a sarcastic response from you because that's your typical modus operandi when you don't have an answer for something.


The fact that a shell casing manufactured in 1953 and found in 1975 was found on the roof of the Dallas County Records building ties in nicely with where most people believe the rear shot originated from. The spent bullet casing was found embedded in the air conditioning unit which explains why it wasn't retrieved on November 22,1963.


By the way,your explanation for the lack of blood on CE 399 doesn't wash (excuse the pun); nor does your explanation of disappearing gunsmoke odors, as was the case for your reference to Dale Myers' computer simulation.


I'd love to hear your explanation for how Governor Connally was buried with more bullet fragments remaining in his body than was missing from CE399.