JFK Assassination 40th Anniversary Thread (1 Viewer)

[D. Scott MacDonald]

I thought of that theory, but figured that anybody shooting the President in such a way would have to expect to get caught (and possibly shot). A more palatable theory (at least for me) might be that if he prepared for a straight shot, he would have been plainly visible to the motorcade long before he got the shot off, giving the SS and driver some time to take evasive action. I may have just answered my own question.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Dennis - dead men can't talk.

Didn't Jack Ruby die of cancer in a guarded hospital room?

Glenn

 

[Eric Paddon]

Um...Glenn, he died three years after he shot Oswald and was tried and testified openly about it, and his cancer was like any other person's cancer. Natural.

Jack Ruby, was in the words of the people who knew him, a man who couldn't even get his own parking tickets fixed, and was the last person anyone would entrust to some kind of "hit man" operation. But if we want to look at how Ruby's murder was only the result of pure chance and not careful planning, consider this (this should interest you, Glenn, considering your concerns over timing with regard to Oswald).

Oswald was supposed to be transferred at 9:00 AM that morning and the press was waiting in the basement expecting a transfer at that time. But the transfer was held up when Postal Inspector Harry Holmes, who needed to interrogate Oswald in relation to the mail order documents he used to purchase his rifle and revolver, decided at the last minute to not go to church and go downtown to question Oswald, since he felt that once Oswald was in the County Jail he might not get another chance to question him. Inspector Holmes' interrogation lasted more than 90 minutes and was the reason why the transfer did not take place until the fateful time of 11:20 AM.

Now where was Jack Ruby at the time Oswald was supposed to be transferred and the press in waiting? Not in the basement of police headquarters, but at home. He did not arrive downtown until 11:10 and then he went into the office of Western Union across the street to wire money to one of his strippers, the timestamp for his receipt showing 11:17 just two minutes before he shot Oswald. That Ruby had not planned to be in the basement originally was further borne out when his dog was found locked in his car.

It was simply a freakish coincidence of timing caused by the delay when Inspector Holmes decided not to go to church, and Ruby arriving when he did that set those events in motion. But given this timeline and the actions of those involved there is no way you can fit anything conspiratorial into this chronology and the actions of Ruby based on responsible evidence.

 

[David Von Pein]

[Oswald] was seen killing Officer Tippit at 1:12 ... and was arrested in the Texas Theater at about 1:45...

Eric...Much has been made by the conspiracy crowd of this "gap" in time between Oswald shooting Tippit at 10th & Patton Streets and his arrest in the theater on Jefferson Avenue. (Overblown way out of proportion, IMO, by the CTers...like so much else in the case.)

But I'd be interested in hearing your take on this 33-minute time period, between 1:12 PM and 1:45 PM (CST), in which Oswald was (mostly) apparently just walking the side streets of Dallas/Oak Cliff, until being spotted acting suspiciously by Brewer in the lobby of his Hardy's Shoe Store.

Conspiracy advocates argue: Why does it take Oswald half-an-hour to travel the few short blocks from Tippit's killing to the Texas Theater on Jefferson? (This, of course, is used by the CT gang to argue that it WASN'T Oswald at all at the scene of the Tippit shooting. Instead, one or two OTHER men killed Tippit. Even though we KNOW bullets from Oswald's own revolver were plucked from Officer Tippit. To hear many conspiracy people tell it, Oswald was as innocent and pure as snow in winter, having never even touched a weapon on November 22nd.)

Anyway ... There IS indeed some gap in time, as Oswald travels just--what?--half-a-mile (or less) from Patton to Jefferson. What was Oswald doing during this interim period? What's the Warren Commission explanation of this? Or did they give one? (I can't seem to recall that part of the Report. Although I do know that the WC puts the exact time of J.D. Tippit's murder as 1:15 PM. But that would still leave a 25-minute gap between the shooting and the time he ENTERED the theater, which was approx. 1:40 PM, just five minutes before he was surrounded by DPD Officers.)

 

[David Von Pein]

11:17 just two minutes before he shot Oswald.

I hate to quibble about such minor things, but Oswald was shot at 11:21 AM in the jail basement. Not 11:19.

But, of course, I couldn't agree with you more re. Ruby, Eric.

If the Oswald killing was a mob "hit", then MAN are those guys good! (Meaning: they have incredible timing. Timing Ruby's basement arrival just 30 seconds before Oswald is brought out of the building. Isn't that small gap a tad too SHORT, even if it WAS "perfectly planned out"?)

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Points have been made that the gap in the timing between the theater and the shooting (Tippet) were the result of the other Oswald showing up close to where the original one was.

No, I'm not going to swear to that, but it makes a lot more sense then just having him 'vanish' for 33 minutes. His military record seemed to take a 180 degree turn after he went to the Soviet Union. The theory was that they kept him, and sent out someone that looked like him, and then let the real one loose at a later time.

The same goes for Ruby. What in the world would anybody,(especially him), be doing going into the garage with a loaded gun at exactly that time - unless he had been called (on the phone) earlier, and was told to hang out outside until someone in the cop shop gave him a sign that he was being moved right now. There is no way that was an accident. The odds would be astronomical. Think about it.

They have had tons of documentaries on this on TV already, and I thought that one of the last ones discussed how many rounds that type of rifle with an expert marksman could get out in the alloted time, how long it took to drive from the bookstore to the theater, and even mentioned someone on the overpass that had not been seen before. I could have sworn that James Earl Jones was the host, but it has been years.

Glenn

 

[David Von Pein]

What in the world would anybody,(especially him [Ruby]), be doing going into the garage with a loaded gun at exactly that time - ...

It's JUST EXACTLY the kind of thing Jack Ruby would do! He loved to be "where the action was". He knew many DPD officers, and, in fact, if you'll recall, was already present in the Dallas Police Station on several OTHER occasions the weekend of Nov. 22-24. Looking like he was a reporter (complete with notepad), Ruby even verbally corrected DA Henry Wade on a FPCC matter the night of 11/22. (And he was armed and COULD have taken a pot shot @ Oswald on Friday....so WHY would he not have done it then. Better to rub him out ASAP, right? But, instead, we have him waiting two more days...precious time in which Oswald could have blabbed everything he might have known (had a plot existed).

And Ruby's gaining access to the DPD Garage via the Main St. ramp seems to me to be no surprise either. He was a common sight around the Department. He simply walked down the ramp.

 

[David Von Pein]

They have had tons of documentaries on this on TV already, and I thought that one of the last ones discussed how many rounds that type of rifle with an expert marksman could get out in the alloted time, how long it took to drive from the bookstore to the theater, and even mentioned someone on the overpass that had not been seen before. I could have sworn that James Earl Jones was the host, but it has been years.

J. Earl Jones actually hosted TWO different JFK-related documentaries. One was "11-22-63: The Day The Nation Cried" (which you can now get on DVD). I really liked this one. But the other, called "The JFK Conspiracy", was simply dreadful in every respect. Jones was awful as the "interrogator/narrator". He couldn't read any of his tele-prompted lines right, and looked like a total, uninformed boob throughout this mess of a program. (Not to mention the subject matter that Jones was awkwardly stumbling through was pure nonsense at best -- more of the same conspiracy/multiple gunmen BS.)

Even if you ARE pro-conspiracy in your thinking, I'd steer well clear of this program. (I sold my copy after 1 viewing. )

 

[Eric Paddon]

"Points have been made that the gap in the timing between the theater and the shooting (Tippet) were the result of the other Oswald showing up close to where the original one was."

By whom? And what evidence of a second Oswald is being cited? That is just speculation galore. For an exhaustive study of the Tippit murder and Oswald's movements afterwards, consult Dale Myers "With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit" Oswald was arrested with the Tippit murder weapon in his hand and was identified by the 11 eyewitnesses who saw him either shoot Tippit or immediately flee the scene.

"His military record seemed to take a 180 degree turn after he went to the Soviet Union. The theory was that they kept him, and sent out someone that looked like him, and then let the real one loose at a later time."

You are engaging in speculation without any reference to concrete evidence, Glen. That is not how the process of historical methodology works.

"The same goes for Ruby. What in the world would anybody,(especially him), be doing going into the garage with a loaded gun at exactly that time - unless he had been called (on the phone) earlier, and was told to hang out outside until someone in the cop shop gave him a sign that he was being moved right now. There is no way that was an accident. The odds would be astronomical. Think about it."

Glen, this is nothing more then speculation to try and cover-up the inconvenient fact of the timing situation I outlined above. You have no concrete evidence of any phone call or any signals and therefore you haven't a shred of legitimacy for making the argument on behalf of that in the first place and saying the odds somehow favor that scenario in the absence of any relevant evidence.

But let us instead indulge in common sense logic. A rational conspiracy plot would have had Ruby in the basement exactly when Oswald was supposed to be moved. Period. The odds that a conspiracy plot would do things in the way you describe are even longer then the "astronomical" odds you attribute to how things actually unfolded. You have no phone calls, no suspects, nothing. That is what is known as a fishing expedition by someone who knows he's in trouble with the evidence and hasn't a leg to stand on.


"I thought that one of the last ones discussed how many rounds that type of rifle with an expert marksman could get out in the alloted time"

CBS already proved in 1967 that firing three shots in the necessary time and scoring two hits was perfectly normal for a man of the above average marksman skills Oswald had.

 

[David Von Pein]

...how many rounds that type of rifle with an expert marksman could get out in the alloted time...

Oswald's "3 Shots with 2 Hits in approx. 7 to 8 seconds" scenario is certainly far from IMPOSSIBLE.

CBS-TV conducted several tests (with a specially-built--to scale--tower being constructed to match Dealey Plaza, et al) with a Carcano rifle, and most who performed the test DID manage 2 hits out of 3 in the allotted time. One person made 3-of-3 hits on the moving target.

CTers dismiss the CBS tests completely out of hand as "unscientific" and the like....but I don't distrust CBS News and its findings. Do you? Do you think Dan Rather & Walter Cronkite have/had a hidden agenda, and are not telling the full, true story?

 

[David Von Pein]

A rational conspiracy plot would have had Ruby in the basement exactly when Oswald was supposed to be moved.

And probably an even more rational plot would have been to have "hit man" Ruby rub out Oswald as early as possible after the assassination, which could easily have been accomplished by Ruby the night of 11/22 in the DPD hallways. Or, better still, if such a grand "Rub Out Oswald" plan WAS in place, WHY even let Lee escape the Depository Building?? Why not simply make sure Ruby (or whoever) kills Oswald coming right out of the TSBD? Why let him live even an hour to let him say anything?

 

[Chris Lockwood]

>To me, Case Closed by Gerald Posner destroys all conspiracy theories. I can't believe that anyone takes Oliver Stone's insane film seriously.

I hope you're not saying that everyone who believes in a conspiracy agrees with the movie.


>... getting Lee Harvey Oswald his job at the Texas School Book Depository Building in mid-October of 1963, one month before the President's visit to Dallas. ... No one knew there would even BE any sort of parade/motorcade through the city until early November!

Doesn't that add some credence to a conspiracy theory? Oswald just happened to be working along the motorcade route? How conveeeeeeenient!


>The most compelling evidence that there was no conspiracy is the simple fact that 40 years have past and no conspirator has come forth.

Maybe they're dead, kept their mouths shut due to loyalty to whatever group they're with, are afraid to come forward, or don't think they'll be believed. We still don't know who Deep Throat is from Watergate, 30 years ago, & the person is supposedly still alive, so there's a secret that's been kept a long time.

 

[Cary_H]

Another interesting, somewhat obscure read out there is 'Mortal Error' by Bonar Menninger.
Menninger is a ballistics expert with his own take on events around Kennedy's assassination. He devotes a fair bit of space to a gunman being able to get off multiple rounds in the limited timeframe, and putting them on target.
His own findings will shock you.
Let's face it....with the way the whole affair was so swiftly concluded and put to bed using some pretty dicey 'evidence', anybody with a double digit IQ can see something doesn't quite add up here.

 

[David Von Pein]

Let's face it....with the way the whole affair was so swiftly concluded and put to bed using some pretty dicey 'evidence', anybody with a double digit IQ can see something doesn't quite add up here.

But the simple fact that the conclusion that Oswald acted alone was reached quickly does not automatically make it incorrect.

The evidence, ALL of it, only pointed to one man--Oswald! Were the authorities supposed to ignore the wealth of material pointing to Oswald, just to chase shadows?

Reminds me again of the ludicrous claims made by the OJ Simpson defense team, who kept screaming "Rush to judgement!".

But does OJ Simpson's blood at the murder scene cease being his blood just because there was a "rush" in finding it?

Same can be said in the JFK case .... Does all the evidence against Oswald cease to be there simply because the police actually did their jobs WELL, and cornered him quickly??

 

[Eric Paddon]

"Doesn't that add some credence to a conspiracy theory? Oswald just happened to be working along the motorcade route? How conveeeeeeenient!"

Not when we know who the people who got Oswald the job are. The job came because TSBD employee Buell Frazier's sister mentioned to Ruth Paine that there were openings at that particular time. That means in order for a conspiracy to make sense then Buell Frazier must be implicated in it, and that just does not hold water.

"We still don't know who Deep Throat is from Watergate, 30 years ago, & the person is supposedly still alive, so there's a secret that's been kept a long time."

Bad analogy. "Deep Throat" ultimately was totally irrelevant to exposing Watergate. Alexander Butterfield's public revelation of the White House taping system was far more significant. That was a case where the work of a simple, ordinary Congressional committee (with far less staff and fewer resources then any of the commissions that studied the assassination ever had) did the work that brought out the most damaging information. (and Deep Throat's identity may well still be a secret if no such man ever existed, as a good many people suspect, given Bob Woodward's penchant for telling tall tales in the past, such as his getting a comatose William Casey to supposedly "confess" about Iran-Contra)

 

[Eric Paddon]

Cary, it may interest you to know that Secret Service Agent Hickey, the man Menninger accused of being the man who shot JFK in the head, sued the publisher and if memory serves me right they were forced to settle quite heavily in Hickey's favor. The thing that was laughable about that theory to begin with is not a single person out of 150 witnesses in Dealey Plaza ever saw anything that could lend credence to that theory.

 

[Cary_H]

After re-reading some prior posts I'll make some further points.
One, I take anything from 20/20, or for that matter, anything from the media, with an emphasis on the U.S. media with a huge grain of salt.
Two, Who could possibly contest the findings of the Warren Commission without access to evidence? In his book, Menninger claims it was pretty much a farce.
Let's say you are asked to investigate a crime. If you have sole access to any evidence and you want to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion, it's pretty easy to work backwards to justify it if you choose to 'filter' your evidence to ensure you remain on your chosen path. All the easier when you keep it all under a blanket of secrecy and only release evidence that supports your findings.

In my mind, Oswald may, or may not have known if he was acting alone, but not all the shots were his. One thing is for sure; he became a quick, convenient scapegoat for something more than we're being led to believe.
Call it a conspiracy, call it what you want, but we're not getting all the goods on this one. There's far too many tight lips out there.
I was born at night, but not LAST night.

 

[Eric Paddon]

Cary, I find it interesting that rather than address the specific points in the evidence, which is there for all people to study, you instead are resorting to the fallback of an institutional bias to explain your refusal to accept the facts. How can you quote Menninger as a credible author when he posits a theory that in order for it to be believable would mean EVERY witness in Dealey Plaza managed to avoid seeing Hickey's gun discharging? And then there's the matter of the aforementioned lawsuit that was settled in Hickey's favor?

As for "not all the shots being Oswald's" you have an inconvenient problem known as the weight of the evidence. The overwhelming majority of earwitnesses says no more than three shots fired. Two shots are accounted for in the bullet wounds that hit Kennedy and Connally and there is evidence of a third missed shot that was fired first from Oswald's rifle (borne out by three shell casings found on the 6th Floor). The burden of proof is on you to account for where these extra shots came from.

 

[David Von Pein]

The burden of proof is on you to account for where these extra shots came from.

Not to mention the additional burden of explaining WHERE the evidence of these "extra" shots went.

If ANY other non-Oswald missiles struck the car's occupants, or the vehicle, what happened to them?

ALL bullets/fragments recovered trace back to Oswald's Carcano rifle.

Were these "other" assassins such miserable shooters that ALL of these other shots missed completely?

Or were all traces of bullets/bullet fragments from frontal shooters completely and magically eradicated? (Some of which would necessarily HAVE to be performed within minutes of the event, to ensure NO non-Oswald ammunition is seen/recovered.)

Sounds silly, doesn't it?? It is.

 

[Ric Bagoly]

Count me as one who doesn't believe EVERYTHING put forth by Stone and Garrison, but do find it credible enough that something was amiss in Dallas that day. As far as no one coming forward keep in mind that several "persons of interest" (David Ferrie, et al.), died rather suspicious deaths before they could blab, so that probably serves as a good deterrant to anyone involved thinking of spilling their guts even today.

However, this is about as far as I'm gonna go with this(got better things to do with my time), plus I don't feel like raising the ire of the "lone nut theorists" who seemingly feel they can only make a point if they spread it out over 2 or 3 consecutive posts(weird), so I'm gonna go do something a little more fun than sitting on the Internet. Bye y'all...