If not Oswald, who killed JFK and why?

[Cory Santos]

Forget the buildings, the turn onto elm, and the windows because in reality the route took him under a  bridge which had no security on it while riding in an open car.  That alone was a huge breach.  

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

...the route took him under a bridge which had no security on it...

Not true. (If you're referring to the Triple Underpass bridge, that is.) Because that bridge on Elm Street had two Dallas policemen on it when JFK's car drove underneath it on 11/22/63.

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by David Von Pein

[Cory Santos]

7 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Not true. (If you're referring to the Triple Underpass bridge, that is.) Because that bridge on Elm Street had two Dallas policemen on it when JFK's car drove underneath it on 11/22/63.

 

Ok, please explain.  I do not recall seeing anything about officers stationed on the triple overpass-if we are talking about the same thing.  So lets be clear, after Kennedy is shot, the limo goes under a bridge which is a underpass if going underneath it.  So on the overpass, who was stationed on it?

[John Kozlowski]

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

Ok, please explain.  I do not recall seeing anything about officers stationed on the triple overpass-if we are talking about the same thing.  So lets be clear, after Kennedy is shot, the limo goes under a bridge which is a underpass if going underneath it.  So on the overpass, who was stationed on it?

Officers J.W. Foster and J.C. White were on the underpass during the parade.

[Cory Santos]

1 hour ago, John Kozlowski said:

Officers J.W. Foster and J.C. White were on the underpass during the parade.

I do stand corrected.  Thanks.  However, my point regarding the security threat is still valid.  

That is, allowing the President to drive in an open vehicle under a bridge is still an incredible security risk that never should have happened.  Even if there were two officers on the bridge.  That risk alone should have been realized by security in pre-planning and that route should have been avoided.

David, would you agree with that or is that simply just an another convenient oversight?

Edited August 9, 2019 by Cory Santos

[John Kozlowski]

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

I do stand corrected.  Thanks.  However, my point regarding the security threat is still valid.  

That is, allowing the President to drive in an open vehicle under a bridge is still an incredible security risk that never should have happened.  Even if there were two officers on the bridge.  That risk alone should have been realized by security in pre-planning and that route should have been avoided.

David, would you agree with that or is that simply just an another convenient oversight?

Should have added that they testified to the WC that a train was running at the time of the assassination and they didn’t see or hear a thing