Jump to content
The Education Forum
David Von Pein

Did Lee Harvey Oswald Order The Rifle? The Answer Is Yes

Recommended Posts

Or, are you....chicken? :help

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A reprise....

Doesn't this little "coincidence" ever cause you pause and want to re-think the SBT, Bob?:

JFK is hit in the UPPER BACK by a bullet.

and

John Connally is ALSO hit by a bullet in his UPPER BACK too. And Connally is hit at nearly the very same instant that Kennedy is also hit.

That little "BOTH VICTIMS ARE STRUCK IN THEIR RESPECTIVE UPPER BACKS AT ALMOST AN IDENTICAL TIME" coincidence doesn't mean a thing to you, does it, Bob?

I wonder why not.

Z-FilmClipSBTInMotion2.gif

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could mean a coordinated team of shooters received the Go signal and shot at the same time, or it could mean Connally was not shot at this point.

Did you know that the medical evidence shows the bullet entered at the outside right of Connally's chest at the mid axillary line, followed the outside of his 5th rib on a downward course, and exited his chest at a point between his right nipple and the centre of his chest?

250px-Axillary_lines.png

media_52670_en.jpg

Strange, it does not appear that Connally was turned to his right at the moment you claim he was shot in the back, yet for this bullet to enter at the right mid axillary line, and to exit between his right nipple and the centre of his chest, it would seem the bullet was travelling at an angle across his chest, from right to let, of about 45°.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob,

Dale Myers' computer model (which is aligned with the Z-Film itself) shows how far Governor Connally is turned to his right when the SBT bullet struck. It's difficult to tell exactly how much to the RIGHT Connally is turned when JUST looking at the Z-Film. I certainly can't tell how many "degrees" to the right JBC is turned at Z224 by merely watching the Z-Film. But Myers has locked his computer animation right to the Zapruder Film itself. So this is the most accurate 3D rendering we're likely to ever get....

FromDaleMyersAnimation11.jpg

FromDaleMyersAnimation14.jpg

FromDaleMyersAnimation21.jpg

Other still images here -----> With--Malice.blogspot.com

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If those cartoons are accurate, why is the trajectory of the bullet centred on the middle of the back of JFK's neck? Plus, if you continue this trajectory, the bullet hits Connally in the middle of the back.

And what frames are those cartoons supposed to be representing?

Edited by Robert Prudhomme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two of the Myers images show the frame numbers right on them, Bob. Can't you read the numbers?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron Reiland refers to the Depository rifle as an "Argentine 6.5 Mauser" in this WFAA-TV audio clip from the afternoon of 11/22/63. He doesn't call it a "7.65" weapon at all:

RON REILAND AUDIO EXCERPT FROM NOVEMBER 22, 1963

So much for Mr. Reiland being one of only two people in Dallas on November 22nd "who knew [his] butt from a hole in the ground when it came to rifles".

You're just like a little kid, Dave, never happy until you get in the last "Nyah! Nyah! Nyah".

[...]

Why not have a go at the other thread? You know, the one you've been ignoring for a few days now.

I was just tying up a loose end regarding this Reiland thing. And you're the one who made this statement yesterday, Bob. Not I. ....

"Ron Reiland and Bob Clark were obviously the only ones who knew their butts from a hole in the ground when it came to rifles."

As for your other thread.....

You haven't proven the SBT is a fallacy. Your charts and schematics don't show JOHN KENNEDY'S skeletal structure specifically. And without knowing every little nuance of John F. Kennedy's body, then your charts might be CLOSE, but they might not be close ENOUGH.

Plus, I've already pointed out about 699 times in the past the absurdity of believing that TWO separate bullets went into JFK's body just A TINY LITTLE BIT, with neither bullet exiting the body....and then....both bullets simply VANISH!

Tell me how that theory passes anyone's laugh test, Bob.

Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com/#Debating-The-SBT

----------------

Your charts and schematics don't show JOHN KENNEDY'S skeletal structure specifically. And without knowing every little nuance of John F. Kennedy's body, then your charts might be CLOSE, but they might not be close ENOUGH.

But, as you always remind us,(to paraphrase) "...the preponderance of evidence is sufficient..." - why not in this case?

Also, 3 little questions:

1. Why was the obvious discrepancy between the advertised rifle length and the length of CE139 never questioned (a response along the lines of "well, they had the rifle used by Oswald to assassinate the President so there was no need to question it." won't do)? Revisiting your question "Did Lee Harvey Oswald order the rifle?" , the answer must therefore be "No" since the rifle found does not match the rifle that was ordered - pretty fundamental really.

2. When was the check cashed, according to the WC records?

3. Did the handwriting experts examine the original documents?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another point, the weapon found on the 6th floor of the TSBD is clearly not the weapon ordered by A. Hidell since the advertised (and ordered) weapon is a different length - it may be a "little nuance". CLOSE, but not close ENOUGH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The weapon found on the 6th floor of the TSBD is clearly not the weapon ordered by A. Hidell since the advertised (and ordered) weapon is a different length...

Ian,

Regardless of what length rifle Oswald actually ordered, the TSBD weapon is clearly the same weapon that Klein's mailed to "Hidell" (at Oswald's post office box). It's got the same serial number on it---and Oswald's prints are on it.

1.) Oswald ("Hidell") was shipped an Italian (Carcano) rifle with the serial number C2766 on it.

2.) The TSBD rifle is an Italian (Carcano) rifle with the serial number C2766 on it.

Good heavens, what more proof do you require?

And try as they might, no CTer has ever come up with proof that a SECOND Carcano rifle bearing the serial number C2766 has ever existed. Nor, for that matter, have I seen anybody produce two Carcanos with the same serial number---period---regardless of what serial number it might be.

As for the "different length" argument, go back to Post #1 in this thread (or click the link below; it's the same as Post 1)....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/12/oswald-ordered-rifle.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And without knowing every little nuance of John F. Kennedy's body, then your charts might be CLOSE, but they might not be close ENOUGH.

Do you really think that JFK's body was that much different to any other human?

Good heavens, what more proof do you require?

Regardless of what length rifle Oswald actually ordered, the TSBD weapon is clearly the same weapon that Klein's mailed to "Hidell" (at Oswald's post office box).

Show me where, in the record, the length discrepancy is explained please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two of the Myers images show the frame numbers right on them, Bob. Can't you read the numbers?

And the one in the middle? Which Z frame does it correspond to?

Also, why does the cartoon show the trajectory of the bullet lined up with the centre of JFK's neck (back), if Dale Myers was so accurate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the one in the middle? Which Z frame does it correspond to?

I'm not sure exactly. But my guess would be Z223.

Also, why does the cartoon show the trajectory of the bullet lined up with the centre of JFK's neck (back), if Dale Myers was so accurate?

It doesn't. Dale Myers' computer model shows the entry wound to be slightly right of the midline in Kennedy's upper back---just where the autopsy picture places it (click to enlarge)....

JFK-Back-Wound.png

BTW, Bob, we've hashed all this out before. Just four months ago in fact, as archived here....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-887.html

---------------

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter, Dave, you still don't get it. Look at the bottom cartoon on the left in your post. The bullet would be going right through the centre of the spinal column.

When will you admit the vertebrae in the neck are in the way of making the SBT work?.

See the photo on the right at the bottom? If the bullet entered that close to JFK's spine, and then continued on to go through the right side of JFK's trachea (windpipe), it had to go through the vertebrae in the neck to get there. The autopsy report, though, tells us only the transverse process of vertebra T1 was damaged.

How did the bullet avoid going through the vertebrae, Dave? Magic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob,

Dale Myers' computer model (which is aligned with the Z-Film itself) shows how far Governor Connally is turned to his right when the SBT bullet struck. It's difficult to tell exactly how much to the RIGHT Connally is turned when JUST looking at the Z-Film. I certainly can't tell how many "degrees" to the right JBC is turned at Z224 by merely watching the Z-Film. But Myers has locked his computer animation right to the Zapruder Film itself. So this is the most accurate 3D rendering we're likely to ever get....

and.... if the Z-film is altered, Myers two-bit cartoon is based on what premise? Cone of probability, I believe that the lone nut shuck-n-jive... what a bunch of unadulterated, lone nut nonsense.... I recall asking Myers for his lightwave files so I could do a little "testing". Funny, he never responded. Guess he was busy doing ghost writing for daBugliosi's publishing disaster... As old Steve Keating use to say, "you (lone nut) guys are a hoot... Carry on, hon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did the bullet avoid going through the vertebrae, Dave? Magic?

Well, Bob, all I can say is....

You are obviously incorrect in your analysis. Simple as that.

Also....

The HSCA's Forensic Pathology Panel had no problem with the bullet going clean through JFK's body. Nor did the autopsy doctors have any difficulty arriving at such a "thru-&-thru" conclusion (after Dr. Humes talked with Dr. Perry on the morning of November 23rd, that is).

But I'm supposed to believe a man by the name of Robert Prudhomme instead, while ignoring those TWELVE pathologists who said that a bullet DID go through JFK's back and neck.

You think you know more than TWELVE different pathologists, Bob? Please enlighten me on WHY you think that.

And here's another panel which concluded something that Robert Prudhomme thinks could have only resulted from "magic". So this brings the total number of doctors that Bob P. needs to ignore up to sixteen....

Quoting from the Clark Panel Report (emphasis added by DVP).....

"The other bullet struck the decedent's back at the right side of the base of the neck between the shoulder and spine and emerged from the front of his neck near the midline. The possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was considered. No evidence for this was found.

There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck.

The possibility that the path of the bullet through the neck might have been more satisfactorily explored by the insertion of a finger or probe was considered. Obviously the cutaneous wound in the back was too small to permit the insertion of a finger. The insertion of a metal probe would have carried the risk of creating a false passage, in part because of the changed relationship of muscles at the time of autopsy and in part because of the existence of postmortem rigidity.

Although the precise path of the bullet could undoubtedly have been demonstrated by complete dissection of the soft tissue between the two cutaneous wounds, there is no reason to believe that the information disclosed thereby would alter significantly the conclusions expressed in this report."

[END QUOTE.]

These excerpts deserve a replay and lots of extra emphasis:

"The possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was considered. No evidence for this was found."

"Any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck."

"There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds..."

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

---------

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
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...