Mike Williams
-
Posts
1,023 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Mike Williams
-
-
Thanks Duncan...
Please tell me that the same type of analysis was done on the image to the left, behind the tree, along the southern face of the fence.
Never have seen size analysis done on that area...
you?
Once one looks at and comprehends the ballistic evidence, one will stop wasting time with such foolishness as a knoll shooter. Of course it does keep the goldfish, who gobble up any flake thrown to them, occupied and out of the way of real research.
Some people are so easily fooled.
-
By the way, if you dont mind my asking, how long have you been researching the assassination, and what is your particular area of interest?
I've been interested in the events since I was 15 years old Mike. My Dad got me onto it when we had 'The Men Who Killed Kennedy' aired for the first time in the U.K..
I got seriously into it, buying the books, hunting down old journals and the like when I was 18-19. I was obsessed with it till about the age of 25 and then kinda went onto other things. In my early 30's I picked the books and my notepads back up. For the last 3 years, outside of looking after my young daughters and being a husband, has been my number one interest and passion.
Lee Oswald, the real man behind the one dimensional WC portrait, is what I'm truly interested in. I know this guy was innocent Mike. Set up by JJ Angleton and a combination of Texas moneymen and the Military. He was moved around a chessboard thinking he was a knight when he was, unfortunately, just a pawn.
Lee
Lee,
Thanks for sharing that. I myself have been researching about 3 years only and much of that on other things. As you know I am mostly interested in the ballistics. As you might also know I own www.jfkballistics.com. If you are ever interested in writing an article on Oswald I would love to have it on my site.
I post all kinds of things from all sides of the debate. Not just ballistics. All I ask is that if it has ballistics in it that it be accurate.
So anyhow just thought I would offer.
Mike
-
And Hill wasn't alone. Pretty much everyone who saw Kennedy respond to the first shot said he was either hit by the shot, or reacted to the shot beyond calmly waving to his right (the reaction pushed by those holding the first shot missed circa frame 160 of the Zapruder film). This highly suggests (proves, as far as eyewitness testimony can be relied upon) that the first shot rang out after frame 180 (when he waves) but prior to Kennedy's heading behind the sign. As none of those claiming he reacted to the first shot said there was another shot just after that appeared to hit him, moreover, it is clear-cut evidence that the first shot hit JFK.
From patspeer.com, chapter 5:
Remote Viewers--those noting the impact of the shots from buildings looking down on Dealey Plaza (all listed witnesses heard three shots unless otherwise noted):
Ruth Smith (12-21-63 FBI interview, CD206 p.9) “She looked back toward President Kennedy’s car after the first shot and thinks he raised his hands to his face.”
Lillian Mooneyham (1-10-64 FBI report, 24H531) “Mrs. Mooneyham heard a gunshot and observed President Kennedy slump to the left of the seat of his car."
Cecil Ault (1-10-64 FBI report, 24H534) “Following the first shot Mr. Ault noted that President Kennedy appeared to raise up in his seat.”
Dr. Samuel Paternostro (1-20-64 FBI report, 24H536) “He said he estimated several seconds, possibly four or five more, elapsed between the first report and the second and third reports. He said he observed President John F. Kennedy when he appeared to grab his head and thought at the time he is “well-trained;” then, when the other reports followed in quick succession, he realized that the President had been shot.”
Harold Norman (3-24-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 3H186-198) "I can’t remember what the exact time was but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard a shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something."
James Jarman (11-24-63 FBI report, CD5 p334-335) “He said that he heard a shot and then saw President Kennedy move his right hand up to his head."
So, we're just beginning and the score is already 6-0. All these witnesses heard three shots and all of them believed Kennedy responded to the first shot.
Eastsiders--those noting the impact of the shots from a location in the Plaza to the east of the limousine:
TE Moore (1-10-64 FBI report, 24H534) “By the time President Kennedy had reached the Thornton Freeway sign, a shot was fired and Mr. Moore observed the President slump forward in the Presidential car."
Mrs. Ruby Henderson (12-6-63 FBI report, 24H524) “at the time the motorcade passed where she was standing, she heard what she initially thought was a firecracker, and saw what she thought was paper fly out of the Presidential car. She said she now realized it was a shot she heard and what she thought was paper was probably flesh." (If so, she thought the first of the four shots she heard was the head shot. This seems highly unlikely, in light of all the other statements. It seems probable then that she was mistaken on this point.)
Welcome Eugene Barnett (7-23-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 7H539-544) “I was looking at the President when the first shot was fired, and I thought I saw him slump down, but I am not sure, and I didn’t look any more then. I thought he was ducking down."
Pierce Allman (11-22-63 eyewitness report on WFAA radio, between 1:45 and 2:00 PM CST) “Right after Mr. Kennedy passed in front of me I heard one big explosion and my immediate thought like most of the people standing around me was “this is firecrackers, but it’s in pretty poor taste”. I looked and saw the president, I thought, duck. Evidently, he was slumping at the time."
Phil Willis (7-22-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 7H492-497) "When I took slide No. 4, the President was smiling and waving and looking straight ahead, and Mrs. Kennedy was likewise smiling and facing more to my side of the street. When the first shot was fired, her head seemed to just snap in that direction, and he more or less faced the other side of the street and slumped forward.”
Linda Willis (7-22-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 7H498-499) (When asked if she heard shots) “Yes; I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together. When the first one hit, well, the President turned from waving to the people, and he grabbed his throat, and he kind of slumped forward."
Patricia Lawrence (11-24-63 FBI Report, 22H841): “When the motorcade passed she stated she was looking at Mrs. Kennedy who was looking to the other side of the car. The President was looking in her direction and she had waved. She heard the shot fired as the president was waving." (The president was not waving at frame 160 of the Zapruder film--the moment of the purported first shot miss--but was waving by frame 180, a second or so later. Still, as she does not specifically say the president stopped waving after the shot, it's difficult to say for sure that she is describing a first shot hit.)
Mary Woodward (11-23-63 newspaper article Witness From the News Describes Assassination written by Woodward for the Dallas Morning News) "After acknowledging our cheers, he [JFK] faced forward again and suddenly there was a horrible, ear-splitting noise coming from behind us and a little to the right. My first reaction, and also my friends', was that as a joke someone had backfired their car...I don't believe anyone was hit with the first bullet. The President and Mrs. Kennedy turned and looked around, as if they, too, didn't believe the noise was really coming from a gun." (Kennedy, of course, does not turn and look around after frame 160, but resumes waving. What Woodward called "turning" then is almost certainly a reaction to the first shot's impact.)
Jean Newman (11-22-63 statement to the Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 19H489, 24H218) "The motorcade had just passed me when I heard something that I thought was a firecracker at first, and the President had just passed me, because after he had just passed, there was a loud report, it just scared me, and I noticed that the President jumped, he sort of ducked his head down, and I thought at the time that it probably scared him too, just like it did me, because he flinched like he jumped. I saw him put his elbows like this, with his hands on his chest." (Only heard two shots.)
June Dishong (Letter written on 11-22-63, as read by her daughter on CNN, 11-21-2003, and featured on the Sixth Floor Museum website) “here come the president and his wife…His arm in the air waving…He drops his arm as they go by, possibly 20 feet. Suddenly--a sound. Gun shots? So hard to tell above the clamor of the crowd. The president bent forward into his wife’s lap as his arm slipped off the side of the car."
While we can't rightly count Mrs. Henderson, Ms. Lawrence or Ms. Newman as first shot hit witnesses, the statements of the other 7 witnesses definitely support that Kennedy was hit by the first shot. This makes the score 13-0. Unfortunately, things get a little more confusing when we move on to discuss the statements of those on the west end of the plaza.
Westsiders--those noting the impact of the shots from a location in the plaza to the west of the limousine:
S.M. Holland (11-22-63 statement to Dallas County Sheriff’s Department, 19H480, 24H212) “the President’s car was coming down Elm Street and when they got just about to the Arcade I heard what I thought for the moment was a fire cracker and he slumped over...After the first shot the President slumped over and Mrs. Kennedy jumped up." (Apparently, he thought the first shot was the head shot.)
Stavis Ellis (HSCA Vol. XII, p.23) “On August 5, 1978...Ellis said that just as he started down the hill of Elm Street, he looked back toward President Kennedy’s car and saw debris come up from the ground at a nearby curb. Ellis thought it was a fragment grenade. Ellis also said that President Kennedy turned around and looked over his shoulder." (Even though Ellis believed the first shot missed, his description of Kennedy's actions by no means matches the behavior of Kennedy observed between frames 160 and 190 of the Zapruder film, and instead suggests the first shot hit. The "fragment grenade" observed by Ellis was most logically a piece of Kennedy's skull, which would suggest the first shot heard by Ellis was the head shot. It also seems possible Ellis heard less than three shots.)
Dallas County Sheriff Bill Decker (Undated 1963-1964 statement included with Decker Exhibit 5323, 19H458) “I distinctly remember hearing 2 shots. As I heard the first retort, I looked back over my shoulder and saw what appeared to be a spray of water come out of the rear seat of the President’s car." (Only heard two shots, the first of which was most probably the head shot.)
Jack Franzen (11-24-63 FBI report, 22H840) “He said he heard the sound of an explosion which appeared to him to come from the President’s car and noticed small fragments flying inside the car and immediately assumed someone had tossed a firecracker inside the automobile." (Once again, the first shot he describes is the head shot.)
Mrs. Jack Franzen (11-25-63 FBI report, 24H525) “She advised shortly after the President’s automobile passed by on Elm Street near where she and her family were standing, she heard a noise which sounded to her to as if someone had thrown a firecracker into the President’s automobile. She advised at approximately the same time she noticed dust or small pieces of debris flying from the President’s automobile." (Her statement mimics her husband's. Once again, the first shot is the head shot.)
Malcolm Summers (11-23-63 statement to Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 19H500) “The President’s car had just come up in front of me when I heard a shot and saw the President slump down in the car and heard Mrs. Kennedy say, “Oh, no,” then a second shot and then I hit the ground as I realized these were shots." (Only recalled hearing two shots, with the first one most probably the head shot.)
Emmett Hudson (11-22-63 statement to Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 19H481) “At the same time the President’s car was directly in front of us, I heard a shot and I saw the President fall over in the seat." (First shot head shot.)
Mary Moorman (11-22-63 statement to Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 19H487, 24H217) “As President Kennedy was opposite me, I took a picture of him. As I snapped the picture of President Kennedy, I heard a shot ring out. President Kennedy kind of slumped over." (Moorman's photo depicts the head shot. Once again...first shot, head shot.)
Jean Hill (11-22-63 statement to Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 19H479, 24H212) “Just as Mary Moorman started to take a picture we were looking at the President and Jackie in the back seat…Just as the President looked up toward us two shots rang out and I saw the President grab his chest and fall forward across Jackie’s lap." (Once again...first shot, head shot.)
Well, this is a surprise. Here, we have nine witnesses from the west end of the plaza--all of them recalling at least two shots--and ALL of them describing the events observed in the Zapruder film at the time of the head shot as the events they observed at the time of the FIRST shot. Now, this is curious, and suggests that (as Kennedy was obviously hit at least once before the head shot) not only did the first shot not miss, but that the second shot was the head shot. This, in turn, suggests it was the THIRD shot that missed. (Now we can call it either 22-0 or keep it at 13-0. You decide.)
Centrists--those noting the impact of the shots from the center of the plaza.
Abraham Zapruder (2:10 PM 11-22-63 interview on WFAA) “as I was shooting, as the President was coming down from Houston Street making his turn, it was about a half-way down there, I heard a shot, and he slumped to the side, like this. Then I heard another shot or two, I couldn't say it was one or two, and I saw his head practically open up, all blood and everything, and I kept on shooting.” (Only heard two definite shots, but felt certain Kennedy was hit by the first one.)
Marilyn Sitzman (11-29-66 interview with Josiah Thompson) “There was nothing unusual until the first sound, which I thought was a firecracker, mainly because of the reaction of President Kennedy. He put his hands up to guard his face and leaned to the left." (Only heard two shots.)
William Newman (11-22-63 interview on WFAA) “we were at the edge of the curb, getting ready to wave at the President when we heard the first shot and the President.....I don't know who was hit first but the President jumped up in his seat, and I thought it scared him, I thought it was a firecracker, cause he looked....you know, fear." (Only heard two shots.)
Frances Gayle Newman (11-22-63 statement to Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 24H218) “When President Kennedy’s car was about ten feet from us, I heard a noise that sounded like a firecracker going off. President Kennedy kind of jumped like he was startled and then covered his head with his hands and then raised up."
Charles Brehm (11-22-63 NBC television interview first broadcast around 3:15 CST, as shown in Rush to Judgment) “He was coming down the Street and my five-year old boy and myself were by ourselves on the grass there on Commerce Street. And I asked Joe to wave to him and Joe waved and I waved (breaks up)…as he was waving back, the shot rang out and he slumped down in his seat."
John Chism (11-22-63 statement to Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 19H471) "When I saw the motorcade round the corner, the President was standing and waving to the crowd. And just as he got just about in front of me, he turned and waved to the crowd on this side of the street, the right side; at this point I heard what sounded like one shot, and I saw him “The President,” sit back in his seat and lean his head to his left side." (Only heard two shots.)
Marvin Faye Chism (11-22-63 statement to the Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 19H472) “As the President was coming through, I heard this first shot, and the President fell to his left." (Only heard two shots.)
Well, this is also interesting. Why did so few of those in the middle of the plaza hear three shots? The thought occurs that one of the shots was harder to hear than the others. Counting only those initially claiming to have heard three shots, then, the score is now 24-0 or 15-0.
The motorcade witnesses:
Paul Landis (11-27-63 report, 18H758-759) “At this moment, I heard what sounded like the report of a high powered rifle behind me. My first glance was at the President, as my eyes were almost straight ahead at that time. I did not realize that the President was hit at that point. I saw him moving and thought he was turning in the direction of the sound." (Only heard two shots, but saw Kennedy react to the first sound.)
Glen Bennett (notes written on 11-22-63, 24H541-542) "At this point I heard a noise that immediately reminded me of a firecracker. I immediately, upon hearing the supposed firecracker, looked at the boss's car. At this exact time I saw a shot that hit the boss about 4 inches down from the right shoulder. A second shoot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the boss's head." (While the precise meaning of Bennett's words are open to debate, they do on first glance suggest that he felt the first shot missed. Since he did not see Kennedy's reaction to the first shot, but only saw him at the "exact time" he received the second shot, it seems possible the blood seen by Bennett came from the first shot. But we'll call this one a first shot miss.)
George Hickey (11-22-63 report, 18H765) “As 100-X made the turn and proceeded a short distance, I heard what seemed to me that a firecracker exploded to the right and rear. I stood partially up and turned to the rear to see if I could observe anything. Nothing was observed and I turned around and looked at the President’s car. The President was slumped to the left in the car."
David Powers (5-18-64 affidavit, 7H472-474) “the first shot went off and it sounded to me as if it were a firecracker. I noticed then that the President moved quite far to his left after the shot from the extreme right hand side where he had been sitting."
Clint Hill (11-30-63 report, 18H740-745) “The noise came from my right rear and I immediately moved my head in that direction. In so doing, my eyes had to cross the Presidential automobile and I saw the President hunch forward and then slump to his left." (Only heard two shots, but saw the President react to the first one.)
Sam Kinney (11-22-63 report, 18H732) “The first shot was fired as we were going into an underpass…it appeared that he (the President) had been shot because he slumped to the left."
Emory Roberts (11-29-63 report, 18H733-738) “12:30 PM: First of three shots fired, at which time I saw the President lean toward Mrs. Kennedy."
B.J. Martin (4-3-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 6H289-293) “one of the agents got off of the car after the first shot…I looked to my right (after the first shot)…I looked at the President after I heard the (first) shot and he was leaning forward—I could see the left side of his face."
Bobby W. Hargis (11-22-63 article in Dallas Times-Herald) “About halfway down between Houston and the underpass I heard the first shot. It sounded like a real loud firecracker. When I heard the sound, the first thing I thought about was a gunshot. I looked around and about then Governor Connally turned around and looked at the President with a real surprised look on his face…The President bent over to hear what the Governor had to say." (Only heard two shots, but he saw the President respond to the first one.)
James Chaney (11-22-63 interview on WFAA, as shown on Youtube) “We heard the first shot. I thought it was a motorcycle backfiring and uh I looked back over to my left and also President Kennedy looked back over his left shoulder." (By saying the President turned to his left after the first shot-which only happens after Kennedy had obviously been hit--Chaney suggests he was hit by the first shot.)
Roy Kellerman (12-10-63 FBI report, CD7 p.3-11) (11-22-63 FBI interview) “he advised he heard a shot and immediately turned around, looking past Governor Connally…to the President. He observed the President slump forward."
First Lady of Texas Nellie Connally (Notes written on 12-2-63, as reprinted in her book From Love Field, 2003) “then I heard a loud, terrifying noise…I turned and looked toward the President just in time to see him clutch his neck and see him sink down in his seat."
First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy (11-29-63 interview with Theodore White, notes released 5-26-95) “They were gunning the motorcycles; there were these little backfires; there was one noise like that; I thought it was a backfire. Then next I saw Connally grabbing his arm and saying no no nononono, with his fist beating—then Jack turned and I turned." (Only heard two shots, but thought her husband responded to the first one.)
So...a final tally. When one performs even a cursory review of the statements regarding the movements within the limousine at the time of the first shot, one finds that 42 of these indicated Kennedy had a reaction to the first shot. Not one indicated he just sat there waving, or looked around and resumed waving. While Agent Bennett's statement indicated that Kennedy was not hit until the second shot, he does not describe Kennedy's behavior after the first shot, so that his movements can be compared to the Zapruder film. This makes it hard to discern just when Bennett looked at Kennedy, and just how accurate are his recollections. Even if one includes Bennett as a firm witness for a first shot miss, however, and arbitrarily dismisses the statements of those hearing only two shots under the assumption they failed to hear the first shot, and the statements of those claiming the first shot was the head shot under the assumption their recollections are just not credible, the score remains 23-1 in favor of statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one hit, vs. statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one missed. Unless someone can come up with a reason why all these witnesses were wrong while Bennett, who was not even asked to testify to clarify his statements, was right, the evidence is overwhelming that the first shot hit.
Pat,
That is some good stuff right there!
-
Now I get it Mikey....
You don't actually want to hear anything, you simply want to argue.
Simply want to stay wrapped up in the minutia and xxxxx....
Brennan did not ID Oswald... you can understand that statement, right?
Please post ANYTHING CONSIDERED EVIDENCE that identifies LHO in the window shooting a rifle,
then we can move forward.
If you can't do that there's really no point in discussing this with you.
finally, if we are going to use testimony as "documentation", testimony without cross-examination, then you MUST accept
all the testimony. Do we also have to show you the statements of all the witnesses that place shots coming from the GK???
Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had any kind of a scope on it?
Mr. BRENNAN. I did not observe a scope.
Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had one? Do you know whether it did or not, or could you observe that it definitely did or definitely did not, or don't you know?
Mr. BRENNAN. I do not know if it had a scope or not.
{He can tell the hieght and weight of a man 6 stories up, kneeling at a window and see MOST of the rifle but cannot testify to seeing a scope or offer positive ID to the DPD or SS... uh, okay. If anything this helps prove that the rifle used was NOT the 6.5 MC that had a scope on it... but then again some witnesses do see a scope}
Mr. BELIN. I believe you said you thought the man was standing. What do you believe was the position of the people on the fifth floor that you saw--standing or sitting?
Mr. BRENNAN. I thought they were standing with their elbows on the window sill leaning out.
Mr. BELIN. At the time you saw this man on the sixth floor, how much of the man could you see?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, I could see at one time he came to the window and he sat sideways on the window sill. That was previous to President Kennedy getting there. And I could see practically his whole body, from his hips up. But at the time that he was firing the gun, a possibility from his belt up.
Mr. BELIN. How much of the gun do you believe that you saw?
Mr. BRENNAN. I calculate 70 to 85 percent of the gun.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know what direction the gun was pointing.
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. And what direction was the gun pointing when you saw it?
Mr. BRENNAN. At somewhat 30 degrees downward and west by south.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know down what street it was pointing?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes. Down Elm Street toward the railroad underpasses.
Mr. BELIN. Now, up to the time of the shots, did you observe anything else that you have not told us about here that you can think of right now?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, not of any importance. I don't remember anything else except--
Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. BRENNAN. Positively two. I do not recall a second shot--
Mr. BELIN. By a second shot, you mean a middle shot between the time you heard the first noise and the last noise?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes; that is right. I don't know what made me think that there was firecrackers throwed out of the Book Store unless I did hear the second shot, because I positively thought the first shot was a backfire, and subconsciously must have heard a second shot, but I do not recall it. I could not swear to it.
Mr. BELIN. Could you describe the man you saw in the window on the sixth floor?
Mr. BRENNAN. To my best description, a man in his early thirties, fair complexion, slender but neat, neat slender, possibly 5-foot 10.
Mr. BELIN. About what weight?
Mr. BRENNAN. Oh, at--I calculated, I think, from 160 to 170 pounds.
Here's your FAIR complexion, 5'10" 170 lb man
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/pdf/WH26_CE_3002.pdf
Autopsy - 5'9" 150lb
Careful there Davey your common sense is showing.
I could sure give the GK shot more weight if you could offer some physical evidence of it happening. So please add that to the list of things you are uselessly yammering about, but can not prove.
Brennans own words:
"I felt even more angry and betrayed. I hadn’t agreed to make an identification to the local authorities. I knew that there were ways my identity could become known though the leaks in the police department and I didn’t want any part of it. I knew that they had Oswald on enough charges that he wasn’t going anyplace. He had been charged with resisting arrest and carrying a firearm without a permit. There was overwhelming evidence that he had killed Officer Tippit and so my identification in that moment wasn’t absolutely necessary. If they needed me later, I knew I could identify him."
So you accept what some witness tells a researcher who you cant even remember, but disregard the words right from the horses mouth?
So.....are you going to support any of your positions with anything resembling evidence at all?
I get a kick out of kooks like you who cherry pick without evidence and then try to use some little tidbit to prove a point.
Here is your list again in case you've lost it:
That people were killed for saying more than 3 shots.
That the paraffin tests clear Oswald.
That Brennan never identified Oswald.
That the Carcano was crap.
That there were 38 auto shells at the Tippit killing.
Quit trying to squirm out of it and give us what you have in the way of evidence. I'm betting you don't have anything other than a wild imagination.
-
I agree with you Mike, I dont like it at all, but once you get used to it it wont be that bad, I used 6 different forums and every one is different
I did really like the old (as in one day old lol) ED forum format, it was easy to use and nice on the eyes
Eh, its no bother to me really I dont post here much anyhow. This forum has really changed in the last couple years. Seriously going down hill.
-
I hate change just as much as the next guy
But this happened to the forum im a Mod at, and after a month or so u forget abiut the old format once you get used to the new
This format is horrid. It looks aweful and is odd to use.
-
My pleasure Mike... when I say something I like to have the evidence to back it.
WHY he doesn't put his name to an identification is of no consequence Mike. He doesn't.
Everything you've quoted is, once again, hearsay... Brennan's story.
And he does this on front of Sorrells, he has his chance to ID Oswald for a Federal agent and doesn't.
If you're going to believe people for what they say... a citizen to boot, why not believe an experience police officer Roger Craig?
Because his story does not jive with what you believe are the facts... never mind how much substantiation is offered.
Please post an actual piece of evidence that shows Brennan identifies Oswald at any time - and that Roger Craig DID NOT SEE OSWALD
get into a station wagon....
And "they" didn't kill people FOR identifying Oswald,
people were killed for NOT, for saying MORE than 3 shoots were fired, that shots were fired from the GK.
So let me get this right. You discredit Brennan as hearsay, and just a few posts ago try to sell me some "facts" based on what a witness told a researcher? Even though the words are from the man's own book?
Your kidding me right? Is this what you call research?
Classic CT cherry picking.
Now that is funny!
Since you like to have the evidence to support your statements, how about supporting these:
That people were killed for saying more than 3 shots.
That the paraffin tests clear Oswald.
That Brennan never identified Oswald.
That the Carcano was crap.
That there were 38 auto shells at the Tippit killing.
Can you offer anything in the way of evidence to support any of this?
Ill be waiting.
-
Mike
I'll answer tha more fully in about an hour when I get home.
What I will say is that Rowland says he saw the "negro" at the window 5 minutes before the motorcade went past him on Houston Street. If the motorcade was 5 minutes off schedule I'd imagine that the sniper was up there waiting although Rowland doesn't place them in the window at the same time. His description of the shooter somewhat matches Brennan's meaning he was wearing light clothing and was in his early 30's.
You're right testimony is documentation. However, I'd like to see the records of the DPD that prove that Brennan attended a line-up. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I do know they didn't delve into Brennan's background the way they did Rowlands so obviously Rowlands was certainly a hostile witness to the commission.
Laters
Lee
P.S. I meant it when I said I never want you on a Jury if I'm ever prosecuted!!
I would think you would want someone who would follow the evidence without prejudice. That's exactly what I do. Thats why I dont support the WC nor the CT crowd.
I think BJ just posted a doc that might help ya.
I knew this card existed Mike and I knew Brennan's name was added to the bottom saying that he "also" attended this line-up. The document reaks.
Now read his testimony that you place so much importance on. How many people did Brennan say were in his line-up?
Lee
Why would the card reak? Its actually irrelevant to anything. Testimony is documentation enough.
-
Mike
I'll answer tha more fully in about an hour when I get home.
What I will say is that Rowland says he saw the "negro" at the window 5 minutes before the motorcade went past him on Houston Street. If the motorcade was 5 minutes off schedule I'd imagine that the sniper was up there waiting although Rowland doesn't place them in the window at the same time. His description of the shooter somewhat matches Brennan's meaning he was wearing light clothing and was in his early 30's.
You're right testimony is documentation. However, I'd like to see the records of the DPD that prove that Brennan attended a line-up. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I do know they didn't delve into Brennan's background the way they did Rowlands so obviously Rowlands was certainly a hostile witness to the commission.
Laters
Lee
P.S. I meant it when I said I never want you on a Jury if I'm ever prosecuted!!
I would think you would want someone who would follow the evidence without prejudice. That's exactly what I do. Thats why I dont support the WC nor the CT crowd.
I think BJ just posted a doc that might help ya.
-
Working on a reply - The document above is EVIDENCE that Mr. Brennan does not ID LHO as the assassin.
More to come....
DJ
Yep sure does prove he failed to identify, on 11/22/63.
However this proves WHY, and gives a positive ID. There is no doubt about that!
"I felt even more angry and betrayed. I hadn’t agreed to make an identification to the local authorities. I knew that there were ways my identity could become known though the leaks in the police department and I didn’t want any part of it. I knew that they had Oswald on enough charges that he wasn’t going anyplace. He had been charged with resisting arrest and carrying a firearm without a permit. There was overwhelming evidence that he had killed Officer Tippit and so my identification in that moment wasn’t absolutely necessary. If they needed me later, I knew I could identify him."
Oswald on a platter no matter how you look at it!
However thanks for the doc on Brennan.
-
<!--quoteo(post=194686:date=Jun 8 2010, 07:46 AM:name=Lee Farley)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lee Farley @ Jun 8 2010, 07:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194686"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=194678:date=Jun 8 2010, 12:03 PM:name=Mike Williams)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mike Williams @ Jun 8 2010, 12:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194678"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=194671:date=Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM:name=Lee Farley)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lee Farley @ Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194671"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mike
Let's go through these one by one and put something, worth reading, together.
Question 1.
Do you, or DVP, have any proof that Howard Brennan actually attended a line-up to identify Oswald? Your response seems to focus on Brennan being put under pressure by the DPD to make the identification. The reason Brennan sites as to initially failing to make the ID of Oswald was because he thought the assassination was a "communist conspiracy" and he was frightened for his family's safety. But seeing as how you talk about fundamentals, let's go to the fundamentals.
<b>Can you please show for us the documented proof that Brennan actually attended a line-up?</b>
We'll head to question 2 once we've successfully navigated this one...
Lee<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sure thing,
A quote from Brennan's Book:
"The officer walked over to me sticking out his hand to shake. He greeted me by name and I knew if he knew who I was and what my connection with the case was, then others must know. He asked me, “Does the second man from the left look most like the man you saw?” He was talking about Oswald and I knew what he wanted me to say."
Second man from the left. Sounds like a line up to me. It also appears in his WC testimony.
Mike
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So, your evidence is Brennan's say so?
Do you have any "documents" that would prove to a Court and a Jury that Brennan attended a line-up?
Lee
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I would say his testimony would be enough. We also have his affidavits, sworn testimony. I should think that would stand up.
Are you actually telling me that sworn testimony is not evidence that can be evaluated?
Is it normal police procedure in your country to keep records of people who have attended line-ups Mike?
If so, can you point me in the direction of Howard Brennan's line-up records please? Reports from the officers conducting it? Time, date, names and statisitics of the people who were in the line-up? Photographs of the the people used during the line-up?
I don't accept Howard Brennan's testimony as being truthful. You know, the way you don't believe Roger Craig's testimony? If testimony is good enough for you why don't you, or the likes of DVP, believe what Craig said to the Warren Commission? Or perhaps Arnold Rowland's testimony of seeing an elderly black man on the sixth floor at the same time?
If there were half a dozen others who backed up Brennan's statements and testimony then I'd agree with you and let the records slide. Unfortunately, there aren't half a dozen others. There's ONLY Brennan. He's the only one your side has got. The only one. Amos Euins doesn't help your cause much. Rowland throws a spanner in the works and was shafted by the WC.
Brennan said in his affidavit that the man who was shooting was wearing light coloured clothing and was in his early 30's. Is this truthful? He said the man he saw wasn't in a hurry to leave the snipers nest. Is this truthful? He said he saw the whole barrel of the rifle but didn't see a scope. Is this truthful? He said he saw the shooter from the waist up. Is this truthful?
I'd really like you to back up his testimony with some solid evidence of him having attended a line-up with Oswald. If not, then forget him as a witness...because I don't believe he EVER attended a line-up.
If you were on a jury, would you expect to see this sort of stuff? If not, I hope to God I never end up being prosecuted for something and see you sitting there looking at me...
Regards
Lee
Lee,
Can you please show me when Rowland saw BOTH men at the same time? He never said that at all, so why would you conjure up such a thing? And while your at it, please support that with documentation. Surely Police where you come from would have kept records of such a thing!
The difference between Brennan and Craig should be obvious to you. The fact that it is not, is disturbing and would seriously make me question your ability to examine evidence.
But one thing at a time, and how about those Documents for Rowland? I hope you can find some!
I'll trade you them for Brennan's Mike...
...apologies for some slight mistakes I'm making but I'm in work and sneaking these posts in during breaks. I hope you don't hold them against me but I'll make sure I reply more fully when I get home.
Lee,
Sorry to derail, but I have a message for you.
Would you do me a favor?
If possible, let Lee F., (member
of both forums) know at the
education forum, I have on file
a photo of Robert Brown with
Sturgis and de Joseph per his
thread.
If he is interested he can
contact me directly at
johnw291@yahoo.com
I'm not allowed to post at that forum.
johnw
Mike
-
<!--quoteo(post=194686:date=Jun 8 2010, 07:46 AM:name=Lee Farley)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lee Farley @ Jun 8 2010, 07:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194686"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=194678:date=Jun 8 2010, 12:03 PM:name=Mike Williams)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mike Williams @ Jun 8 2010, 12:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194678"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=194671:date=Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM:name=Lee Farley)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lee Farley @ Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194671"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mike
Let's go through these one by one and put something, worth reading, together.
Question 1.
Do you, or DVP, have any proof that Howard Brennan actually attended a line-up to identify Oswald? Your response seems to focus on Brennan being put under pressure by the DPD to make the identification. The reason Brennan sites as to initially failing to make the ID of Oswald was because he thought the assassination was a "communist conspiracy" and he was frightened for his family's safety. But seeing as how you talk about fundamentals, let's go to the fundamentals.
<b>Can you please show for us the documented proof that Brennan actually attended a line-up?</b>
We'll head to question 2 once we've successfully navigated this one...
Lee<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sure thing,
A quote from Brennan's Book:
"The officer walked over to me sticking out his hand to shake. He greeted me by name and I knew if he knew who I was and what my connection with the case was, then others must know. He asked me, “Does the second man from the left look most like the man you saw?” He was talking about Oswald and I knew what he wanted me to say."
Second man from the left. Sounds like a line up to me. It also appears in his WC testimony.
Mike
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So, your evidence is Brennan's say so?
Do you have any "documents" that would prove to a Court and a Jury that Brennan attended a line-up?
Lee
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I would say his testimony would be enough. We also have his affidavits, sworn testimony. I should think that would stand up.
Are you actually telling me that sworn testimony is not evidence that can be evaluated?
Is it normal police procedure in your country to keep records of people who have attended line-ups Mike?
If so, can you point me in the direction of Howard Brennan's line-up records please? Reports from the officers conducting it? Time, date, names and statisitics of the people who were in the line-up? Photographs of the the people used during the line-up?
I don't accept Howard Brennan's testimony as being truthful. You know, the way you don't believe Roger Craig's testimony? If testimony is good enough for you why don't you, or the likes of DVP, believe what Craig said to the Warren Commission? Or perhaps Arnold Rowland's testimony of seeing an elderly black man on the sixth floor at the same time?
If there were half a dozen others who backed up Brennan's statements and testimony then I'd agree with you and let the records slide. Unfortunately, there aren't half a dozen others. There's ONLY Brennan. He's the only one your side has got. The only one. Amos Euins doesn't help your cause much. Rowland throws a spanner in the works and was shafted by the WC.
Brennan said in his affidavit that the man who was shooting was wearing light coloured clothing and was in his early 30's. Is this truthful? He said the man he saw wasn't in a hurry to leave the snipers nest. Is this truthful? He said he saw the whole barrel of the rifle but didn't see a scope. Is this truthful? He said he saw the shooter from the waist up. Is this truthful?
I'd really like you to back up his testimony with some solid evidence of him having attended a line-up with Oswald. If not, then forget him as a witness...because I don't believe he EVER attended a line-up.
If you were on a jury, would you expect to see this sort of stuff? If not, I hope to God I never end up being prosecuted for something and see you sitting there looking at me...
Regards
Lee
Lee,
Can you please show me when Rowland saw BOTH men at the same time? He never said that at all, so why would you conjure up such a thing? And while your at it, please support that with documentation. Surely Police where you come from would have kept records of such a thing!
The difference between Brennan and Craig should be obvious to you. The fact that it is not, is disturbing and would seriously make me question your ability to examine evidence.
But one thing at a time, and how about those Documents for Rowland? I hope you can find some!
I'll trade you them for Brennan's Mike...
...apologies for some slight mistakes I'm making but I'm in work and sneaking these posts in during breaks. I hope you don't hold them against me but I'll make sure I reply more fully when I get home.
Lee,
No worries on the slight mistakes, I make my share for sure.
The point I was making is testimony IS documentation. That's why they keep records of such. Interestingly enough, I am sure there is a document that says Brennan did not id Oswald, otherwise why would the WC have known to ask him about it?
However if you strike Brennan for lack of documentation, then you will have to so the same for Rowland and many others.
Point is testimony IS documentation.
By the way, if you dont mind my asking, how long have you been researching the assassination, and what is your particular area of interest?
-
<!--quoteo(post=194678:date=Jun 8 2010, 01:03 PM:name=Mike Williams)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mike Williams @ Jun 8 2010, 01:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194678"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=194671:date=Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM:name=Lee Farley)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lee Farley @ Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194671"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mike
Let's go through these one by one and put something, worth reading, together.
Question 1.
Do you, or DVP, have any proof that Howard Brennan actually attended a line-up to identify Oswald? Your response seems to focus on Brennan being put under pressure by the DPD to make the identification. The reason Brennan sites as to initially failing to make the ID of Oswald was because he thought the assassination was a "communist conspiracy" and he was frightened for his family's safety. But seeing as how you talk about fundamentals, let's go to the fundamentals.
<b>Can you please show for us the documented proof that Brennan actually attended a line-up?</b>
We'll head to question 2 once we've successfully navigated this one...
Lee<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sure thing,
A quote from Brennan's Book:
"The officer walked over to me sticking out his hand to shake. He greeted me by name and I knew if he knew who I was and what my connection with the case was, then others must know. He asked me, "Does the second man from the left look most like the man you saw?" He was talking about Oswald and I knew what he wanted me to say."
Second man from the left. Sounds like a line up to me. It also appears in his WC testimony.
Mike
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That wasn't a leading question for the officer to ask, was it Mike?
And Brennan said that the man in the Sixth Floor Sniper that he saw wasn't in a hurry, and stood back and took it all in for a moment, and therefor didn't run down the stairs right away, and was most probably the same person that Amos saw, the Sniper with the pattern baldness (not Oswald), and the same person that the court clerk saw three to four minutes later moving around in the Sniper's Nest Window (not Oswald).
BK
Bill,
What an ignorant question to ask Brennan, I agree. The potential to have excluded such a witness, by doing just such a thing is crazy.
Unfortunately for you most of that testimony had to be taken with a grain of salt. Or at the very least considered very carefully. We all know how unreliable witness testimony is, and of witness testimony look at the statistics on timing and time recall. So for someone to say they saw them 3-4 minutes later, in reality it could have been seconds. Brennan as well fits this in saying the man hung out and was in no hurry. I am rather surprised you would put as much stock into this as you seem to.
Mike
-
<!--quoteo(post=194686:date=Jun 8 2010, 07:46 AM:name=Lee Farley)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lee Farley @ Jun 8 2010, 07:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194686"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=194678:date=Jun 8 2010, 12:03 PM:name=Mike Williams)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mike Williams @ Jun 8 2010, 12:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194678"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=194671:date=Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM:name=Lee Farley)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lee Farley @ Jun 8 2010, 02:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=194671"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Mike
Let's go through these one by one and put something, worth reading, together.
Question 1.
Do you, or DVP, have any proof that Howard Brennan actually attended a line-up to identify Oswald? Your response seems to focus on Brennan being put under pressure by the DPD to make the identification. The reason Brennan sites as to initially failing to make the ID of Oswald was because he thought the assassination was a "communist conspiracy" and he was frightened for his family's safety. But seeing as how you talk about fundamentals, let's go to the fundamentals.
<b>Can you please show for us the documented proof that Brennan actually attended a line-up?</b>
We'll head to question 2 once we've successfully navigated this one...
Lee<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sure thing,
A quote from Brennan's Book:
"The officer walked over to me sticking out his hand to shake. He greeted me by name and I knew if he knew who I was and what my connection with the case was, then others must know. He asked me, “Does the second man from the left look most like the man you saw?” He was talking about Oswald and I knew what he wanted me to say."
Second man from the left. Sounds like a line up to me. It also appears in his WC testimony.
Mike
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So, your evidence is Brennan's say so?
Do you have any "documents" that would prove to a Court and a Jury that Brennan attended a line-up?
Lee
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I would say his testimony would be enough. We also have his affidavits, sworn testimony. I should think that would stand up.
Are you actually telling me that sworn testimony is not evidence that can be evaluated?
Is it normal police procedure in your country to keep records of people who have attended line-ups Mike?
If so, can you point me in the direction of Howard Brennan's line-up records please? Reports from the officers conducting it? Time, date, names and statisitics of the people who were in the line-up? Photographs of the the people used during the line-up?
I don't accept Howard Brennan's testimony as being truthful. You know, the way you don't believe Roger Craig's testimony? If testimony is good enough for you why don't you, or the likes of DVP, believe what Craig said to the Warren Commission? Or perhaps Arnold Rowland's testimony of seeing an elderly black man on the sixth floor at the same time?
If there were half a dozen others who backed up Brennan's statements and testimony then I'd agree with you and let the records slide. Unfortunately, there aren't half a dozen others. There's ONLY Brennan. He's the only one your side has got. The only one. Amos Euins doesn't help your cause much. Rowland throws a spanner in the works and was shafted by the WC.
Brennan said in his affidavit that the man who was shooting was wearing light coloured clothing and was in his early 30's. Is this truthful? He said the man he saw wasn't in a hurry to leave the snipers nest. Is this truthful? He said he saw the whole barrel of the rifle but didn't see a scope. Is this truthful? He said he saw the shooter from the waist up. Is this truthful?
I'd really like you to back up his testimony with some solid evidence of him having attended a line-up with Oswald. If not, then forget him as a witness...because I don't believe he EVER attended a line-up.
If you were on a jury, would you expect to see this sort of stuff? If not, I hope to God I never end up being prosecuted for something and see you sitting there looking at me...
Regards
Lee
Lee,
Can you please show me when Rowland saw BOTH men at the same time? He never said that at all, so why would you conjure up such a thing? And while your at it, please support that with documentation. Surely Police where you come from would have kept records of such a thing!
The difference between Brennan and Craig should be obvious to you. The fact that it is not, is disturbing and would seriously make me question your ability to examine evidence.
But one thing at a time, and how about those Documents for Rowland? I hope you can find some!
-
Mike
Let's go through these one by one and put something, worth reading, together.
Question 1.
Do you, or DVP, have any proof that Howard Brennan actually attended a line-up to identify Oswald? Your response seems to focus on Brennan being put under pressure by the DPD to make the identification. The reason Brennan sites as to initially failing to make the ID of Oswald was because he thought the assassination was a "communist conspiracy" and he was frightened for his family's safety. But seeing as how you talk about fundamentals, let's go to the fundamentals.
Can you please show for us the documented proof that Brennan actually attended a line-up?
We'll head to question 2 once we've successfully navigated this one...
Lee
Sure thing,
A quote from Brennan's Book:
"The officer walked over to me sticking out his hand to shake. He greeted me by name and I knew if he knew who I was and what my connection with the case was, then others must know. He asked me, “Does the second man from the left look most like the man you saw?” He was talking about Oswald and I knew what he wanted me to say."
Second man from the left. Sounds like a line up to me. It also appears in his WC testimony.
Mike
So, your evidence is Brennan's say so?
Do you have any "documents" that would prove to a Court and a Jury that Brennan attended a line-up?
Lee
Well I would say his testimony would be enough. We also have his affidavits, sworn testimony. I should think that would stand up.
Are you actually telling me that sworn testimony is not evidence that can be evaluated?
-
By the way Bill, glad ya like the ballistics stuff, I got a whopper coming up for you on the scope. Turns out it was not defective at the time of the shooting and was in fact sighted in rather well!
Mike
When did the person who used it on the Sixth Floor have a chance to sight the scope Mike? Given the timeframes we have?
Lee
Oh and P.S.
Mike Williams: "I have far more respect for that than I do the "Oswald is innocent at all cost" crowd, who lack any credible common sense at all."
That would include me. A bit insulting. Don't you think?
Lee,
That's rather odd. I myself would not have placed you into that group. While I do know you think the man was innocent, I have not as yet read anything that was ridiculous nor outlandish from you, in an attempt to make the point. This is what I mean when I say the "Oswald innocent at all cost" faction.
I am unsure what you mean by "chance to sight in the scope". It could have been done long in advance. There was no need, near as I can tell, for Oswald to have removed the scope from the rifle. As long as he did not remove it, then the scope/barrel relationship would remain intact.
Mike
Mike,
I don't understand your definition "...at all costs" then? If he's guilty then he's guilty and if he's innocent then he's innocent.
I don't just feel that he's innocent, I KNOW that he innocent and I'll fight that corner "...at all costs."
The rifle; if "whoever" sighted the scope prior to placing it in the non-existent "brown bag", that would have been too small for the damn thing even if it did exist according to BWL's testimony, are you saying that on the back seat of Frazier's old truck there was no chance that it would have moved slightly? I'm sure the suspension on the piece of junk that Frazier drove was about as good as its engine.
Lee
Lee,
I have no doubt you would defend what you believe. But would you do so at the cost of common sense and your own integrity? Of course not. I have read some of the most outlandish trash from many who have, and do. I do not place you in that crowd.
Back to the scope.
How can you be "sure" of the suspension? What do you base this on? Frazier had a car, best I recall, not a truck.
At any rate. If this were the case and the scope had been misaligned at the time of the assassination, then how did the FBI manage to shoot groups like this only 5 days later? How did they manage to do so with an average time of 6 seconds for 3 shooters?
-
Mike
Let's go through these one by one and put something, worth reading, together.
Question 1.
Do you, or DVP, have any proof that Howard Brennan actually attended a line-up to identify Oswald? Your response seems to focus on Brennan being put under pressure by the DPD to make the identification. The reason Brennan sites as to initially failing to make the ID of Oswald was because he thought the assassination was a "communist conspiracy" and he was frightened for his family's safety. But seeing as how you talk about fundamentals, let's go to the fundamentals.
Can you please show for us the documented proof that Brennan actually attended a line-up?
We'll head to question 2 once we've successfully navigated this one...
Lee
Sure thing,
A quote from Brennan's Book:
"The officer walked over to me sticking out his hand to shake. He greeted me by name and I knew if he knew who I was and what my connection with the case was, then others must know. He asked me, “Does the second man from the left look most like the man you saw?” He was talking about Oswald and I knew what he wanted me to say."
Second man from the left. Sounds like a line up to me. It also appears in his WC testimony.
Mike
-
By the way Bill, glad ya like the ballistics stuff, I got a whopper coming up for you on the scope. Turns out it was not defective at the time of the shooting and was in fact sighted in rather well!
Mike
When did the person who used it on the Sixth Floor have a chance to sight the scope Mike? Given the timeframes we have?
Lee
Oh and P.S.
Mike Williams: "I have far more respect for that than I do the "Oswald is innocent at all cost" crowd, who lack any credible common sense at all."
That would include me. A bit insulting. Don't you think?
Lee,
That's rather odd. I myself would not have placed you into that group. While I do know you think the man was innocent, I have not as yet read anything that was ridiculous nor outlandish from you, in an attempt to make the point. This is what I mean when I say the "Oswald innocent at all cost" faction.
I am unsure what you mean by "chance to sight in the scope". It could have been done long in advance. There was no need, near as I can tell, for Oswald to have removed the scope from the rifle. As long as he did not remove it, then the scope/barrel relationship would remain intact.
Mike
-
Very grateful, Mike. Thank you.
John,
Anything for you buddy!
Mike
-
Thank you Mike. So B dropped them again? (and did other interesting things, apparently). Presumably they were fingerprinted?
So, what is the ejection (MC) pattern? I know the investigation checked this, but what does an independent verification say? (I think it's important to angle the rifle according to suggested shots.)
Its a large pattern John. So large in variance that I am positive all 3 of my rifles would replicate it.
I can look into this a bit and let you know.
My buddy Colin did a study on this and I think I can get some diagrams from him.
Mike
-
Bill,....What is the issue here?
Mike, you are the issue for using the forum to attack Robert Harris and to announce your attack in the head of the thread. Who is Tom Foolery? He's in the headline next to Robert Harris and CE399? And then you point out that he got one thing wrong in his film and you call it a fabrication. It is only a fabrication if he knew it was wrong ahead of time and I don't think he did, and since he's now been corrected, we all know it is Fritz's
initials upside down.
Evidence is not about Bob Harris or David Von Pein, its about the envelope, who had possession of the envelop, and what's in it. Now if we can weigh a postage stamp, why can't we weigh a few bullet fragments - all four of them, or both of them, and what happened to the whole bullet? That was different than CE399 wasn't it? And what did Nurse Bell tell the HSCA and ARRB about it?
And someone is misrepresenting you - David Von Pein - he's the one misrepresenting the truth in this case and he should not even be mentioned in any serious research, especially in regards to any ballistics that you want to be considered at all. The bottom line is the evidence, and not those who misrepresent it - like Von Pein. I don't know Robert Harris, but anybody who can sturr the displeasure of DVP is a friend of mine.
Bill Kelly
Bill,
I would say the same thing to someone I could not hold my own with. I have an idea, why dont you debate DVP there Bill? Im sure it would be very informative lol
Mike, you're good with guns and ballistics, but not so good when you try to put the guns in Oswald's hands, as your bias slips in.
As for debating DVP, there's nothing to debate. He would have to continually check with his hero's bible Bugliosi's Reclaiming History, which he tells us was originaly going to be called Final Verdict, but they can't seem to put the final nail in Oswald's coffin.
It's easy to follow the planted evidence that frames Oswald The Patsy, but as soon as you latch on to it, you're distracted long enough to let the real assassins slip away.
DVP would never come here to join in the debate for the same reasons Dale Myers and the rest of those YoYos won't, because they would be exposed for what they are.
Just read his gushing review of Bugliosi:
http://blogs.myspace.com/davidvp1961
DVP makes a nice summary for those who can't take the time to read the whole thing, but in the course of chasing Ozzie the Rabbit into the Maze, Bugliosi falls back on Capt. Fritz, the man on the scene - and like all suit and tie prosecutors, the Bug must rely on the cops to make his case. And they do. And read the Bug saying how great the Dallas PD were, especially Capt. Fritz, in putting the case against Oswald together so quickly. Ah yes, Captain Fritz. Fritz the Cat on the trail of Ozzie the Rabbit, right off the bat.
And DVP wonders how Conspiracy Theorists can imagine Capt. Fritz as part of any conspiracy, by golly, that's rediculious.
All Fritz has to do is go up to the Sixth Floor at about 1 PM, and within fifteen minutes he has the three shells in hand, the rifle by the strap, and Oswald's name is given to him by Truly, so what else does he need to go on? He then heads back to his office, after stopping by to pay his respects to his old good buddy Sheriff Wild Bill Decker, and by the time gets to homicide there's Oswald sitting right there in a chair waiting for him. And then the White House calls and says "You have your man."
Yea, whose calling the shots here?
The investigation is over.
We're going to debate DVP, Bugliosi and Myers et al by solving the crime and exposing the conspiracy before their 10 part TV show comes out, and that will end the debates once and for all.
The Final Verdict is not yet in.
BK
I appreciate you mentioning my work. I do put much into it.
The point of my initial post was to share a good laugh, nothing more. The only reason I quoted DVP, beside the fact that I like the guy, is because he was the one who found Harris moronic blunder. I would have loved to have found that.
I really dont understand why the CT side has such an issue with DVP, except that he makes most look like fools. I dont agree with him on many issues, but for the most part he is a hell of a good resource. I have far more respect for that than I do the "Oswald is innocent at all cost" crowd, who lack any credible common sense at all.
Now were one to dig into Harris video, I am sure more blunders would be found. Frankly Bob bores me. His theories are so ridiculous, that they are just a bump above James Files.
By the way Bill, glad ya like the ballistics stuff, I got a whopper coming up for you on the scope. Turns out it was not defective at the time of the shooting and was in fact sighted in rather well!
Mike
-
'' People who murder with revolvers generally don't hang around long enough to eject the shells. ''
Mike, or anyone, ok it's a revolver. Why in this instance were the shells ejected?
Also, what would be the expected trajectory, velocity, of an improperly ejected cartridge (MC), ditto properly? (MC angled down)
John,
Not sure what you mean by "improperly ejected" are you talking short cycle like I mentioned earlier?
I suspect he may have ejected the shells to reload. The man just shot the President, and a Dallas cop and was effecting an escape. Id reload too.
Yes, the short cycled one, thank you, Mike.
OK, would you reload on the spot after giving the coup de' gras or run and reload?
Who is the first to note the ejected shells, presumably by swivelling the revolving bit and pointing gun up on the spot? Did anyone see this happen?
John,
A short cycle is cleared just like any other round, simply pull the bolt back. Ejection patter would be the same.
Yes there was one man who saw him eject the shells from the pistol. Benevides (sp?)
There may have been more, but I recall him saying he picked them up. This is a strong indication that the officer who made the "auto" statement did not pick them up and made his statement based on the fact that he could see them on the ground, just as if an auto had fired them.
Mike
-
Mikey -
Reading thru this thread all we find is you once again copy/pasting someone elses words, thoughts conclusions with not a single one of your own..
my mistake, you do tell us how much a stamp weighs.
You DONT address the issue of CE399 being a complete fabrication and only defer to the person you stole from - DVP...
Mike Williams
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 769
Joined: 31-October 07
From DVP,
DVP said exactly:"You can't prove any initials were "erased". You just want to believe that. And even if something was erased, you can't prove that such action was conspiratorial in nature. Can you, Bob?" --- DVP; 05/19/10
So lets see.
In Harris theory the initials of Bell, turn out to be that of Fritz when turned over!
Hilariously stupid error in my book
You can insult real well, you can condemn others using what yet a third person wrote... but when it comes to posting something from your own little mind the best you have is "stupid error" and more quotes from your mentor DVP.
How about YOU debating with Bill - bring SOMETHING to the table beyond "DVP said...."
are you not able to formulate your own opinions and back them with your own research and your own illustrations and your own conclusions?
As you so eloquently posted
Time to put up or SHUT UP... or maybe you can have DVP write you a note - say you have a doctor's appointment or your dog ate your homework
Speaking of parroting, your replies to me in the other thread are far from original. Do you ever do any of your own work, or do you just gobble up what others feed you?
-
'' People who murder with revolvers generally don't hang around long enough to eject the shells. ''
Mike, or anyone, ok it's a revolver. Why in this instance were the shells ejected?
Also, what would be the expected trajectory, velocity, of an improperly ejected cartridge (MC), ditto properly? (MC angled down)
John,
Not sure what you mean by "improperly ejected" are you talking short cycle like I mentioned earlier?
I suspect he may have ejected the shells to reload. The man just shot the President, and a Dallas cop and was effecting an escape. Id reload too.
Robert Harris and the CE399 Tom Foolery!
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Lee,
Actually they were firing the rifle to test if for accuracy "as is". It shot remarkably well. I do not think at this point they were trying to recreate the event.
I appreciate your honesty about the assumption, I wish more were as forthright as you are.
My military rifle and scope rode in my hummer for days , and I had little concern for its accuracy. However, I also was very careful to make sure it was secure and unharmed.
Mike