Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Second "Patsy"....The Grassy Knoll "Patsy"


Mike Rago

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

(click any image to enlarge it)

I do not think Jack Ruby was a patsy. I do think the man behind the fence is a patsy.

Sam Holland saw smoke on the Knoll, near the little plaza, under the trees. He said the smoke was in front of the fence but the report sounded like it came from behind the fence. He ran behind the fence and saw a spot where someone was standing smoking cigarettes and he assumed this is where the man who shot the president was standing.

I believe that Sam jumped to conclusions that the man was behind the fence.

I have assumed a shooter was in front of the fence by the tree behind the retaining wall.

Here is where I put the shooter. ..

He is the figure under the tree to the left of the sidewalk at top of knoll.

He has placed the tree trunk between himself and Lee Bowers tower.

The fence protects his rear.

gsshotshooterloc31000.png

Here is a view from the street of a shot from such a shooter.

Notice that he is shooting along the retaining wall, not over it.

This is what it might have looked like to a person sitting in the limo.

gkshotstreetlevel31000.png

And here is what it would have looked like from Sam Hollands location. It would appear the smoke came from underneath the trees. From Sam's location you cannot pinpoint the exaxt location of the shooter from the smoke alone.

I believe Sam mistakenly thought the shooter was behind the fence because of the cigarette butts. I do not think that man was the shooter. He may have been there to prevent spectators from taking up positions behind the shooter.

gkshotsamholland31000.png

Here is what it would look like from Mary Moorman's location.

gkshotmoorman31000.png

Here is what the trajectory looks like from above...

gkshotmapview31000.png

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(click any image to enlarge it)

moormandrumscanzoomedla.png

Here are two possible locations for the shooter on the Knoll. The distance between them is about 20 feet.

The "shooter" behind the fence is at the acoustically determined position, 8 feet from the corner of the fence.

The "shooter" in front of the fence is at the optically determined position.

gkshotshooterdist1000.png

From street level a shot from each location would look like the following

gkshotstreetlevel41000.png

From Sam Hollands location the trajectories would look almost identical. (Look at the yellow and red lines)

gkshotsamholland4p1000.png

Sam ran behind the fence and saw cigarette butts and jumped to the conclusion that the shooter was located there.

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Mike...have you ever fired a modern firearm?

Modern firearms use "smokeless" powder...that is, the amount of smoke released upon the firing of a modern firearm is VERY small.

Now, a "black powder" firearm--considered an antique by about 1910--would, indeed, create the amount of smoke you see "generated" in your photos.

So, answer one question for me: Did ANY witness--even just ONE witness--insist that they say ANYONE with an antique firearm in their possession in the vicinity of the so-called "Grassy Knoll" around 12:30 pm on November 22, 1963?

If so, please name that witness, and direct me to their testimony.

Otherwise, your "theory" goes up in smoke, too...because modern cartridge-type firearms use "smokeless" powder, and do NOT create such smoke clouds as you are insisting occurred on the "Grassy Knoll."

Does NO ONE investigating the JFK assassination have any firearms experience anymore?

edit: Now, I'm NOT disputing a shot from the "Grassy Knoll," as I don't have the expertise to contest the audio evidence. But as a lifelong hunter, who uses BOTH modern firearms and black powder rifles, I have a few years of experience in THAT area.

rubyshot.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Is that smoke from the gunshot, or it that dust from the tower?

really???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The initial acoustic analysis by BBN determined there was a 50% likelihood that a shot originated from the Grassy Knoll. The HSCA changed the acoustic analysis provider to determine where exactly that shooter was located on the Knoll.

The result of the analysis to locate the assassin on the Knoll was to place a gun in the hand of the person behind the fence at the location of the red arrow. I believe this man is nothing more than a second Patsy. He is the acoustic "Patsy" or the Grassy Knoll "Patsy".

According to the acoustic analysis this man fired his shot about 500 ms after the shot which struck the president at Zapruder frame 313 and his shot missed the president. This is about 400 ms after the Moorman photo was snapped.

Why did the acoustic analysis conclude the shot missed? They had no other choice but to conclude the shot missed because the Zapruder film does not show any evidence that a shot struck the president about 500ms after the shot at frame 313.

The acoustic analysis concluded there were 4 shots. Three shots from Oswald in the TSBD and a fourth shot from this character on the Knoll but his shot missed the president. It also implies that the Single Bullet Theory is correct because the acoustic analysis only admits to 4 shots.

If the SBT is false then the acoustic analysis , and particularly , the location of the shooter on the Knoll as determined by that analysis, is also false.

In addition, a shot from that location(the red arrow) would not have been missed by the men in the Queen Mary and Halfback.

Where exactly on the Knoll was this man located. That is the key question.

moormandrumscanzoomedla.png

Here is a closeup of that area...

hatmansixsecondsscan.jpg

"The acoustic analysis concluded there were 4 shots. Three shots from Oswald in the TSBD" This is baffling. How did the acoustic analysis conclude that it was LH Oswald firing a rifle. Does a rifle make a different sound when LHO is firing it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not disputing that there was a sound like a shot from the Grassy Knoll. I'm not disputing that witnesses said they say smoke from the Grassy Knoll. I'm just disputing that the photos that are reputed to show smoke are actually showing smoke from the firing of a modern firearm.

The 'known' fact is that there was smoke from the grassy knoll. It might have come from a smoke making machine, but it probably came from a rifle that made the amount of smoke that was made. If that was a 'new' rifle, or an 'old' rifle, for some reason it made the amount of smoke seen. Of course it might have just been pollen that it blew off of the trees, or dust. But probably smoke.

Edited by Kenneth Drew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

why does Anthony Summers state that the shots are timed starting with shot #1 at 0, then #2 at 1.66 seconds, #3 at 7.49 and #4 at 8.43 seconds ?

in any situation this places 313 long before shots 3 and 4 according to Summers / Dictabelt...

what i'm saying is, if that's the timing of the shots, then neither of the 3rd or 4th shots hit K. at 313. so the Dictabelt analysis has to be wrong. right?

4ShotsSM.png

Edited by Glenn Nall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not disputing that there was a sound like a shot from the Grassy Knoll. I'm not disputing that witnesses said they say smoke from the Grassy Knoll. I'm just disputing that the photos that are reputed to show smoke are actually showing smoke from the firing of a modern firearm.

The 'known' fact is that there was smoke from the grassy knoll. It might have come from a smoke making machine, but it probably came from a rifle that made the amount of smoke that was made. If that was a 'new' rifle, or an 'old' rifle, for some reason it made the amount of smoke seen. Of course it might have just been pollen that it blew off of the trees, or dust. But probably smoke.

The majority of what is seen as "smoke" from rifles shooting cartridges loaded with smokeless gunpowder is actually condensing water vapour, much the same as the "smoke" coming from automobile exhausts on a cool day. The amount of condensing water vapour seen depends on what the atmospheric conditions are at the time; mostly temperature and humidity. As it had been a cool wet morning in Dallas, just prior to JFK's arrival, it is not surprising at all to see this much "smoke" from a rifle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, I don't buy a gunman placed in the area in front of the fence because an oblique angle like that would have put Jackie in the line of fire, which I don't think would have been done. To me, the trajectory of the blood and brain matter going to the rear left and hitting MC cop Hargis makes more sense with a shooter location behind the fence several feet west of the corner. Also the area in front of the fence looks to be very similar to where some have placed Badgeman, which I don't buy either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, I don't buy a gunman placed in the area in front of the fence because an oblique angle like that would have put Jackie in the line of fire, which I don't think would have been done. To me, the trajectory of the blood and brain matter going to the rear left and hitting MC cop Hargis makes more sense with a shooter location behind the fence several feet west of the corner. Also the area in front of the fence looks to be very similar to where some have placed Badgeman, which I don't buy either.

The brain matter effect would have been the same from the manhole. The shot from the fence area missed or hit almost simultaneously with the manhole shot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

am I imagining the large discrepancy between the Summers/Dictabelt/HSCA shots and the visible signs on the zFilm? is this too off-topic...?

i thought it was on topic because the analysts claim that shot #3 came from the front-right (specifically the fence or the retaining wall, i don't remember which, when they were pressed), and the others from behind.

as well, on topic, i just came across the portion of the Nix film of the retaining wall, enlarged and slowed, that showed what seemed to me a very definite downward movement of something - has anyone seen this (by Martin Hinrichs, i think?):

wall.gif

Edited by Glenn Nall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, I don't buy a gunman placed in the area in front of the fence because an oblique angle like that would have put Jackie in the line of fire, which I don't think would have been done. To me, the trajectory of the blood and brain matter going to the rear left and hitting MC cop Hargis makes more sense with a shooter location behind the fence several feet west of the corner. Also the area in front of the fence looks to be very similar to where some have placed Badgeman, which I don't buy either.

Why would anyone care if Jackie got hit? The objective was to kill JFK, not to 'not kill' Jackie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, I don't buy a gunman placed in the area in front of the fence because an oblique angle like that would have put Jackie in the line of fire, which I don't think would have been done. To me, the trajectory of the blood and brain matter going to the rear left and hitting MC cop Hargis makes more sense with a shooter location behind the fence several feet west of the corner. Also the area in front of the fence looks to be very similar to where some have placed Badgeman, which I don't buy either.

Why would anyone care if Jackie got hit? The objective was to kill JFK, not to 'not kill' Jackie.

I think even monsters like this were still somewhat concerned about such severe collateral damage as Jackie - as well, any potential obstacle is still an obstacle.

i've heard some of talk about "poison" or "disabling" type ammo in order to render a person motionless for whatever reason in lieu of just shooting the man, and other talk of various 'missing the target' scenarios. I don't know about others, but I'm fairly certain that the firearm proficiency that would have been present in anyone who'd have been chosen to shoot, what, 35 yards from a target moving at 11 mph would NOT have had any concerns over missing. I cannot see that being a concern at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, I don't buy a gunman placed in the area in front of the fence because an oblique angle like that would have put Jackie in the line of fire, which I don't think would have been done. To me, the trajectory of the blood and brain matter going to the rear left and hitting MC cop Hargis makes more sense with a shooter location behind the fence several feet west of the corner. Also the area in front of the fence looks to be very similar to where some have placed Badgeman, which I don't buy either.

Why would anyone care if Jackie got hit? The objective was to kill JFK, not to 'not kill' Jackie.

I think even monsters like this were still somewhat concerned about such severe collateral damage as Jackie - as well, any potential obstacle is still an obstacle.

i've heard some of talk about "poison" or "disabling" type ammo in order to render a person motionless for whatever reason in lieu of just shooting the man, and other talk of various 'missing the target' scenarios. I don't know about others, but I'm fairly certain that the firearm proficiency that would have been present in anyone who'd have been chosen to shoot, what, 35 yards from a target moving at 11 mph would NOT have had any concerns over missing. I cannot see that being a concern at all.

I'm sure they didn't intend, or plan to hit Jackie. I just think their objective was to hit JFK, but, an example, surely they couldn't know where a bullet from in front, thru the windshield was going to end up. But with about 6 guns firing, some of them likely firing multiple shots, there could certainly have been collateral injuries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...