Grassy Knoll shooter

[Tom Little]

I have been reading through the Douglass book "JFK and the Unspeakable". It strikes me as a Catholic apologetic, the writer was a graduate of theology at a Jesuit school; I also have a degree from one. He makes JFK look like he was suffering greatly against the CIA and its huge appetite for militarism and intrigue. Much of that is true, but he wasn't a martyr.

Something that keeps coming up in my thinking are trying to see the assassination plans so they make sense, and so the different versions are credible. James Files says he was alone behind the fence, other versions like that of that of Gordon Arnold and the deaf mute Ed Hoffman describe pairs of men. How do we reconcile these and other versions?

 

[Ron Bulman]

The GK is a deep subject within itself too.  I'm no expert. 

Jim Marrs interviewed Files looking for the truth.  While I didn't follow his website extensively I think he just quit posting about Files over time.  I took this to mean he found fault in his story, as others have.  I wondered at one point and still do if the patron of Files story, the Dane, Wm Dankbarr though supposedly independently wealthy might have been influenced or funded by a modern day Operation Mockingbird. 

Some have speculated the grassy knoll shooter was a Dallas cop, Tippitt or Roscoe White.  See Badgeman.

Others think it was a Cuban still angry over the Bay of Pigs trained in Operation 40, maybe allowed to do it by the CIA.

Or one sent/working on behalf of Castro.

Then there's the French/Corsican Souetre/Mertz possibility from Harvey/Dulles/Angleton Italian connections all the way back to WWII.

Total reconciliation may be impossible because of destruction of files and death of witnesses and participants.

But somebody shot from front right.  Back and to the left still does not lie to common sense.

"pair's" is the key to me.  A shooter and a spotter/protector/radioman?  

Who was the Secret Service man on the Grassy Knoll?  Their wasn't one, but someone there had such credentials.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Ron Bulman

[Tom Little]

If you go over to the JFK murder solved site, Dankbaar has been posting a lot over there recently.  He challenged Jimmy Files to unearth the box of his fellow assassin's diary and saved Dallas documents Charles "Chuckie Typewriter" Nicoletti's.  Files said he buried the stuff before he was put away in jail for the duration.  Files got out of the pen last year and is a good friend with at least one forum member.  Credibility is a huge issue.  Files could be legit, but he could of just as easily manufactured it for some money, he knew all the players in the Chicago mob, and could have worked back claiming to be the only assassin behind the fence, which doesn't make sense.  He never mentioned Ruby as his team associate, or anyone else.  It makes sense there were several teams, they needed to have a  headshot, they wanted it from behind, but their clean up crew was able to make like the lone nut theory was valid.

[Michael Walton]

Tom Little,

JFKAU is a good book but IMO I don't think it's aged too well. I agree the author did go a little overboard with it.  Also, the C Day thing is kind of silly and far-fetched because if JFK was really trying to reach out to Castro before he was killed, would he really have had a C Day plan in place like this?  Of course, the same C Day could have been planned by others on the event of JFK's death (the so-called revenge invasion).

As for the shooters and so forth, you may want to take an opposite tack.  Instead of focusing on the mechanics of the shooting, just look at the evidence, which will tell you what happened:

The unaltered Z film shows his head going violently backward; this same item in the film was covered up on live TV by Dan Rather as he described the film; and this SAME film was suppressed from the public until 1975.  Why was that?

Here is a film of shooting comparisons.  You be the judge:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxU0V1ck1GZFN6TWM

And here too:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxNm9MNTY3UHVrR1k

The mystery photo (so-called) shows a beveled outshoot on the skull.  Here's a photo illustration:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxdm9ZalJTSWU3cms

Could one marksman, who supposedly was adequate when rated in the USMC, and standing or kneeling in an awkward position really have pulled off all of those shots in 6 seconds?  Using a piece of junk gun that was supposedly brought in that morning, hidden, reassembled, but according to gun users never sighted nor test fired before 12.30? Is there any evidence or testimony at all from anyone in that building stating that LHO did all of these things before 12.30? Here's a video showing the shot sequence:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxa3NqTEpScWNQZnc

NOTE - at the above video, take note of the FBI reenactment image on the left.  Look at the little white patch on the stand in's back then look at where a bullet - which would have come out in a straight line from that patch - have went on to. Do you see what I mean? So without realizing it, the FBI pretty much nullified the one shot seven wounds theory that the WC claimed.  LOL.

JFK's back wound terminates in the back - in other words there is no exit of it. How could the SBT happen if that shot terminates? Here's a comparison photo:

Of course there is more, but you get the gist of it here.  As for Files, Bev Oliver and the other fakers, you have to take their words with a grain of salt.  Unfortunately there are many many fakers and charlatans in this case trying to make a buck. It's as simple as that and there are plenty of suckers out there who fall for it as well. So don't take their collective words for it - follow stuff like the above and other stuff written by Pat Speer, Dave Josephs and so on.

And the absolute deal breaker could be the Prayer Man theory. That, for me, could be the ultimate proof of conspiracy if the TV station who owns the rights to the film ever releases the original film for analysis.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Michael Walton

[Chris Davidson]

Why would you post a comparison video which shows the same initial impact result as the extant Z film. A shot from behind.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1A3xt19UjlY3KiP-bXFjneddj4i4RsKyl/view?usp=sharing

Why not show us a (frontal shot) video in which brain matter exits the back of the head?

We could then compare it to the extant Z film and ask why we see no brain matter exit the rear. 

The difference between altered and unaltered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[George Sawtelle]

Tom

I believe James Files. He made two statements to Joe West during his confession that frame his participation in the assassination.

He told West the following

1. I will mark an "X" on the point where I was at in Dealey Plaza. That is not where I was but I will reveal my true position later, or words to that effect.

2. I won't give anybody up.

Files was one of two shooters behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll however when he made his confession in 1993 the other shooter was still alive. He took the place of the other shooter in that he said he was the one who shot Kennedy in the head. He "eliminated" the other shooter by saying he was the only shooter behind the grassy knoll. This was his way of precluding all questions about another shooter behind the picket fence and thus not giving him up. I believe Files shot Kennedy in the throat from behind the picket fence (behind the pergola also) and that the other shooter shot Kennedy in the head. The other shooter  died in 2007 but Files hasn't changed his story. ??????

Files wasn't part of the ambush until the day of the assassination. I think he was patsy #2. If patsy #1, Oswald, somehow escapes Dallas Files would have been arrested for the murder of Kennedy. The plotters had a back-up plan. Files had a track record of a disgruntled ex-soldier. Court martialed for killing an american soldier in Loas, he seemed to have enough baggage to place him in the radical category. David Phillips handled both Oswald and Files.

[Tom Little]

Files doesn't say that he was with anyone behind the fence, no one  It is inconceivable there was not a spotter or second person.   You have to have corroborating accounts, one person' s version is insufficient.   Some have said it was Ruby who was nearby without positive identification; also that Ruby knew all about it, without giving a plausible rationale for why he would shoot Oswald with nothing to gain.