Larry Hancock

The one rule that is almost always in play is that weapons are selected based on the total mission...in Dallas that would include not only the selected shooting positions but the other aspects of the plan as a whole, including moving people in and out, the sources of the weapons used (in case something goes wrong and people are captured or their weapons recovered) and some sort of continuity with the overall intent i.e. who was to take the blame for the attack. To some extent that also applies to the selection of the personnel - especially in the event something does go bad.

I'll leave two comments in one post....on the first for Robert, the image you show of a something being picked up and put in someone's pocket represents a totally lost piece of evidence, it was never officially recorded or described. I've talked to the member of a family who also observed what they thought was a bullet strike in the grass in that area, near a manhole. They notified police and we know an officer directed crime scene personnel over there - there is a photo of a CSI kit in the area with the photo angled back towards the TSBD. However what they did or did not find appears in no report. As to Special Forces weapons, certainly, no disagreement there. On the other hand covert and deniable operations as conducted by the CIA spent huge sums of money on obtained foreign sources weapons not traceable to US involvement or in other instances, as with Cuba, using commercially obtained weapons - the major point being deniablity and maintaining the image that conventional forces forces were not involved in the action. All of that looks sort of silly now but it was SOP in the fifties and early sixties. Ron, as you say, caching a weapon would make perfect sense and has been standard practice in assaults in "denied" assaults where the shooters would be visible and immediately under suspicion by an aroused public/security force after the attack. Bringing a hunting rifle into Dallas would be one thing, leaving with it after the shooting would be another. We even have FBI report which mentions a several individuals with a rifle in the Plaza area days before the shooting - the only reason it was reported was somebody thought they might actually be doing "target practice". We know cars were not searched in either knoll parking lot, we know the list of tag numbers disappeared. We know nothing was really searched that much in the TSBD after the rifle was found (no shipping crates opened) and no other buildings were searched. Caching and recovering the weapons would have been easy...especially if your plan calls for a suspicious weapon to be planted where it is quickly and easily recovered. I can't prove any of that but it once again it would be SOP in a truly organized and planned assault. Only lone nuts abandon their weapon at the scene of the shooting where they actually work and then claim total innocence...sigh.

You got it with an "I don't know"....I don't, what I will say is that if you go with a scenario that points the attack towards a conspiracy and particularly towards Cuba and Castro it would be best not to go too exotic....also it minimizes the risk to your shooters to not be carrying something that would be out of place on a street or parking lot in Dallas Texas....and good hunting rifles would fit that profile. Same works if the shooter is caching a weapon for later recovery. Introducing something else, or any weapon that forces you to get up to close to your target, increases the risk and puts the plan at more risks by last minute changes to the security screen....distance is good if your shooters are up to it. We also know that historically the Secret Service was sensitized towards pistol attacks and to up close threats, not to longer range attacks.

A couple of guys that went to work for Werbell in the years after the assassination very likely knew a good bit about what happened in Dallas...as to the rifles themselves, anything on my part would be pure guesswork - I have heard the guys involved were well pleased and proud of their achievement so claiming trophies would not be inconsistent. What we do know is that the weapons given for use in the sniper attacks planned against Castro in Cuba were high quality sporting rifles with telescopic sights. And those assaults involved one to two shooters in a very well scripted attack, one where the range was known in advance so the rifles sights could be appropriately sighted in advance. Generally speaking those rifles were in the same class as the type and caliber weapon two men tried to buy from Robert McKewon in Houston shortly before the assassination but failed. From what I've seen the rifles used would have been quality sporting/game rifles not military weapons - which would be much better for infiltration and for that matter for recovering afterwards - standard practice being to hide the weapons locally and let someone else recover it well after the fact so as to make exfiltration easier.

Actually I reference that source as well as a couple of other similar ones in my upcoming monograph - good choice. Perhaps a better choice of words on my part would have been to use "point of attack" rather than kill zone. There are are many types of paramilitary assaults which target only specific vehicles in a convoy or for that matter specific vehicles in a processions. In some instances the goal is to take captives, with minimal casualties. It all depends upon the objective - the overall tactical approach remains the same (for example multiple firing points depending on the weapons used) but the targeting changes with the objective. The objective in Dallas was to ensure a single individual died...whether or not there were back up plans that would have more dramatically expanded the targeting (say an IED) or attacks at different locations is a matter of speculation but would not be uncommon in an assault plan.

Well said Rick!

I'd also note that radio is not necessary to coordinate the shooting, it would be routine for any trained team to coordinate simply by position of the target - not that I think they were intent on disguising multiple shooters but "volley fire" is simply a more effective shooting tactic. Given the fairly restricted firing area three to four volleys would be very much in line. And if anything a physical signal - as with the umbrella - would most likely be a control over the overall attack. Umbrella up, its on, shoot per plan. Umbrella down - abort. Just speculating but there are some pretty standard infantry guide lines for ambush type attacks...including where you stage blocking points and diversions.

As per Gary's post, John Hunt's work on both the RFK and JFK assassination is amazingly detailed and remains unpublished. Fortunately Stu has a great deal of it and hopefully the public will see it one of these days....his passing was tragic, his work on RFK un-excelled in my opinion. The same is true for Gary's research, which gets nowhere near the attention it deserves.

Amazing how some of the most dedicated document researchers have escaped the list: Anna Marie Kuhns Walko Jerry Rose Gary Shaw Wallace Milam Debra Conway Malcolm Blunt Rex Bradford Bill Simpich Bob Dorff Stu Wexler .....I'm afraid a lot of the true historical work (as vs. posting) has been missed...

That's a good point David, as I understand it the NPIC operation was so deeply classified that the CIA was actually a sort of working cover for them, and indeed they operated under its umbrella while providing services to the military, DIA and the NSC staff - given their work on photo intel for the CIA its likely that affiliation explains why the briefing boards went to McCone. Its also important to recall that within a couple of weeks McCone very privately expressed that he felt their had been multiple shooters. I expect the first set of briefing boards were a fundamental shock to the system, which is why they were redone as part of the obfuscation that ensued over the weekend and why later when someone discovered the originals stashed in a store room at NPIC it drove a moment of panic until they were destroyed - as you say, Hicks totally freaked. It says something that the WC itself avoided the Z film as studiously as possible and that it did not demand a stand alone photo intel study and report from NPIC - of course given how the ballistics evaluation backfired on them I suspect that would have been the last thing Warren wanted, after all he even refused to deal with the WC conflicts with the FBI shooting study. I think Dino knew very well what he saw in those first viewing. What a thing to have on your conscience. -- definitely TMI...

I may be missing it but was there an actual written NPIC evaluation/conclusion related to the number of shots, trajectories, firing points or do we just have the numerical notes and tables? Its also my impression that the actual NPIC study was done a good bit after the preparation of the two sets story boards and the viewings that McMahon describes. My impression was that the true estimate of the shooting was presented in great secrecy based on the first set of story boards and that was done over the weekend....the second set were prepared at a later date for the archives and supported the lone nut story - not what was briefed at the highest level within 48 hours.

Jim raises an excellent question, up to now we have known that NPIC made at least two sets of storyboards....we have known virtually noting about their actual photo analysis and its conclusions....was any of that even submitted to the WC?

Thanks Steve, so then the real answer is that Marina was located via a postal change of address card which had been prepared and submitted as a joint change of address in New Orleans....wonder if Lee did that, or Ruth? Seems unlikely Marina did it herself..

There was a time when the FBI was even monitoring his brother's mail - clearly the net for Oswald was wider than they would later admit. Given that the FPCC was on the subversive list as an organization I've often wondered why Oswald was not under some sort of surveillance in New Orleans (unless of course they knew that was not necessary). Hosty did visit the Paines on November the 1 - which may explain this document. However it doesn't read quite like that. We do know that an FBI pretext call was made to the TSBD to verify his employment there...apparently based on Ruth's information to Hosty. Perhaps someone can refresh both our memories on how the FBI knew that Marina was staying with Ruth Paine.

I think this one in particular might deserve some discussion, some interesting implications on FBI monitoring of Oswald in Dallas: https://ncisahistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/OSWALD-LEE-H-Verification-of-employment-at-Texas-School-Book-Depository-Nov-4-1963.pdf

This film has been discussed here before - years ago. It was taken at an event hosted by Frank Sturgis and Gerry Hemming. It was made as part of a television coverage and was intended to promote and solicit donations to the INTERPEN group - it has nothing at all to do with Operation 40 or those involved in that. Pedro Diaz Lantz's brother is also in the picture as is Marita Lorenz. The Doyle looking character is one of the various Interpen hangers on, he has been identified but the name escapes me at the moment. The media event featured a parachute jump and the effect was dampened when one of the jumpers broke a leg or an angle, forget which.

If it is the purported photo of a group at a dinner table it has been widely and effectively debunked... As to Operation 40, which was never officially designated in that manner, its far more complex than often discussed. You might find this article interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/1975/01/04/archives/cuban-exiles-recall-domestic-spying-and-picketing-for-cia.html As for a list of those involved in the group originally, which was prepared for the landings in Cuba, you can find it here: https://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0034.html The group prepared and trained for intelligence activities inside Cuba became quite different after the failed landings, with some members going on to participate in the Cuban Intelligence Service operated by JMWAVE and others going into the highly unsanctioned and illegal activities discussed in the New York Times article.

It would be pure speculation, he really only says he made a car bomb that did not have to be used....one other possibility is that it was in that pickup truck that was "stalled" right before the overpass and towed away only minutes before the motorcade arrived on Elm. It certainly had the attention of the officers assigned to the overpass, perhaps the pickup was pure circumstance - in any event it served as a major diversion during the hour or so before the motorcade arrived. .

David, take a look at the photos at the link below....in one image I think you can actually see people sitting or standing in the bed of a pick up, in others the cars have their wheels cut at an angle showing they backed off on the side of the road. The police had closed Stemmons with a motorcycle unit down the freeway but folks who had gone down it earlier had the opportunity to just go down and pull off to the side to park and wait for the motorcade pass...no other traffic was coming behind them. https://www.google.com/search?q=jfk+limo+on+stemmons+freeway+in+dallas+photo&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=cv1u6MeFaZKzAM%3A%2C5zSO4MdYFI-7AM%2C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kThDovZWU43oN0PoA3JgFCIyvD20A&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiA4f3toMvoAhUMRqwKHV4sAaYQ9QEwA3oECAoQHQ#imgrc=cv1u6MeFaZKzAM:

David, there are cars parked off Stemmons at the head of the access ramp from Elm onto the freeway...sorry, no time to look for it now but I've seen it in more than one photo...it appears people pulled off the freeway in anticipation of the motorcade.

I've looked up a few more examples from combat veterans and they generally do say that there is a feel to it, even in the midst of general shooting...from the air movement. So what does that tell us about the security detail...based on the official story how close where the bullets passing? And of course there were impacts inside the presidential limo....impacts into bone, and supposedly fragment denting chrome. Did anybody mention "feeling" bullets pass them or hearing any impacts...you would almost think as eager as they were to support the official story you would get some remark....Kellerman talks about a salvo of bullets coming into the limo, was he commenting about hearing shots and didn't sense any impacts inside the car?

Well that sounds like a fun experiment - its good to have people you trust. After time its probably a bit subjective but do you think you would have noticed the sound if you were concentrating on something else or if there was a lot of background noise at the same time? I've nothing comparable to that - did shoot myself in the eye with a BB gun one time though, much like the Christmas program we see every year. It is a really interesting thought though, as far as I recall none of the SS personnel recall hearing passing rounds much less hearing the impact of shots inside the limo, into bodies or metal. I guess I had always just assumed they were too distracted and focused on events to pick up on that sort of sound - that plus the motorcade noise including the motorcycles.

Its a really interesting point, from personal experience I've had a shotgun fire past me only feet away and high powered rifles the same way (in the olden days we were a little less cautious and nobody wore ear plus or sound suppressors) and never heard anything other than the shot and never felt anything....but then my attention was elsewhere. I would really like some combat vets to chime in on this. My thought is that the agents were clearly heavily focused on things going on around them and that anything like a hiss would have gotten lost in the other sensations. There would seem to be no reason for them not to chime in ab about a bullet passing since that was in line with the lone nut, shot from behind, story. Here is one tidbit I found on a search: what would I feel if a bullet (please feel free to give examples for various types and calibres) missed me by passing, say, six inches above the top of my head? Lets say it was fired from twenty-five yards away and the gun has a magical silencer on it, so that the experience consists entirely of the passing bullet and not the sound of the gun firing. A.R. Cane 08-14-2006, 08:39 AM It's a kind of buzzing sound, not unlike a bee, or mosquito. You, probably, don't recognize it for what it was for a second or two, then it's kind of an 'oh, xxxx' moment. I've heard it twice that I can recall, and it's very memorable. Mangetout 08-14-2006, 08:47 AM Did you only hear it? Wasn't there anything to feel? A.R. Cane 08-14-2006, 09:07 AM I don't recall any feeling, air movement I guess you're referring to, just the brief sound. I really don't know how close they were, just the awareness that it had to be too close. I've worked the butts on rifle ranges and you don't normally hear that sound if the projectile is several feet away, unless it's ricocheting, and a ricochet has a different sound. silenus 08-14-2006, 10:05 AM I second A.R. Cane. You don't really feel it, you hear it. I really second the "oh, xxxx" feeling you get immediately after you realize what just happened!

David, an interesting point....of course you don't hear the round that hits you because the bullet is traveling faster than the speed of sound but the question is can you hear one that has gone past you. Perhaps someone with significant combat experience can comment, but here is what I found in a quick search: Can you hear a bullet go by? "You can be quite a ways away and still hear this (100 yards or so). A CRACK or a SNAP sound means the bullet is supersonic and probably is not a ricochet. The relationship between when you hear the crack and the report (bang) of the gun can tell you a lot. If the crack is very loud, then the bullet passed fairly close." The difference would be between hearing the report / bang and the crack of the supersonic bullet passing by...

Just for a little more pop music history of the period, if you were listening to nighttime AM across most of the nation you picked up Chicago's WLS and DJ's Art Laboe, Art Roberts and Dick Biondi....but none as famous as the Wolfman and none with their own song, by the Guess Who no less.