The Holland Shooter

[Bill Miller]

Take a look:

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/dpmap63.htm

On the third map down down the page you can see where Ed claims he was positioned to see the assassin shoot:

On March 28, 1977, Virgil E. Hoffman accompanied Special Agent [REDACTED]to Stemmons Freeway, also known as Interstate Highway 35 North, Dallas, Texas.

Hoffman communicated that he was driving a 1962 Ford Falcon on November 22, 1963. He parked his car on the west shoulder of Stemmons Freeway at the northbound lane near the Texas and Pacific Railroad overpass that crosses Stemmons Freeway.

Thus, Ed's field of vision was over the intervening RR tracks. As can be seen in the third aerial photo shown on the page shown there is a train on the tracks blocking Ed's view of the picket fence. At Z-313 there were trains on the same tracks which blocked Ed's view of the picket fence & the assassin.

Film footage shot immediately after the assassination shows trains blocking Ed's view. See: http://jfkmurdersolved.com/film/yard.wmv

The train cars that you speak of can be seen in an overhead photo taken the afternoon of the assassination. That photo is in Trask book "Pictures of the Pain" and my memory tells me that it is located on or around page 350. That car was nowhere near blocking Ed's view.

Accounts by Chauncey Holt, et al., attest to the trains on the tracks. There is additional photographic evidence posted here on the forum showing trains seen through the pergola & behind the pergola. Etc... Was Ed ever there?

The "trains" on the tracks is all the same RR cars seen from different angles. They were not attached to anything and did not hinder the LOS from Ed's position to the fence. Making outlandish allegations do not discredtit Hoffman, but rather the person who hasn't bothered to learn the geography of the area around the plaza very well so to be sure about the accuracy of their criticism towards another..

The "resting the barrel theory" is a quess & a bad one. The experienced sniper, cautiously & on fundamental operating procedure grounds, holding his rifle free from contact with any limiting obstructions is the reality. Remember, the sniper does not know how the car & the target within the car will move. He must give himself optimum chances to succeed. The sniper is not an amatuer.

I disagree on several levels. As I have said already - the shot through JFK's neck, Connally's armpit, Connally's wrist, are not signs of crack shot assassins shooting at a car traveling only 11 mph. Missing the car completely and hitting the curb near Tague or sparking the asphalt beside the limo hardly sounds like of work of experienced snipers either. And does not experienced snipers take the time to look the area over beforehand so to get a feel of the flow of the street? I have hunted with guys who could shoot rabbits on the run with a rifle. Anyone behind and/or in front of the limo had virtually a motionless target to hit IMO.

Edited March 29, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Miles Scull]

Film footage shot immediately after the assassination shows trains blocking Ed's view. See: http://jfkmurdersolved.com/film/yard.wmv

Miller says:The train cars that you speak of can be seen in an overhead photo taken the afternoon of the assassination. That photo is in Trask book "Pictures of the Pain" and my memory tells me that it is located on or around page 350. That car was nowhere near blocking Ed's view.

The Trask photo by Cabluck is not time stamped; thus, Ed's view could have been blocked by moving rolling stock as reported by Officer White. The Cabluck photo only shows the RR yard well AFTER Ed's observation. Another point: did the three tramps hide in one of the cars seen in the Cabluck photo? They did not. So where, then, is their car & their train?

Accounts by Chauncey Holt, et al., attest to the trains on the tracks. There is additional photographic evidence posted here on the forum showing trains seen through the pergola & behind the pergola. Etc... Was Ed ever there?[/b]

The most embarrassing aspect of Ed's story is the gross & stark implausibility of the "rifle toss" canard. Ed's story is that the assassin fires a shot from behind the picket fence from a spot near hatman; that the assassin then walks west down along the fence toward the elevated (3') steamline pipe at the north end of the triple underpass; that the assassin tosses his rifle to an assistant, possibly tossing it over the steamline pipe; that the assistant then proceeds to the northern most of two switch boxes to disassemble the rifle to put it in a bag; and, finally, both assassin & assistant then casually walk away unseen. Sound good? Unfortunately there's a massive problem here. In the Bell film two men can be seen at the north wall of the triple underpass, the wall that runs from the underpass to connect with the western end of the picket fence. These two men are seen at this wall as the limo goes through the underpass on the way to Parkland. These two men are, therefore, standing, at the critical time, about 15 feet (!!) away from the switch box where Ed's "assistant" breaks down the rifle. Since there are zero bushes or tress in this area, this means that the two men could have & would have SEEN the assassin toss the rifle to the assistant & would have SEEN the assistant carrying the rifle to the switch box, breaking it down & carrying it away in a bag. It is possible that Ed's "rifle toss" occurred before the assassin reached the steamline pipe; if so, then, the assistant would have had to have jumped over the 3' steamline pipe or to have ducked under it, while carrying the rifle. What makes this whole scenario laughably implausible is the consideration that the assassin is executing a plan of escape that is, in its conception, the exact oppose of a plan designed to succeed. The assassin & his assistant walk to where there is an extremely high likelihood that they will be seen, and seen by any number of witnesses who are in the area of the switch boxes to view the motorcade. In other words, the assassin & his advisers, realizing the dangers, would have first of all have ruled out Ed's scenario as being the worst possible exit strategy, the one plan most likely to fail, the one plan most likely to expose the assassin. Conclusion: Ed's dog don't hunt.

The "resting the barrel theory" is a guess & a bad one. The experienced sniper, cautiously & on fundamental operating procedure grounds, holding his rifle free from contact with any limiting obstructions is the reality. Remember, the sniper does not know how the car & the target within the car will move. He must give himself optimum chances to succeed. The sniper is not an amateur.

Miller says:"I disagree... Anyone behind and/or in front of the limo had virtually a motionless target to hit IMO."

Again, to repeat, you miss the point. The point is simple. The movement of the limo as it actually did occur is irrelevant & immaterial to the question of how a sniper at hatman's locus would have handled his rifle. To repeat, the sniper did not know & could not have known in advance how the limo would move & how the target within the limo would move. Therefore, the sniper allows for & prepares for any & every possibility of movement. Resting the rifle barrel on anything (the fence) is a nonsense. More dogs not hunting.

Edited March 31, 2007 by Miles Scull