Who were the shooters?

[Ashton Gray]

A good friend of mine and Dawnie's, passed away last year, his name was John Ritchson. He was with Bravo Company in VietNam, and was a ballistician with his own gunworks, in co-partnership with his father, in the state of Montana. He collaborated on multiple occasions with Craig Roberts and had the highest regard and respect for his work. John Ritchson was also held in high regard for his expertise in the field of ballistics, as well as for his work and contribution to the Prouty, JFKResearch, Lancer, and The Education Forum. If he deferred to Craig Roberts on numerous projects he was working on, then I'm more apt to follow suit when it comes to whom I'm going to consult for accuracy when citing statistical analysis with respect to missile/bullet trajectory, as well as lines of site.

I'm also of the opinion that the Parkland physicians, specifically those specializing in the field of trauma, triage, and forensics inherent in those cases most likely to be presented in Emergency Room/Department scenarios, to be the most accurate in assessing wounds inflicted on the human body immediately following trauma. Anterior means entering frontally, be it the right forehead, above the right eye, or the anterior aspect of the neck, below the cricoid cartilage and above the suprasternal notch.

And it is a source of infinite sadness that all the King's Experts and all the King's Friends haven't solved the case.

Ashton

[Terry Mauro]

A good friend of mine and Dawnie's, passed away last year, his name was John Ritchson. He was with Bravo Company in VietNam, and was a ballistician with his own gunworks, in co-partnership with his father, in the state of Montana. He collaborated on multiple occasions with Craig Roberts and had the highest regard and respect for his work. John Ritchson was also held in high regard for his expertise in the field of ballistics, as well as for his work and contribution to the Prouty, JFKResearch, Lancer, and The Education Forum. If he deferred to Craig Roberts on numerous projects he was working on, then I'm more apt to follow suit when it comes to whom I'm going to consult for accuracy when citing statistical analysis with respect to missile/bullet trajectory, as well as lines of site.

I'm also of the opinion that the Parkland physicians, specifically those specializing in the field of trauma, triage, and forensics inherent in those cases most likely to be presented in Emergency Room/Department scenarios, to be the most accurate in assessing wounds inflicted on the human body immediately following trauma. Anterior means entering frontally, be it the right forehead, above the right eye, or the anterior aspect of the neck, below the cricoid cartilage and above the suprasternal notch.

And it is a source of infinite sadness that all the King's Experts and all the King's Friends haven't solved the case.

Ashton

****************************************************************

"And it is a source of infinite sadness that all the King's Experts and all the King's Friends haven't solved the case.

Ashton"

LUCKY MAN Words and Music by Emerson, Lake, and Palmer

He had white Horses

And ladies by the score

All dressed in satin

And waiting by the door

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

White lace and feathers

They made up his bed

A gold covered mattress

On which he was led

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

He went to fight wars

For his country and his king

Of his honor and his glory

The people would sing

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

A bullet had found him

His blood ran as he cried

No money could save him

So he laid down and he died

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

Ooooh, what a lucky man he was

[Richard J. Smith]

Hi Ter:

As well as the Parkland trauma team's findings..a blow out to the back of the head...they were the first trained medical witnesses, as well as Hill and others who saw such...but

which upon the bodys arrival at Bethesda, though it was also seen, it had become much larger in size..according to witnesses.....Though you would never know it by the autopsy photos, or the Bethesda Doctor's reports..imo ...nothing is in stone in the JFK assn...it should

have been from the beginning but.....and it all changes according to whomever's latest whims at times.

B..

And, so right you are, Bernie! The pictures of the back of the head at Bethesda, belie the hole in the right occiput, as that photo depicts JFK's full head of hair seemingly intact over where the exit wound was supposed to be. Although upon further scrutiny one is able to make out a fold of something that appears to look like the scalp, behind the right ear and which looks as if it's being held in place by one of the surgeon's hands. The exit wound itself looks like it's been filled in with something to give it a rounded definition of the skull still being intact, with the scalp pulled into place over it. Thus, masking the true exit wound.

Hi Ter,

And Ashton earlier in this thread referred to the 30+ eyewitness statements and testimony to the rear of head wound as "anecdotal"(Webster's ANECDOTAL = "based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers"). Doctors, nurses, and autopsy techs are "unscientific observers"? And Clint Hill's statement "The right rear portion of his head was missing"? Guess Clint was mistaken huh?

Actually quite amazing that so many in this thread have their own speculative shooting positions without utilizing any ballistic or medical information whatsoever. If you believe there was a large rear of head wound, and it's pretty tough to dismiss, then a head shot from the rear is virtually impossible. Pick a card...any card.

RJS

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton earlier in this thread referred to the 30+ eyewitness statements and testimony to the rear of head wound as "anecdotal"(Webster's ANECDOTAL = "based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers"). Doctors, nurses, and autopsy techs are "unscientific observers"? And Clint Hill's statement "The right rear portion of his head was missing"? Guess Clint was mistaken huh?

Somebody sure as hell is mistaken. Or lying. Or both.

If you want to spend the rest of your life treading tar in that tar pit of contradictions in testimony and "medical evidence," step right in. I won't get in your way. I'll even help you in. But don't try to drag me in with you.

I also think your incorrectly chosen definition of "anecdotal" stinks. Here's the one I'm using: "based on personal observation, case study reports, or random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation." It's quite a distinction. (Homonymic pun intended.)

There is no "systematic scientific evaluation" of the so-called "medical evidence" possible, because the anecdotal testimony and the physical evidence are in hopeless, eternal, permanent contradiction. It is in a state of unrelieved and unrelievable seizure. And it ain't by accident, either.

Still, you are perfectly welcome to dance away following all the Pied Piper "experts" and "eyewitnesses" you want over the hills and into the woods, and into hopelessly contradictory tar pits as far as I'm concerned. I'm not stopping you. I'm not even slowing you down. I'm urging you along.

Why? Because the CIA needs patsies, not only to pin murders on, but to carry their water for them. And their water is "confusion and contradiction." And it ain't water at all: it's tar. The invariable product of CIA operations can be summed up in one word as far as public knowledge goes: MAYBE. A big tar pit of "maybe." They know exactly how to create it, too.

And that's all the so-called "medical evidence" is: a giant tar pit of "maybe" for suckers to sink into. Bray all you want about it, but don't forget to keep treading tar while you do, because it won't ever be anything but "maybe." They saw to it.

Meanwhile, on this web page is a motion picture of a man very graphically getting the right front part of his skull blown outward—over and over and over and over and over. Go look, with your eyeballs. Go observe for yourself without listening to the cacophony of ten thousand contradictory voices telling you that what you see is not what you see. Then come back and tell me that you see the back of his head being blown out. I want to hear you say it, right here, in this thread.

Go ahead. I'll wait.

Actually quite amazing that so many in this thread have their own speculative shooting positions without utilizing any ballistic or medical information whatsoever.

You don't have any "ballistic or medical information" that isn't contradictory! Go look with your eyeballs at the link I just gave you, and tell me what you see! Do you need some "expert" <SPIT!> to grant you a license to observe what is right before your eyes?

If you believe there was a large rear of head wound...

Well, do you? If so, why do you? Have you ever seen, with your own eyes any slightest physical evidence of any such thing?

And is that what you see happening on that page I just gave you a link to? I'm not asking you for what somebody else has "told you." I'm asking you to go to the link above and to look with your eyeballs at what is right in front of you, and tell me what you see. What do you see? I want to know what you see.

Pick a card, any card...

And all you're holding is a big handful of "maybe."

Ashton

Edited December 4, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Ashton,

Superb graphics!

EBC

[Cliff Varnell]

NOTE: I spent hours attempting to respond to this post from Cliff Varnell last night, and the quoting function becomes utterly broken after the first four quotes, which then disables all the quotes in the message. I reported this in the appropriate forum, and my answer was "Use the Reply button," which I always do anyway and have never had anything even resembling such trouble before. So I now have to resort to color codes to be able to respond at all. Sorry, but I proved to my own satisfaction by lengthy tests last night that it's being caused by something in the forum software, and have reported it, and that's all I can do. —Ashton

This begins with Cliff Varnell quoting me from an earlier message:

ASHTON GRAY: I find an endless source of entertainment in the way various threads seem to bring themselves together, because I've just now suffered through Cliff Varnell's most recent torturous twisting of Bowers's testimony about "two men" into something utterly unrecognizable in order to support an unsupportable position, consistently ignoring the most crucial facts in Bowers's actual statements.

CLIFF VARNELL: This is odd.

I cited Bowers' testimony, but I didn't make any reference to the two men, tortured or otherwise.

WelL, Cliff, here's how it went on my monitor, and your mileage may vary: just about the entire content of what you posted from Bowers's testimony was [LEWIS BLACK] Blblblblblblblbl about the TWO MEN!

[CV]: Save it for the tourists, Ashton, this is Cliff yer talk'n to...

Bowers had PLENTY of other things to say in that chunk of testimony I cited.

The last bit there pertaining to people streaming in from different directions seems

particularly salient, since it touches upon your Smoke Pot Diversion Theory.

Let's review:

(quote on)

Mr. BOWERS - A large number of people came, more than one direction. One

group converged from the corner of Elm and Houston, and came down the

extension of Elm and came into the high ground, and another line another

large group went across the triangular area between Houston and Elm and

then across Elm and then up the incline. Some of them all the way up. Many

of them did, as well as, of course, between 50 and a hundred policemen within

a maximum of 5 minutes.

(quote off)

At this juncture, I need to correct a statement I made in an earlier post -- I

wrote that 7 people stated they saw a puff of smoke on the knoll.

The correct number is 8.

Now, I agree wholeheartedly with you, Ashton, that these men saw a puff of smoke,

and I place great weight on consensus witness testimony.

However, all 8 of the smoke witnesses stood on the railway overpass overpass looking

east into the whole of Dealey Plaza. While 3 of them did go around the corner to

check out the "sweet spot", they weren't part of the stampede toward the knoll.

What made all of those other people charge the knoll?

I'm not sure how far you can push a theory that boycotts that explanation.

So pardon me, pardon me, for attaching too much importance to it. [/LEWIS BLACK]

[CV]: The Two Men and the Two Cops were there before and after the shooting, and they

weren't part of the "commotion."

CLIFF VARNELL: Here are the observations I posted as to the Bowers' testimony.

1. "Here's the guy with the best view of the scene at the back of the fence during the shooting sequence..."

Thank you. We are as one. I made this exact point many messages ago, viz.:

CLIFF VARNELL: 2. "Catch that bit about the dark dressed man not being distinguishable from the trees?"

Yes, I "caught it." I think I might qualify for sixth grade reading comprehension skills and I don't need a quiz.

[CV]: Y'wudda flunked it!

All that Bowers testimony and all you retained was stuff about the Two Men?

Big fat F...

I just think it's a rather thin and flimsy shadow for you to be grasping onto as though you'd grabbed a bare 220-volt line.

[CV]: You let your assumptions get away from you.

At the point of Bowers's testimony where he makes this single comment that you have such an iron-claw grip on, Bowers is being questioned specifically about an incident "at the time of the shooting," when "there seemed to be some commotion."

[CV]: Yes, and the point being that, at the "time of the commotion," dark clothing was

indistinguishable from the trees, from Bowers' vantage point. This is important

because there were a lot of cars behind the fence, and men dressed as policemen

would find ready cover in the shadows behind automobiles.

(Now there's a surprise.) It was then—at the point of the "commotion," when the motorcycle cop came "nearly all of the way to the top of the incline"—that Bowers wasn't certain of the location of one of the two men he had alluded to. I don't give a damn that Bowers decided this was attributible to the "darker dressed man" being "too hard to distinguish from the trees." Did you ever stop to ask yourself how he possibly could know that was the reason he didn't see the man temporarily? I wouldn't advise dwelling on that question for too long.

[CV]: Did you ever stop to think that POSSIBLY Lee Bowers thought he saw a cop shoot JFK but

he wasn't sure because of the shadow of the trees and he was quite leery of making such

an accusation?

No need to dwell on that long, either...

And Bowers definitively said that the two men were there before and after the shooting.

[CV]: Bingo! Those two guys weren't part of the "unusual" "commotion" and "milling."

That was other guys. Behind the cars. In the sweet spot.

CLIFF VARNELL: 3. "And the two cops watching east/west on the triple underpass?"

Yes. Agreed. Two cops were at the overpass before and after the shooting. What is your point?

[CV]: Allow me to introduce two of Dallas' finest, Officer J. W. Foster and Officer J. C. White.

Foster was posted to the east side of the overpass tracks, White faced to the west -- as

per Bowers' testimony.

What does Officer White have to tell us?

(WC, quote on)

Mr. Ball.

Will you state your name, please.

Mr. White.

J. C. White.

Mr. Ball.

What is your residence?

Mr. White.

2803 Klondite.

Mr. Ball.

And your occupation?

Mr. White.

Policeman.

Mr. Ball.

Did you receive a letter from the Commission?

Mr. White.

No, sir.

Mr. Ball.

For a request to---

Mr. White.

No, sir.

Mr. Ball.

You were asked to come here by your---

Mr. White.

Captain.

Mr. Ball.

Which captain?

Mr. White.

Lawrence.

Mr. BALL. Now, the Commission was established to investigate the facts and

circumstances surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy. We want to

ask you some questions about information that you might have that might aid

us in that investigation...During the course of our investigation in Dallas we

discovered that you and the man that you were working with that day, Mr. J. W. Foster,

knew of some facts that might aid us in the investigation. We asked Chief Curry if we

could have you come up here and testify, and I guess that is the reason you are here.

You are willing to testify, are you not?

Mr. White.

Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Tell us whatever you know about it.

Mr. White.

I don't know.

Mr. Ball.

Well, I can ask you.

Mr. White.

Okay.

Mr. Ball.

I will ask you questions. Where were you born?

(quote off)

Wow! This guy was the inspiration for Sargent Schultz, the quickest "I don't know"

in legal history!

This is the good part:

(quote on)

Mr. Ball.

Did you see the President's car come into sight?

Mr. WHITE. No, sir; first time I saw it it has passed, passed under the triple

underpass.

Mr. Ball.

You were too far away to see it, were you?

Mr. WHITE. There was a freight train traveling. There was a train passing

between the location I was standing and the area from which the procession

was traveling, and--a big long freight train, and I did not see it.

Mr. Ball.

You didn't see the procession?

Mr. White.

No, sir...

...Mr. Ball.

Did you hear any shots?

Mr. White.

No, sir.

Mr. Ball.

Didn't?

Mr. White.

No, sir.

Mr. Ball.

First time you saw the President's car it was going underneath?

Mr. White.

Yes, sir...

...Mr. Ball.

All right, now, you heard no sound of no rifle fire or anything?

Mr. White.

No, sir.

Mr. Ball.

Freight train was going through at the time?

Mr. White.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Ball.

Making noise?

Mr. White.

Yes, sir; noisy train.

(quote off)

One little problem with Officer White's testimony: there was no freight train, as

the Dealey Plaza films and photos clearly show.

Either Officer White struggled with the internal demons of non-existent freight trains,

or he was a big fat xxxx.

White's partner on the overpass, J. W. Foster, gave testimony which conflicted with

the perceptions of others, although that, in and of itself, was not necessarily sinister.

From Foster's WC:

(quote on)

Mr. Foster.

Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Had you seen anybody over at the railroad yard north and west of the

bookstore before you heard the shots fired?

Mr. FOSTER. No; other than people that had come up there and I sent them back

down the roadway.

Mr. Ball.

I See. People had attempted to get on the overpass there?

Mr. Foster.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Ball.

And you had sent them away?

Mr. Foster.

Yes, sir.

(quote off)

Bowers saw a couple of guys standing around the corner by the fence -- Foster

didn't see 'em.

Bowers testified that Foster and White stayed in place after the shooting -- Foster

testified that he left immediately for the TSBD, the area where he thought the shots

originated from.

Railroad workers Sam Holland and James Simmons -- two of our reliable gunsmoke

witnesses -- stood near Foster and were adamant that shots rang out from the

"sweet spot" on the knoll.

All of this pertains to the kind of cover the knoll shooters had 11/22/63.

I'm not accusing White and Foster, the cops closest to the crime scene, of being the

foxes guarding the "sweet spot" hen house -- more like headless chickens. They

seeeee nuth-een!

For whatever reason, the plotters felt comfortable with these two guys at their backs.

CLIFF VARNELL: 4. "The back of the fence offered natural cover."

No, Cliff. No. The "back of the fence" offered NO "cover" whatsoever from the view of Bowers.

[CV]: Sam Holland before the WC...roll tape!

(quote on)

Mr. Holland.

Well. immediately after the shots was fired, I run around the end of this overpass,

behind the fence to see if I could see anyone up there behind the fence.

Mr. Stern.

That is the picket fence?

Mr. Holland.

That is the picket fence.

Mr. Stern.

On the north side of Elm Street?

Mr. Holland.

Of course, this was this sea of cars in there and it was just a big-it wasn't an inch in

there that wasn't automobiles and I couldn't see up in that corner. I ran on up to the

corner of this fence behind the building. By the time I got there there were 12 or 15

policemen and plainclothesmen, and we looked for empty shells around there for quite

a while, and I left because I had to get back to the office.

(quote off)

Oh my, all those policemen and plainclothesmen johnny on the spot, Texas style rapid

response y'all.

Check out this map of the "sweet spot" that Sam Holland prepared showing

details of the shooter location.

Check out this bit from Sam's WC:

(quote on)

Mr. MORRISON - Mr. Holland, is there anything you might add to this?

Mr. HOLLAND - Well, the only thing that I remember now that I didn't then,

I remember about the third car down from this fence, there was a station

wagon backed up toward the fence, about the third car down, and a spot,

I'd say 3 foot by 2 foot, looked to me like somebody had been standing there

for a long period. I guess if you could count them about a hundred foottracks

in that little spot, and also mud upon the bumper of that station wagon.

(quote off)

James Simmons also testified under oath, at the Clay Shaw trial.

(quote on)

Q: Now at the time you heard the second and third shot did you notice anything

unusual in the area of the grassy knoll?

A: Well, after I heard the shots I looked to see if I could see where they were

coming from and underneath the trees up on the grassy knoll by the fence I

detected what appeared to be a puff of smoke or wisp of smoke.

Q: From which direction did these noises appear to come from?

A: In front and the left.

Q: Were -- will you step down and point out on the aerial photograph the location

in which you heard the shots coming from and the area in which you saw the puff

of smoke?

A: I was facing this way and the sound appeared to come from this general direction

over along here, and there is a row of trees along the fence and towards the end of

the fence there is a small building and just this side of it a few feet is where I saw the

smoke...

...Q: Mr. Simmons, about how long after the last shot would you say you went back in the

parking lot area behind the fence?

A: Immediately.

Q: Immediately, and about how long did you stay back there?

A: We were back there several minutes.

Q: Could you tell us about how many?

A: I would say 15 or 20 minutes...

...Q: Now the area behind the fence where you have described as being a place

where you went you say that was a parking lot?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Where quite a few cars were parked in it?

A: Yes, sir, there was.

Q: Was this a muddy day?

A: Yes...I went around -- there is a fence like I say here, and I went around the railing on

top the overpass and walked around behind the fence.

Q: And when you got behind the fence did you see anything unusual to you?

A: Well, I was one of the first ones there and uh, when we got there there was no

one there but it had rained that morning and there were several footprints back and

forth along the fence.

Q: What drew your attention to these particular footprints, Mr. Simmons?

A: Well, 'cause there were so many of them.

Q: Did you see any footprints in any other area but this area?

A: On the fence, on the fence. On the fence there was a wooden brace or rail and

there were muddy footprints on it.

(quote off)

Muddy footprints, mud on the fence, mud on the bumper...and mud all over Jack Lawrence,

arrested after they discovered the car he'd borrowed from work behind the picket fence...boy,

when those CIA '63 boys set ya up -- you wuz SET UP! Lucky for Jackie boy they went

for the Lone Assassin Scenario, or his ass was grass...But I digress...

For the love of Aunt Marcy, Bowers never even suggested, even in his most uncertain moments, that the fence had any bearing on "dark cothing," which seems to be a point you are determined to make.

I ain't gonna work on Marcy's farm no more...

There are no trees at the "back of the fence." It's just a bare, exposed fence.

...They sing while you slave and I just get board.

[snip]

Yes, it's more difficult to see him in shadows than in full sunlight. But the moment he moves he's going to be silhouetted in motion against the negative space in between the fence and the myrtles, and against any spaces in the fence. Not only that, but he's surrounded by full sunlight. When and how did he get there unseen by Bowers? Where is he going to go unseen by Bowers? How is he even going to move without becoming a focus of attention to Bowers—or to anybody who even might be stationed in that tower?

Let's ask Bowers...from his WC:

(quote on)

Mr. BALL - Now, you were on duty on November 22, 1963, weren't you?

Mr. BOWERS - That's correct.

Mr. BALL - Close to noon, did you make any observation of the area around between

your tower and Elm Street?

Mr. BOWERS - Yes; because of the fact that the area had been covered by police for

some 2 hours.

(quote off)

The comings and goings of police officers wouldn't be a big deal, Ashton.

CLIFF VARNELL: Now that, Ashton, is the sum total of comments I made about Lee Bowers.

And the above, Cliff, is the sum total of my answer.

CLIFF VARNELL: I made one statement of fact -- that Bowers had the best view of the back of the fence.

Then let's go have a drink. I'll buy.

CLIFF VARNELL: I then asked you if you caught the key points in the testimony -- two questions, neither of which had to do with the two men.

Then I formed a conclusion -- the back of the fence offered natural cover.

Then I've changed my mind: you buy.

CLIFF VARNELL: Where in all of that do you get some "tortured twisting of Bowers testimony"? Ashton?

Asked and answered, counselor.

CLIFF VARNELL: Ashton Gray continues:

I think that alone gets the most under the most people's skin.

CLIFF VARNELL: You've been hanging out with Pat Speer too much, Ashton.

Ouch. Hittin' below the belt, Cliff. Now you're definitely buying. (And you know Speer never writes that well.) Do go on, though...

CLIFF VARNELL: All I pointed out was the reasonable speculation that two gunmen dressed as cops shot JFK from the knoll.

Okay. I don't consider it at all reasonable.

Where did they come from? How did they get there? Were they carrying rifles? Where did they go? And what are you going to do about "Hard Hat Man"? He wasn't in police uniform—according the popular Legend of Badge Man and Hard Hat Man. How can you posit that three men can get in and out of these exposed spaces in broad daylight, shoot the President of the United States two or three times, and walk away carrying rifles, when the positions are absolutely surrounded by potential witnesses in every direction, as I've demonstrated repeatedly. Yet you blow this off like it's nothing.

[CV]: And the nature of their concealment has been discussed at length.

All eyes were on the limo and the shooters were behind all the potential

witnesses except for Bowers -- and Bowers described "something

out of the ordinary" at that location.

At what point does it remain tenable to dispute everything everyone says?

Your answer is that they would say they were "returning fire" if they were seen?

[CV]: I was refering to Black Dog Man in particular.

Then they would have to answer "returning fire where, and at whom."

[CV]: In the direction of the diversionary shots from the north east corner of the Plaza.

Never mind bullet and gun forensics to deal with.

[CV]: Assuming the investigation is on the up and up...tough assumption, ain't it?

You seem to be insisting that I accept without question a scenario that I not only find less than reasonable, but that I find to be downright ludicrous.

[CV]: I'm not insisting you accept anything. I'm arguing from the witness testimony

and the photographic evidence to establish my own points.

What you regard as ludicrous the world class sniper Craig Roberts found obvious,

so I don't know how much room for persuasion you have, frankly.

I simply cannot conceive of any professional, accomplished sniper ever even

listening to such a plan, much less agreeing to be part of it. That location near

the corner of the fence and the retaining wall of the north pergola has got to be among

worst potential "sniper's lairs" in all of Dealey Plaza as far as I'm concerned.

[CV]: A highly trained sniper disagrees.

And you're assuming that the plotters wanted to mask evidence of a conspiracy.

CLIFF VARNELL: I never claimed that the two cops Bowers saw were the same guys, but that fact isn't going to stop you when you're in full strawman mode, is it?

Au contraire: nothing stops me in my tracks faster. I mistook your meaning, and I apologize.

[CV]: Accepted.

But you still need to answer the question, then, of what two cops (or men dressed as cops) got in and out of there without Bowers seeing them—just as he saw the two cops and the other men in the vicinity of the overpass.

[CV]: Since when are cops walking around is a majorly suspicious event?

Holland and Simmons testified to the large number of cars.

Bowers testified that dark clothing was indistinguishable from the

shadows of the trees.

Bowers testified to a "milling around" that didn't involve the other four men -- so

what makes you think the shooters got into place without Bowers seeing them?

And then there's Hard Hat man you have to answer for. And none of it has the least scrap of supporting testimony or evidence. It's thin air and nothing but.

[[CV]: I said nothing of AJ Millican (Hard Hat Man). Why would I?

But you seem to expect me to agree with it.

[CV]: I only expect unsupported assumptions I can refute with actual evidence.

CLIFF VARNELL: I merely pointed out the police presence in the vicinity of the knoll, and that shooters dressed as cops could easily blend in.

Actually, you've pointed to a police presence in the vicinity of the overpass. "The knoll" has become such a generality in the public mind that it's a meaningless expression for location. "The knoll" stretches from Houston Street to the overpass. Part of why I've created this model is to get to specific locations and look.

[CV]: Please see Sam Holland's statement that a good dozen "policeman

and plainclothesman" were in the vicinity when he got there, and that he left

his spot on the overpass immediately.

There were cops around before the shooting, there were a lot of cops around right

after the shooting.

Holland was a lot closer to the "sweet spot" than Bowers and he couldn't see in there

initially, either.

CLIFF VARNELL: Sorry if you pet theory doesn't match the facts of the case, Ashton--

Straw theories are no more substantial than straw men. You've been hanging out with Pat Speer too long (see my sig). I have not propounded any theory at all about anything except a possible other location for a shooter of the head shot: the County Courts/County Records complex.

[CV]: What about your Smoke Pot Diversion Theory?

Or your theory about there being no shots from the knoll?

Or your incipient No Throat Wound Theory, or, as I like to call it,

the Parkland Hospital Mass Hallucination Theory.

I don't feel that I'm promoting any theories, either, particularily.

I just point to the witness testimony and the photographs and try

to apply a little common sense.

I'm not putting forth The Ashton Gray Unifying Theory of Dallas 1963: all I'm doing is trying to provide people with additional data and tools so they, by their own lights, can better test existing theories that have been floated into the research community and have generated quite a lot of discussion and speculation.

[CV]: Well and good but garbage-in garbage-out applies as well.

Having subjected the Badge Man and Black Dog Man theories to these same tests that I'm sharing in this forum, I personally reject them out of hand. I don't require you to.

[CV]: Irrelevent. The question is -- do these tests of yours hold up to the facts

of the case?

I argue they do not.

Again, I've brought this up already twice, have you ever actually been

in Dealey Plaza, dear Ashton?

CLIFF VARNELL: you still haven't explained how the throat wound got there if it wasn't caused by a strike from the right front.

So far I'm not convinced that there was a throat wound, so I feel no requirement to "explain" it at all. Feel free to convince me. (Do I see another "Diem Cables" thread beginning to form through the fog in the old crystal ball?)

[CV]: Did Diana Bowron have a gig with the Rand Corporation, too? Something

about those John F. Kennedy wounds! Everyone who saw them suffered incredible

hallucinations...

CLIFF VARNELL: Pour a double...

You buyin'?

Ashton

Only the odd numbered rounds...

[Cliff Varnell]

There is no "systematic scientific evaluation" of the so-called "medical evidence" possible, because the anecdotal testimony and the physical evidence are in hopeless, eternal, permanent contradiction.

True of the head wound evidence. Total black hole. (Didn't you go

there with your Smoke Pot Diversion Theory, Ashton?)

NOT true of the throat wound and the back wound. The physical

evidence, the witness testimony, the photographic evidence are

generally consistent with the exception of the Fox 5 autopsy photo.

JFK was struck from the right front by a projectile that nicked

the right side of the trachea, bruised the tip of the right lung,

caused a tiny fracture of the right T1 transverse process. The

round did not exit and left a metallic debris field in proximity

to the transverse process.

The photographic record also indicates the throat shot was sound

suppressed.

JFK acted paralyzed in the limo; the only purpose for such a weapon

would be to paralyze.

Say "hi" to our little friend...

http://www.hobrad.com/acreourm.htm

Edited December 4, 2006 by Cliff Varnell

[Ashton Gray]

Cliff, thank you for your heartfelt concern over my "getting my mind right" about there having been one to three (or more? I sure wish you'd settle on a number and locations) sniping assassins hiding somewhere behind the picket fence and the pergola retaining wall on 22 November 1963. I feel almost as if I am being inducted into a religion. I realize I am a hard heretic to bring to the alter, and I am agog at your industry in this effort.

I am even more agog, though, at how eloquently you make my case for me that the locations you and others describe are perhaps the worst sniper positions in all the history of fact and fiction since the invention of gun powder.

So I think I'll just lean back in my chair, stretch out my legs, and lace my hands behind my head while you do just that: make my case for me.

First, though, just to help get people oriented to what you're describing, allow me to put up here on the easel "Ashton's Exhibit A," an annotated overview of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) parking lot and picket fence area at issue:

Doh! I put that sucker up there upside down. I don't know what's got into me. Lemme fix that for you...

There we go. You have the floor:

Bowers had PLENTY of other things to say in that chunk of testimony I cited. The last bit there pertaining to people streaming in from different directions seems particularly salient...

• MR. BOWERS (Railway worker in observation tower behind picket fence): A large number of people came, more than one direction. One group converged from the corner of Elm and Houston, and came down the extension of Elm and came into the high ground, and another line another large group went across the triangular area between Houston and Elm and then across Elm and then up the incline. Some of them all the way up. Many of them did, as well as, of course, between 50 and a hundred policemen within a maximum of 5 minutes.
  

...What made all of those other people charge the knoll?

I'm not sure how far you can push a theory that boycotts that explanation. ...

• SAM HOLLAND (Railway worker atop overpass at time of shooting): Well. immediately after the shots was fired, I run around the end of this overpass, behind the fence to see if I could see anyone up there behind the fence. ...I ran on up to the corner of this fence behind the building. By the time I got there there were 12 or 15 policemen and plainclothesmen, and we looked for empty shells around there for quite a while...
  

Oh my, all those policemen and plainclothesmen johnny on the spot, Texas style rapid response y'all.

• QUESTION: Mr. Simmons, about how long after the last shot would you say you went back in the parking lot area behind the fence?
  JAMES SIMMONS (Railway worker atop overpass at time of shooting): Immediately.
  QUESTION: Immediately, and about how long did you stay back there?
  JAMES SIMMONS: We were back there several minutes.
  QUESTION: Could you tell us about how many?
  JAMES SIMMONS: I would say 15 or 20 minutes...
  

...Let's ask Bowers...

• MR. BALL: Now, you were on duty on November 22, 1963, weren't you?
  MR. BOWERS: That's correct.
  MR. BALL: Close to noon, did you make any observation of the area around between your tower and Elm Street?
  MR. BOWERS: Yes; because of the fact that the area had been covered by police for some 2 hours.
  

...Please see Sam Holland's statement that a good dozen "policeman and plainclothesman" were in the vicinity [behind the picket fence, including the corner of the picket fence] when he got there, and that he left his spot on the overpass immediately.

There were cops around before the shooting, there were a lot of cops around right after the shooting.

Thank you. I rest my case. You've argued it about as persuasively as it could be argued. I'm entirely convinced: the purported positions for "Black Dog Man," "Badge Man" (plus spotter), and "Hat Man" are utterly absurd as shooting positions.

Hordes of people, including policemen, flooded into the area in seconds from all directions.

The entire area at issue was lousy with cops for two hours before, and not one witness in forty years has ever once suggested that even one of them carried a rifle, or that any person, in any mode of dress or garb, was ever seen in the area at issue with a rifle at any time.

The entire area was searched carefully for empty shell casings immediately after the shooting and none were found.

Not a single verifiable scrap of evidence of any shooters in those locations was found then, and not a single scrap of verifiable evidence has been found to this day.

When are you going to make your case, though?

Oh: maybe that was that question you had for me in the above, the one I've answered about ten times now, but you can't seem to get somehow. Let's do some remedial back-trackig. Go ahead—ask it again:

What made all of those other people charge the knoll?

I'm not sure how far you can push a theory that boycotts that explanation.

Cliff? Have you been paying any attention at all? Can I get you to focus real hard for a sec? I mean, this is only the central and crucial point I have made repeatedly in this thread and others. And, Cliff: this ain't some theetie-weetie, airy-fairy theory, or bizarre clumps of shadow and light pulled out of grainy photos and colorized to look sort of humanoid. Un-unh; this is hard, cold, documented, incontrovertible, inarguable evidenciary fact. So please—please, for your old pal Ashton—try to pay attention this time.

Here it is again, from all the way back on page 6 of this thread, as originally reported by Steve Thomas, and this time I'm going to make some things bold for you:

Here is a transcript of what Sheriff Decker broadcast over Channel 2 of the Dallas Police Department at 12:30 from Chief Curry's lead car:

"Have my office move all available men out of my office into the railroad yard to try to determine what happened in there and hold everything secure until Homicide and other investigators should get there."

Here is what was broadcast by the Sheriff's Department dispatcher at 12:30:40:

"Stand by 1. All units and officers in the vicinity of the station report to the railroad track area, just north of Elm. Report to the railroad track area just north of Elm."

For the love of Buddha, Cliff, at almost the instant of the shooting Decker was on the Dallas Police Department Channel 2 saying something had "happened in there" in "the railroad yard."

Motorcycle policemen in the motorcade instantly dropped their bikes in the street and charged to that area, and people of course followed!

Hell, Bowers himself says in his testimony that immediately after the shooting "there was a motorcycle policeman who shot nearly all of the way to the top of the incline."

They all had just been informed urgently on DPD Channel 2 that something "happened in there." What do you expect the cops on and near the scene to do? Go to Dunkin' Donuts? And what do you expect a crowd of onlookers to do when they see every cop on the scene racing toward the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) parking lot/railroad yard immediately after the President of the United States has just been shot right before their eyes?

Within 40 seconds of Decker's broadcast, the Sheriff's Department made its broadcast.

How many times have I made the point that Decker instantly ordered the County Courts building emptied?

Let's consider this soberly: the first thought planted in the very instant of greatest shock was "something happened in there" in the railroad track area "just north of Elm." Meaning the TSBD parking lot. Meaning right where you to this day are insisting "something happened in there."

And then what did the people running this little show do? They moved it all just slightly, into the TSBD.

And they stuck the whole world right there.

Do you know what "psy ops" means? Do you know how it works? Do you really know how these scum work? Do you know the significance, in the use of such black arts, of planting an idea in a moment of intense shock and dispersal and emotional stress and pain? If you don't, trust me: they do.

But even if you don't buy that there was a psy-op involved (the effects of which are reverberating to this very instant), even with that discounted out of hand, just look at "Exhibit A," above. Just look with your eyes.

What you regard as ludicrous the world class sniper Craig Roberts found obvious...

I.

Don't.

Give.

A.

Damn.

Can I make it any plainer?

I wouldn't care if you marched in 10,000 army-classed female virgin sharpshooters dressed as angels singing "It's a sniper's paradise" in four-part harmony (assuming they have sopranos). I don't need professional government killers (I'm sorry: I meant "experts") or itchy-finger angels to tell me what I see with my own eyes. That my personal integrity, not theirs.

And what I see in "Exhibit A" is one of the most ridiculous scenarios anybody could possibly dream up even in a fever, even on hallucinogens, for the daylight murder of the president of the most powerful nation in the world.

That's what I see. You see whatever you want to see.

As for what "world class sniper Craig Roberts" saw, did you bother to find out when he made a record of his Holy Epiphany Behind the Picket Fence? It wouldn't have been put into the book he released in the aftermath of the popular surge of Oliver Stone's "JFK," would it? Would you care to check? Did Myra before she dropped it into this thread explaining how she thought it "relevant"? Did Terry before she checked in with her Roberts endorsement?

I did.

So y'all party on behind the fence. You've sat there for forty-three years hoping to find a perp. (Or two. Or three. Or.... How many?) Sit there for another forty-three for all I care. And you won't find one—not one dressed as a cop, not one dressed as a tramp, not one dressed in drag, and not one dressed as Baby Jesus. It's a blind, dead fence corner. There is no trail. Fiction doesn't leave a trail. That's why you can't pick one up, into the area or out. And you never will.

Of course I'm happy to provide any views of this model anybody wants to see. I'm happy to discuss actual evidence. But as for chasing will o' the wisps behind the fence, I'm done. I've already said I'm done. Thanks for the sermons, thanks for the religious artifacts, thanks for the concern about my research soul, and thanks especially to each of you for the offers to let me take a seat with you in the pew behind the fence. But you're simply not going to get a convert.

And this sinner's got bid'ness elsewhere.

Ashton

[Jack White]

Cliff, thank you for your heartfelt concern over my "getting my mind right" about there having been one to three (or more? I sure wish you'd settle on a number and locations) sniping assassins hiding somewhere behind the picket fence and the pergola retaining wall on 22 November 1963. I feel almost as if I am being inducted into a religion. I realize I am a hard heretic to bring to the alter, and I am agog at your industry in this effort.

I am even more agog, though, at how eloquently you make my case for me that the locations you and others describe are perhaps the worst sniper positions in all the history of fact and fiction since the invention of gun powder.

So I think I'll just lean back in my chair, stretch out my legs, and lace my hands behind my head while you do just that: make my case for me.

First, though, just to help get people oriented to what you're describing, allow me to put up here on the easel "Ashton's Exhibit A," an annotated overview of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) parking lot and picket fence area at issue:

Doh! I put that sucker up there upside down. I don't know what's got into me. Lemme fix that for you...

There we go. You have the floor:

Bowers had PLENTY of other things to say in that chunk of testimony I cited. The last bit there pertaining to people streaming in from different directions seems particularly salient...

• MR. BOWERS (Railway worker in observation tower behind picket fence): A large number of people came, more than one direction. One group converged from the corner of Elm and Houston, and came down the extension of Elm and came into the high ground, and another line another large group went across the triangular area between Houston and Elm and then across Elm and then up the incline. Some of them all the way up. Many of them did, as well as, of course, between 50 and a hundred policemen within a maximum of 5 minutes.
  

...What made all of those other people charge the knoll?

I'm not sure how far you can push a theory that boycotts that explanation. ...

• SAM HOLLAND (Railway worker atop overpass at time of shooting): Well. immediately after the shots was fired, I run around the end of this overpass, behind the fence to see if I could see anyone up there behind the fence. ...I ran on up to the corner of this fence behind the building. By the time I got there there were 12 or 15 policemen and plainclothesmen, and we looked for empty shells around there for quite a while...
  

Oh my, all those policemen and plainclothesmen johnny on the spot, Texas style rapid response y'all.

• QUESTION: Mr. Simmons, about how long after the last shot would you say you went back in the parking lot area behind the fence?
  JAMES SIMMONS (Railway worker atop overpass at time of shooting): Immediately.
  QUESTION: Immediately, and about how long did you stay back there?
  JAMES SIMMONS: We were back there several minutes.
  QUESTION: Could you tell us about how many?
  JAMES SIMMONS: I would say 15 or 20 minutes...
  

...Let's ask Bowers...

• MR. BALL: Now, you were on duty on November 22, 1963, weren't you?
  MR. BOWERS: That's correct.
  MR. BALL: Close to noon, did you make any observation of the area around between your tower and Elm Street?
  MR. BOWERS: Yes; because of the fact that the area had been covered by police for some 2 hours.
  

...Please see Sam Holland's statement that a good dozen "policeman and plainclothesman" were in the vicinity [behind the picket fence, including the corner of the picket fence] when he got there, and that he left his spot on the overpass immediately.

There were cops around before the shooting, there were a lot of cops around right after the shooting.

Thank you. I rest my case. You've argued it about as persuasively as it could be argued. I'm entirely convinced: the purported positions for "Black Dog Man," "Badge Man" (plus spotter), and "Hat Man" are utterly absurd as shooting positions.

Hordes of people, including policemen, flooded into the area in seconds from all directions.

The entire area at issue was lousy with cops for two hours before, and not one witness in forty years has ever once suggested that even one of them carried a rifle, or that any person, in any mode of dress or garb, was ever seen in the area at issue with a rifle at any time.

The entire area was searched carefully for empty shell casings immediately after the shooting and none were found.

Not a single verifiable scrap of evidence of any shooters in those locations was found then, and not a single scrap of verifiable evidence has been found to this day.

When are you going to make your case, though?

Oh: maybe that was that question you had for me in the above, the one I've answered about ten times now, but you can't seem to get somehow. Let's do some remedial back-trackig. Go ahead—ask it again:

What made all of those other people charge the knoll?

I'm not sure how far you can push a theory that boycotts that explanation.

Cliff? Have you been paying any attention at all? Can I get you to focus real hard for a sec? I mean, this is only the central and crucial point I have made repeatedly in this thread and others. And, Cliff: this ain't some theetie-weetie, airy-fairy theory, or bizarre clumps of shadow and light pulled out of grainy photos and colorized to look sort of humanoid. Un-unh; this is hard, cold, documented, incontrovertible, inarguable evidenciary fact. So please—please, for your old pal Ashton—try to pay attention this time.

Here it is again, from all the way back on page 6 of this thread, as originally reported by Steve Thomas, and this time I'm going to make some things bold for you:

Here is a transcript of what Sheriff Decker broadcast over Channel 2 of the Dallas Police Department at 12:30 from Chief Curry's lead car:

"Have my office move all available men out of my office into the railroad yard to try to determine what happened in there and hold everything secure until Homicide and other investigators should get there."

Here is what was broadcast by the Sheriff's Department dispatcher at 12:30:40:

"Stand by 1. All units and officers in the vicinity of the station report to the railroad track area, just north of Elm. Report to the railroad track area just north of Elm."

For the love of Buddha, Cliff, at almost the instant of the shooting Decker was on the Dallas Police Department Channel 2 saying something had "happened in there" in "the railroad yard."

Motorcycle policemen in the motorcade instantly dropped their bikes in the street and charged to that area, and people of course followed!

Hell, Bowers himself says in his testimony that immediately after the shooting "there was a motorcycle policeman who shot nearly all of the way to the top of the incline."

They all had just been informed urgently on DPD Channel 2 that something "happened in there." What do you expect the cops on and near the scene to do? Go to Dunkin' Donuts? And what do you expect a crowd of onlookers to do when they see every cop on the scene racing toward the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) parking lot/railroad yard immediately after the President of the United States has just been shot right before their eyes?

Within 40 seconds of Decker's broadcast, the Sheriff's Department made its broadcast.

How many times have I made the point that Decker instantly ordered the County Courts building emptied?

Let's consider this soberly: the first thought planted in the very instant of greatest shock was "something happened in there" in the railroad track area "just north of Elm." Meaning the TSBD parking lot. Meaning right where you to this day are insisting "something happened in there."

And then what did the people running this little show do? They moved it all just slightly, into the TSBD.

And they stuck the whole world right there.

Do you know what "psy ops" means? Do you know how it works? Do you really know how these scum work? Do you know the significance, in the use of such black arts, of planting an idea in a moment of intense shock and dispersal and emotional stress and pain? If you don't, trust me: they do.

But even if you don't buy that there was a psy-op involved (the effects of which are reverberating to this very instant), even with that discounted out of hand, just look at "Exhibit A," above. Just look with your eyes.

What you regard as ludicrous the world class sniper Craig Roberts found obvious...

I.

Don't.

Give.

A.

Damn.

Can I make it any plainer?

I wouldn't care if you marched in 10,000 army-classed female virgin sharpshooters dressed as angels singing "It's a sniper's paradise" in four-part harmony (assuming they have sopranos). I don't need professional government killers (I'm sorry: I meant "experts") or itchy-finger angels to tell me what I see with my own eyes. That my personal integrity, not theirs.

And what I see in "Exhibit A" is one of the most ridiculous scenarios anybody could possibly dream up even in a fever, even on hallucinogens, for the daylight murder of the president of the most powerful nation in the world.

That's what I see. You see whatever you want to see.

As for what "world class sniper Craig Roberts" saw, did you bother to find out when he made a record of his Holy Epiphany Behind the Picket Fence? It wouldn't have been put into the book he released in the aftermath of the popular surge of Oliver Stone's "JFK," would it? Would you care to check? Did Myra before she dropped it into this thread explaining how she thought it "relevant"? Did Terry before she checked in with her Roberts endorsement?

I did.

So y'all party on behind the fence. You've sat there for forty-three years hoping to find a perp. (Or two. Or three. Or.... How many?) Sit there for another forty-three for all I care. And you won't find one—not one dressed as a cop, not one dressed as a tramp, not one dressed in drag, and not one dressed as Baby Jesus. It's a blind, dead fence corner. There is no trail. Fiction doesn't leave a trail. That's why you can't pick one up, into the area or out. And you never will.

Of course I'm happy to provide any views of this model anybody wants to see. I'm happy to discuss actual evidence. But as for chasing will o' the wisps behind the fence, I'm done. I've already said I'm done. Thanks for the sermons, thanks for the religious artifacts, thanks for the concern about my research soul, and thanks especially to each of you for the offers to let me take a seat with you in the pew behind the fence. But you're simply not going to get a convert.

And this sinner's got bid'ness elsewhere.

Ashton

Ashton...your computer graphics are getting better. This last one seems

quite realistic and accurate.

In my opinion there were at least two gunmen in the area depicted.

There was one on the south knoll.

There were at least two at the rear, not counting the SN window.

There may have been one in the storm drain.

I favor 8 to 12 shots, including several misses.

Keep up the interesting graphics. Can you do a one from the gutter

opening?

Jack

[John Dolva]

Sheep, Boids and People...

Wiki: "Emergence of Collective Behavior in Evolving Populations of Flying Agents"

"In flocking simulations, there is no central control; each boid behaves autonomously. The three simple rules described above are applied not to the entire flock, but only to local flockmates; each boid has to decide for itself which flocks fall into its environment ... boids do not need to check their position against all other boids. They only have to look in the register to see which boids are close enough to possibly be in their local environment."

It takes one leader or one predator to induce flocking in domestic sheep. What about for humans? While each boid...er...human moves autonomously, the movement is influenced by the movement of immediate neighbours.

The man under red arrow represents an 'against the grain' anomaly. He has chosen to override the group behaviour for reasons of his own. How many of these people flocking to the GK know why and where they are going? There is also a factor called 'intentional blindness' whereby such anomalous behaviour is often not seen. This is one reason perps knowledge of how to disappear in a crowd can work when escaping. I'm not saying this guy is a perp. But the way he moves steadily away from the knoll is quite likely not remembered by the general crowd.

[Cliff Varnell]

Our jousting over the evidence aside, thank you for these graphics, Ashton.

[Ashton Gray]

Our jousting over the evidence aside, thank you for these graphics, Ashton.

You're very welcome, Cliff, but if you knew how much I enjoyed doing the graphics, you wouldn't be thanking me—you'd be making me pay admission.

Thanks for being a good and worthy jousting partner.

I think that with all our combined efforts, one day, the truth will out. Whatever it is. And frankly, I don't care what it is. When it's the truth, we'll all know it.

Ashton

[Bernice Moore]

Hi Ter:

That I agree with...J.R's great research, he was a friend to many, all you had to do was ask..

As well as the Parkland trauma team's findings..a blow out to the back of the head...they were the first trained medical witnesses, as well as Hill and others who saw such...but

which upon the bodys arrival at Bethesda, though it was also seen, it had become much larger in size..according to witnesses.....Though you would never know it by the autopsy photos, or the Bethesda Doctor's reports..imo ...nothing is in stone in the JFK assn...it should

have been from the beginning but.....and it all changes according to whomever's latest whims at times.

B..

****************

Ashton,

Here's another for you.. This is the area where Sam Holland and the RR men, ran to, saw the footprints and saw the smoke

drift out, from under the trees.....it is now called the Hatman area..a possible spot from where a shot

came from. His head, does appear, move and disappear......in gifs of the film, Nix I believe, there is movement..I cannot post any Gifs...

But this will show you the approximate area....behind the fence, another for you to contemplate.

This is all I can fit in for now.....

B..

THe photo below written where the smoke came from, is part of Bill Miller's research in this area.

The amount of smoke is almost too large for a normal gunshot, IMO and so maybe Ashton is on to something that the puff was to distract attention - magician style....although I also am inclined to believe some shot or dart or something was headed from near the fence toward Kennedy's neck or head.......the people who planned this assassination obviously thought through every possible thing and how to counter it being discovered or to mask it with a decoy / diversion / etc. I'lve always felt that just about every building and both N. and S. Knoll had shooters....but they all didn't fire....it was only as needed directed from some script or some command post.

*****************************

Hello Peter:

I do not know of rifles nor weapons, but have read that a rifle producing such smoke could have meant that someone had forgotten to Lightly oil their weapon..as Oily barrels can produce huge plumes of

smoke....FWIW..

B.

[Ashton Gray]

Can you do a one from the gutter

opening?

Hi, Jack. I'll be happy to as soon as I can, but I want to make sure I know where you mean. Is that down by the large steam pipe at the overpass end of the fence? And do you want it pointed at the motorcade? Headshot or alleged throat shot, or both?

Let me know, but if I don't respond right away it's because I've already allowed this-week deadlines to get a stranglehold while I was doing, um, these other things. I figure if anybody would understand the deadlines nightmare it would be you.

Ashton

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

View from corner of picket fence?

EBC