Antti Hynonen

I have to say Lee, I agree fully with that statement. In fact I often thought that it was odd that the "debris" from the gunshot victim would end up in so many different locations. I assumed that debris of this type would typically follow the bullet's path, in this case it clearly isn't quite logical. I keep thinking how well "to the left and to the back" jives with the Zapruder film and with the motorcycle cop witnesses riding "to the left and back" of the President. Then again nothing is typical about this case, so I wouldn't be surprised if some expert told me how wrong my thinking is.

Mount St. Mary's College, LA, CA. Mount St. Mary's University, MD.

I wish the Grassy knoll and TSBD shots of 11/22/1963 were as clear as this one....

Good catch. I do find the Parkland Dr.'s to be reliable witnesses in general. The main problem with reliability is that Parkland Dr.'s recall (just about unanimously) an entry wound to the base of the throat and a large grape fruit size exit wound in the occipital-parietal region of the head. The Bethesda Dr.'s performing the autopsy didn't even notice the entry wound in the throat (due to a tracheotomy performed in Dallas, directly on to of the entry wound), and claim the head wound to have been towards the side of the head above the ear, and being much more irregular in size. But that's another thread. Who to believe....? I tend to believe the first hand witnesses, in this case Parkland.

My education is slightly off topic, but I do admit that 7 + years of my (lower and high school) education has been at American schools. Additionally, my college professors were mostly from the US, and I did part of my undergrad. work in the US, so the level of my education, I would imagine, contains some considerable amounts of US influence. Well Mr. Purvis, back to the topic, if the amount of time used is key, lets ask Craig Roberts if using an extra 2 seconds would have made a crucial difference to their evaluation of the Dealey Plaza shooting of JFK, by the alleged single assassin, Lee Oswald. I doubt 2 seconds would have changed a whole lot, besides many independent studies arrive at differing times for the shooting, varying from over 5 to some 9 seconds...

Who to believe, These guys or Mr. Purvis? Well! Since all of "These guys" were dumb enough to believe the WC and attempt to "STUFF" three shots into less than 6 seconds, might I first recommend that one check out the IQ of anyone who has fallen for/believed the WC shooting scenario and thereafter based their entire sum of knowledge on it. Certainly tells me something in regards to capabilities for separate and independent thought process. Also makes me dream of "sheeples". P.S. Believe the evidence. P.P.S. Most high school plane geometry students could have informed one as to the exact "plane" in which the back of JFK's head had to be in order for a 6.5mm bullet to have created the elongated entrance through the skull of JFK which the autopsy surgeons found and measured. Too bad all of these "shooters" never bothered to check out the actual evidence, they just may have learned something. Guess that they were not "math majors" or President of the Mu Alpha Theta in school? As in the vehicle speed, "Math Counts"! P.P.P. S. It is also recognized as an "Established Fact" in virtually every court in the United States. I doubt very much that one or two extra seconds of shooting time would dramatically change the opinions of everyone. If these top level experts say it is impossible in 6 seconds, I doubt it could have been possible for Lee in 8. Homework done. I can not believe Mr. Purvis' proposed scenario of events, despite his numerous attempts to convince otherwise. To me it ranks just slightly above the WC scenario, still, unbelievable.

Just to get a few qualified opinions on the subject. http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/g..._poor_shot.html Some lone-gunman theorists will assert that Oswald's alleged shooting performance was duplicated by several expert marksmen in the CBS rifle test. However, the CBS test did not simulate all of the factors under which Oswald allegedly fired. Furthermore, the four riflemen who managed to score at least two hits out of three shots in less than six seconds failed to do so on their first attempts, yet Oswald would have had ONLY one attempt. And, needless to say, all of these men were experienced, expert riflemen. Seven of the eleven CBS shooters failed to score at least two hits on ANY of their attempts. The best shot in the group, Howard Donahue, took THREE attempts to score at least two hits out of three shots in under six seconds. In addition, the CBS shooters did not use the alleged murder weapon, with its difficult bolt and odd trigger--they used a different Carcano. The impossibility of Oswald's alleged shooting feat was what led former Marine sniper Craig Roberts to reject the lone-gunman theory. Roberts explains as he recounts the first time he visited the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository: I turned my attention to the window in the southeast corner--the infamous Sniper's Nest. . . . I immediately felt like I had been hit with a sledge hammer. The word that came to mind at what I saw as I looked down through the window to Elm Street and the kill zone was: IMPOSSIBLE! I knew instantly that Oswald could not have done it. . . . The reason I knew that Oswald could not have done it, was that *I* could not have done it. (KILL ZONE: A SNIPER LOOKS AT DEALEY PLAZA, p. 5) Retired Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock is likewise skeptical of Oswald's alleged shooting feat. Hathcock is a former senior instructor at the U. S. Marine Corps Sniper Instruction School at Quantico, Virginia. He has been described as the most famous American military sniper in history. In Vietnam he was credited with 93 confirmed kills. He now conducts police SWAT team sniper schools across the country. Craig Roberts asked Hathcock about the marksmanship feat attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission. Hathcock answered that he did not believe Oswald could have done what the Commission said he did. Added Hathcock, Let me tell you what we did at Quantico. We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. (KILL ZONE, pp. 89-90) Are Gunny Hathcock (now deceased) and Craig Roberts qualified to make such statements? Have a look and decide for yourself. Just to be clear, these gentlemen say Oswald could not have shot like he has been said to to have shot... http://www.riflewarrior.com/resume.htm http://www.grunt.com/scuttlebutt/corps-sto...loshathcock.asp Who to believe, These guys or Mr. Purvis?

I fully agree. The WC decided not to use this key medical evidence as part of their report, because it didn't agree with their pre-determined conclusion.

Great! Nobody else was able to understand and see what you saw in the evidence. Must be a pretty unique feeling to be above and beyond everyone else. You've opened it all up, gee whiz. Since you have a Carcano give the mock shooting scenario a go, find an elevated position and fire at a moving target moving away from you, going away at a downward angle, try and hit it 3 times in say under 8 seconds. Be sure not to cheat, and don't practice, that would be dishonest. Try finding a remote controlled car as a target or something. You go ahead and figure out how to best simulate it, you're the smartest one here. Let me know how you did. If you get 3 hits, in the simulation, I'll add a link to my Forum signature to a posting of your simulation test results. Good enough? I tried something similar, didn't succeed (no hits, am at the least an average shot). Don't have a Carcano though, that might have been the problem. Amen.

Mr. Marshall, I would agree with your position that shooters are less important, but wouldn't you say that it is nevertheless important that the shooters/triggermen be tried and convicted as well? Although we'd all prefer to see the plotters tried and convicted, if we had to choose. Perhaps finding out the identities of one group will lead us to the other, no?

In this thread Mr. Purvis claims on several of his postings that Lee Oswald is more skilled as a shooter than what an average ex-marine would be. This is in direct contradiction with what Robert Oswald, Lee's brother said (also an ex-marine) who went hunting with Lee on various occasions. This is in direct contradiction with those who served alongside Lee and also his immediate superiors (US Marine Corps). This is also in contradiction with just about all the (expert) testimony of the WC pertaining to this issue. Had Lee Oswald's shooting performance been exceptional in any way, the WC would have made great efforts to show this, as it would have been one of their goals. In fact this would have been an issue they would have jumped on all over... I believe the marine/military officers questioned about this issue take into consideration the amount and quality of training which a marine goes through, and evaluates Oswald's performance based on this. Conclusion; at best, Lee was an average shot (among the US MC). Therefore I would instead focus difficulty of the actual shooting performance on 11/22/63, considering the circumstances, the weapon, the scope, and perhaps lastly the shooting skills of Lee Oswald. Most forum members, who are well acquainted with rifles, will say this was a very difficult task. The best way to settle this would be by performing a mock shooting, with a similar weapon - in similar condition, under the same circumstances (as far as possible), with the same limited time at hand, and by a group of individuals with similar skills and practise. Their average ability would most likely prove whether the shooting was, in fact possible or impossible. (this is the 2-3 hits in some 6-7 seconds etc. etc.). I believe, a few such tests have been undertaken, why the results of these are contradictory I do not know. It might be interesting to compare how these tests were done. I tend to believe those who say that this shooting was a difficult one, and that the weapon was poor.

I believe the Donald House episode occurred in nearby Ft. Worth.

Donald, I read about this 4th bullet as well. I don't recall the details, but I don't think Chief Curry was there or handling the Carcano. It could have been Lt. Day or someone else on the 6th floor at the time the rifle was found. I too would like to know all the particulars about this issue. I think reading the testimony of Seymour Weitzman (Sp?), Roger Craig, Lt. Day, Det. Luke Mooney etc. will be helpful. If I recall accurately, these were the fellows who were on location at the time the rifle was found, their testimony may reveal something further.

Aye, It's gone. Someone must be "slightly upset" about your pages, considering that they go through the trouble of deleting them. I wonder if your service provider can provide you with any answers as to why this happens to some of your select pages?

Lee this FBI statement is quite confusing. This individual is relating an unbelievable story. First off, the distance travelled is 3 miles. At 10:30 a.m. on November 20th or 21st (Wednesday and Thursday), I doubt traffic was an issue, so I assume the trip took maybe 4 minutes total. How could the person hitch hiking relate all these things in 4 minutes and this fellow remember each thing they said (and showed a photo) with apparently astonishing accuracy? I think either this person made up the whole thing after the fact, or then he's just off his rocker. Anyone looked at the handwriting on this parcel? It sure looks like Lee Oswalds handwriting to me, or whoever was faking Lee's handwriting... (West) Nassaus St. does not exist, but a Nassau Circle does, I doubt it's of much help.

Yes, I agree about the protection in general. However, the security was equivalently poor on many other occasions as well. What I do find interesting is the distance of the follow-up car (Queen Mary) to the Presidential limousine on Elm street as the shooting began. Seems like in most pictures of the motorcade that day, the distance between the vehicles was under 10 feet, but on Elm during the flurry of shots, it was more....

John Simkin wrote: "An interesting picture of William Seymour. Do you think he looks like Lee Harvey Oswald?" Answer: Antti Hynonen No John, not at all. The best match so far would be Robert Oswald, his brother. By the way, the way I recall Sylvia Odio's reaction to seeing Lee Oswald being arrested and on TV soon after JFK's murder, leaves me no potion but to believe that Lee Oswald actually was the guy at Sylvia's home that day.

Hi, A couple of ways to fix the problem: Post your photo to a different site and post a link here. Or go through your own old messages and delete attachments from these to release space, or send your picture to one of the members with "unlimited", or should I say larger posting rights. I believe Bill Miller and Jack White are some of these members. Typically all the photo specialists have such privileges on this Forum. I believe John Simkin is (or has been) away, since he has not been participating in Forum discussions the last few days, otherwise he could naturally, assist in this matter as well.

There was indeed an ambulance at the scene just before the motorcade arrived. The ambulance picked up a man who was suffering from an apparent epileptic seizure. As in many other cases of that day (arrests), there were no records of this man at Parkland hospital, where he was taken to. Ambulance driver Aubrey Rike, who drove for O'Neil, relates that in the few days before the killing of the President, an ambulance was dispatched to the Dealey Plaza area on several occasions (seemed like prank calls at the time...). This could have been to establish the time it took for an ambulance to get there. Both these issues raise considerable suspicion.

I bet Tim Gratz is going to be happy about this book too.

Shanet, I don't know. However, considering the other weird aspects of the case, I wouldn't be too surprised if that was the case.

Just a question: Why would DCM wave with his arm streched up to the max? Wouldn't it be more natural to wave with your arm extended forward, rather than all the way up? To me it looks more like a signal for something than an innocent wave.

Absolutely. In fact (IMO) that would be the only sensible explanation. Too bad the judge didn't allow the evidence... it might have turned the case around.... and forced Shaw to disclose.

Yes, if it were indeed a "transistor radio" why would he conceal it under his clothes? And the other guy is supposed to be one Louie Steven Witt with his umbrella hexing the President or whatever... please .... I think a kid could have come up with a better "story".

I do get TCM (Nordic) and hope to catch The Running Man on that channel some time.