Antti Hynonen

Although most of the key players in the assassination have been interviewed and investigated thoroughly over the last 41 years, I would argue that some issues have been overlooked, somethings have been misinterpreted and therefore some key points of the investigation remain unknown. I am convinced more work can be done with the evidence and witness statements that exist (although flawed and somewhat altered). To those who plan to interview some of the persons mentioned in this thread, I recommend you get some additional life insurance. People who obtain inside knowledge about this case have a habit of committing suicide, die unexpectedly of natural causes or are otherwise prone to deadly accidents.

Tim, since you asked: I'd say Ruby's task was to silence Oswald. Recalling statements by the witnesses such as the police officer who attended to Ruby in Jail that evening, said that immediately after the Oswald shooting Ruby was nervous, sweating and seemed to be very restless all together. Moments later the word came out that Oswald had expired in the OR. This cop told Ruby something to the effect of: Well Ruby, looks like you are going to get the chair, Oswald died of his wounds. After this statement, Ruby became calm, cool, collected and seemed very much relaxed compared to his state earlier. My interpretation is that due to his behavior and actions, (including the shooting of Oswald) Ruby was assigned the task of silencing Oswald. Although he wasn't a professional killer (he probably didn't think of shooting him in the head), he was able to carry out the task after all. Whether his motivation was money, threats or whether he "owed someone big time", I don't know. Something, or someone drove him to do it. Furthermore, he had a little help from his friend(s) in the DPD. By this I mean access to the garage and DPD HQ etc.

Is this the "Secret Service" agent, who wasn't supposed to be there....? The "stalled truck" could have served as a concealed source location for a shot, this would roughly be in line with a south knoll trajectory....

Shanet, in my opinion your final sentence notes the key evidence, available from these films.

Wim I didn't know about Tippit's moonlighting job at the TX theater. I did read Craig's story, and after I read it, I was pretty sure that Decker wasn't running a totally clean investigation on his part. Decker seemed to carry a major grudge against Craig for his insisting on the Mauser issue, and that he saw Oswald enter a rambler stw. immediately following the DP mayhem. At the least Decker didn't wan't any other alleys of the investigation looked into.

Wim Dankbaar Posted Dec 23 2004, 06:32 PM There were two points of damage on the windshield of the limousine: 1) A crack or bullet hole in the glass at the right side of the mirror (looking from the outside from the hood of the car) 2) A nick in the chrome on the top lining of the windshield (looking from the inside of the car) This evidence is all in the Warren Report itself. It is bordering to impossible that both these damage points have been caused by one and the same bullet, but even if we assume it was, which of the three Oswald bullets could have inflicted the damage to the windshield? 1) CE 399, the so called magic bullet that was found almost intact on a stretcher in Parlkland Hospital, alledgedly fallen out of Connally's thigh? 2) The bullet that missed the limousine and struck a curb, the debris of which slightly injured the cheeck of James Tague? 3) Or the fatal bullet that hit Kennedy in the back of the head, "exiting" through JFK's right temple? It is crystal clear that none of these bullets had a path that could cause the two damage points on the windshiled. Hence there were more than three bullets, hence there was more than one shooter, hence there was a conspiracy. And by the way, Gary, you're welcome to give me a counter on that if you can. Wim

Steve, I could be wrong, but I think they first found out about the Irving address from Roy Truly, then Oswald was caught at the TX theater. Fritz probably thought he ought to question Oswald personally and therefore send his detective's out to Irving with some county deputies, among others were Buddy Walthers, the deputy who apparently found a 45 slug or piece of skull on the grass in Dealy P. Walthers was James Eric (Bill) Decker's friend or protegé at the least. Deputy Roger Craig speculated for a long time that Decker and Walthers had a little more to say than they ever did. Naturally R. Craig committed suicide, after a long tedious stage of unemployment, misery and illness. How else.... suicide is the way to go if you happen to have on hand info on the JFK assassination.

Antti, This has been tossed around on Lancer in the past. I totally agree with you that rifles were the weapons used in the assassination. The problem with Suppressors on rifles is that while they do quiet the intial detonation, they cannot quiet the bullet bow shockwave of a rifle caliber projectile in flight. This shockwave will still be a giveaway of shot origin if the wits are perceptive of what is going on around them. A suppressor will slow a velocity some eight to ten percent on the average and this is not enough to decrease the penetration level of the bullet on impact, unless the shot is of considerable range. What I mean by this is that the muzzle velocity has been comprimised and it will lose sustained velocity at a greater rate, but a shot within 150 yards should be effected very little. For this velocity to be compromised so greatly at impact to fail to have the penetration it had, it would have to have been disrupted rather close to the target or it would have had it's trajectory effected a great deal. Once the registered velocity is greatly comprimised, it will then begin to drop it's level of trajectory at a fast rate and it's accuracy is greatly comprimised. That is why I believe in windshield penetration to reduce the velocity to these extremes while not comprimising the trajectory. Windshield penentration will reduce the velocity in the range of 40-60%, depending on the configuration of the projectile and the angle of penetration. The only other factor in reducing penetration after impact would be the composition of the bullet. A compromised bullet that severely fragments will fail to achieve sustained velocity through the wound cavity, as the velocity is greatly compromised with the lighter the projectile (fragments of the projectile). But this would have created a tremendous amount of soft tissue damage within the throat, which was not evident at Parkland. Al Thanks Al. I recall John Ritchson saying the same thing about muzzle blast being suppressed, but that the shockwave is still present causing problems in terms of an attempted disguise. Perhaps a combination of several factors such as distance, a suppressor and ricochets or fragments all help explain the shallow wounds.

I was about 20 when Stone's JFK came out. I didn't start looking into it until about 2 years ago, at 31.

Al, Ron, others: I suggested a while back in a question to John Ritchson, that the use of a silencer (from positions other than the TSBD) may have slowed the projectile speed down somewhat... As I recall a silencer may reduce velocity to some extent, right? My theory was that the carano or similar was used from the TSBD, and high powered rifles with silencers (to attempt to disguise their location) were used from around the railway overpass and the Dal-Tex. Perhaps someone else has suggested this too. I don't believe anything but true assassin's weapons (high powered rifles) were used to assassinate Kennedy. Projectiles with lower velocity (due to longer distance and silencers) would help explain the shallow wound in JFK's back and the throat wound, neither of which was a through-through wound. Al, is this way off?

Jack White's replies to my questions: Reply from Jack White: Dear Antti...excuse me for not seeing this forum email till just now. I prefer that private emails be sent to jwjfk@flash.net, since I NEVER CHECK THE FORUM FOR EMAILS. I will try to respond to your questions: 1.) How many different back yard photos were there? (I mean to ask: how many were originally taken, referring to different poses and angles in determining the number of different photos, not how many copies were floating around in Nov. 1963)? Since I believe the backyards are FABRICATED, there were no SNAPSHOTS originally taken. Of the "known poses", there were 3. Marina and Marguerite told of "another pose" where the rifle was held over the head, but nobody has ever seen it. So I guess the number depends on whether you think the pix were fake or genuine. 2.) Didn't Marina later destroy one she had in her shoe at the DPD on Nov. 22nd 1963? That is the one above which I referred to. This is not necessarily a truthful story. 3.) George DeMohrenschildt had one, which his wife sent to the FBI or some other officials, after his "suicide" in 1977, right? Not necessarily. Though we have the excellent photo, the story of where it came from is very suspicious. When George moved to Haiti (date unknown), he put his belongings in storage. Years later, it is alleged that the photo was found among some of his phonograph records which had been put in storage. I do not believe the story. 4.) Now, regarding these photos, is it possible/likely/certain that one of them, or more than one "were taken" with a different camera? With question number 4, I am refering to the DeMohrenschildt photo, which I recall was of a superior quality compared to the others. Assuming the small "originals" were REAL SNAPSHOTS (I do not), then the DeM picture is of such greater quality than the "originals", then one must assume that they were products of different cameras THAN THE IMPERIAL REFLEX. I believe that the real originals were composites which were then copied on a copy stand. ....Looking at Marina's WC and HSCA statements, and more accurately her comment on the number of photos taken in the back yard, my goal is to show that more photos "were taken" than she claims. And to also show that more than one camera was used. Therefore, indicating that her testimony regarding the photos is totally false, and that the photos were merely created by someone to provide incriminating evidence to assist in the framing of Lee Oswald. In my opinion Marina did not take the photos, and anything she says regarding them IS FALSE. I am interested in any research you may post regarding this. In the future please use my email address instead of posting to the forum email. Sorry for the delay. Thanks. Jack

Jack that's all right. This crime is still being investigated 41 years after it took place. At any rate, I will post your reply and my questions etc. on the back yard photo thread soon.

Pat, I spent some time trying to dig this up, looking for any clues, and hoping they'd help me find the answer. No luck, nothing to confirm any relation between them. I even tried to see if their home addresses (at the time) were relatively close to each other (thinking if they were related they might have wanted to stay relatively close to each other..... far fetched?), I think the photo lab Stovall gave his business address for the WC, and therefore that angle didn't make much sense. It's an interesting question, my guess is IF they are related, they probably don't want it to be known, then again Detective Stovall was sent to the Irving address with Guy Rose by chance, or perhaps they were used to working together. Then the same guys were sent back the next day. I'd say Fritz picked the two of them just because they were there and available. Just my opinion though.

I use the Forum to participate in the JFK debate. I have thoroughly enjoyed discussions and debates with some of the worlds most knowledgeable researchers and authors on the subject. The Education Forum, together with the Spartacus web site, make an unbeatable resource for a relatively new researcher like myself.

What interests the most: confusion with evidence, disappearing evidence, false evidence, witness testimonies supporting conspiracy, dying witnesses. Evidence of foul play in the investigation of JFK's assassination and Lee Oswald. The impersenations of Oswald, the witholding of evidence and government documents under the excuse of national security.... ...national security: I always wonder, are "they" afraid of riots in case the truth emerges, or are they simply afraid of exposing goverment secrets withheld among the documents.

Whoever the seller is, he surely is a coin collector, and pays his purchases on time. Coins are basically what he's used E-bay for in the past.

Out of all the witnesses, she is the key witness. If anyone could turn the case around, in the sense of giving new testimony towards proving Lee innocent, it's Marina. Like many fellow researchers, I bet she was not entirely honest when she testified.

Thanks Bill and Wim. I would like to see how "they" explain that one...

Add Marina Oswald's testimony to obtain the remaining corners of the frame.

Does anyone know whether or not the DeMohrenschildt copy of the b-y photo, was one taken with the same equipment as the others?

There's athread on this Forum where I and other members discussed Marina, June, Rachel and their possible views on the case. I recall that we have an interview with June (Porter, Oswald) on this Forum and also the Oprah one with Marina somewhere, possibly in that thread. I'm sure a search on this Forum will prove to be fruitful. So far we did conclude that pursuing Marina or June for an interview would be pretty much a dead-end. We have understood that Rachel might be interested in proving her biological father not-guilty.

I have heard that too, regarding the cut frames found among DPD stuff, regarding the back yard photos. What interests me more though is the photo obtained from Mrs. DeMohrenschildt after George committed "suicide" in Palm Beach county, FLA. This appeared to be one of the same poses of the ones floating around earlier, however it was of a (far) better quality. I read somewhere that this meant that it was not taken with the same camera as the three other known photos... Perhaps Marina used two Cameras when she was out back taking photos of Lee? Yeah right! Also Marina testified (or was it Marguerite Oswald) that Marina had one of the backyard photos in her shoe when she was first taken down to the DPD. She later burned that photo, fearing it would further incriminate Lee (I don't recall if Marguerite gave her the idea of destroying it or what). At any rate she burned that photo. Would it have been a fifth pose? In her testimony to the WC, Marina testified that she recalled taking one shot, when presented with several poses she eventually said she must have taken two or three. Perhaps Jack White or someone who knows could tell us how many poses there were all in all, how many different cameras were used and how many copies of originials were officially entered as evidence. I'm a bit confused, but the back yard photo deal sure is a weird one.

This article was free and easily accessible when Don posted it. Perhaps they now want $ for reading it. Bernice came to the rescue.

Shanet and others, Check out this page on John Simkin's Spartacus site, and also read the Angleton, and other links on this page. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/SSnosenko.htm Regards,