Who were the shooters?

[John Dolva]

Could someone tell me if a photo of the inside of the fence around this area (image- see arrow ) taken on the day (or at least year) exists and if so where, or post, please. Otherwise please say if one does not exist.

Edited November 26, 2006 by John Dolva

[Myra Bronstein]

(He mentions the very thing that threw me, the fact that Wallace was quite inept.) (Myra Bronstein)

Hi Myra,

Wallace was an interesting character with some very curious connections.

This image below shows a young Malcolm Wallace and Molly O'Daniel. Molly was the daughter of Texas Governer W. Lee O'Daniel who was seriously opposed to Homer Rainey, a man Wallace supported.

John has some terrific information on O'Daniel in his Spartacus biography.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKodaniel.htm

FWIW.

James

Well I'll definitely have to read more about Mac Walace, and Bobby Baker, and Billie Sol Estes...

And O'Daniel, wew, they sure had them some kinda politicians in Texas. He's a piece of work. It looks like every progressive president, in this case FDR, has a klan out to get 'im. It worked with President Kennedy.

There is earlier related discussion at this thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=655

Edited November 26, 2006 by Myra Bronstein

[Ashton Gray]

I was wondering what other people thought regarding who were the shooters, and where they were located.

Ashton

Ashton,

How does a head shot fired from behind in the County Courts building relate to the large wound of exit in the right rear of the head?

RJS

Hi Richard.

I wouldn't assay even to attempt to account for every wound, real or imagined, that has been claimed and counterclaimed and reclaimed and exclaimed about in and around the so-called "medical evidence." The one wound I personally consider to be a very high relative certainty is a large chunk of skull blown out of the right front of JFK's head.

My evaluation of that wound—despite clamors to the contrary from any source—is that it is an exit wound, not an entry wound. Working back from that hypothesis, I merely created trajectories on a 2D plot that most likely would produce an exit wound in such a location, and lo and behold there I found myself with my face pressed against the windows of the one building in all of Dealey Plaza that for all practical purposes had been studiously, rigorously, utterly ignored from any and all consideration throughout decades of investigation. And lo and behold, I discovered that it just happened to be within the jurisdiction of Earl/Earle Cabell and his cronies at the relevant times.

Therefore, I made a 3D model so I could actually see what the views would be from various windows there.

I have no idea how many shooters there might have been in how many locations, or who they might have been.

By following my own hunch that led, for better or worse, away from the madding crowd, I personally have come to the conclusion that the fatal head shot I've described came from that building. If it ever should prove to be correct, then given how much the government has invested in putting Oswald in the TSBD, somebody's gon' have a lot of 'splainin' to do.

By the way, merely as an ancillary to the above, I've postulated that the infamous puff of smoke from the picket fence area was an effect created specifically to divert attention directly away from the angle of fire described above, and to send people running precisely in the opposite direction—where nothing and nobody would be found to be. At almost the same moment, the County Courts building was ordered to be emptied, the personnel from the building sent right into the general area behind where the smoke had been seen.

I dunno: to me it seems about as subtle as a Christmas parade.

Ashton

Edited November 27, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Frank Agbat]

Ashton,

I'm not trying to be a jerk or a naysayer, but I do have one observation about this model...

JFK was listing notable to the left at the time of the headshot *and* was facing more to the left. This might change perspectives a bit on feasible vs. non-feasible shot locations. In the case of the postulated location, it might make a shot that strikes the crown of the head more feasible.

It is, however, quite useful to see different angles and locations other than the same-old, same-old.

[Richard J. Smith]

It is, however, quite useful to see different angles and locations other than the same-old, same-old.

Here's one Frank:

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/images/ click on NID2003.mht

[Richard J. Smith]

I was wondering what other people thought regarding who were the shooters, and where they were located.

Ashton

Ashton,

How does a head shot fired from behind in the County Courts building relate to the large wound of exit in the right rear of the head?

RJS

Hi Richard.

I wouldn't assay even to attempt to account for every wound, real or imagined, that has been claimed and counterclaimed and reclaimed and exclaimed about in and around the so-called "medical evidence." The one wound I personally consider to be a very high relative certainty is a large chunk of skull blown out of the right front of JFK's head.

The Parkland doctors didn't see a large chunk of skull blown out of the right front of JFK's head. Neither did the Bethesda witnesses. Around 30 witnesses from Parkland and Bethesda, including Gawler mortician Thomas Robinson, however, did see a large rear of head wound. Also note that Saundra Spencer, who developed autopsy photos at the NPC, saw a photo which included the rear head wound.

I believe the wound to which you refer is the "flap" seen in the Z film, which Jackie held in place during the ride to Parkland. It was not seen as a "large blown out chunk", since it was still attached and pushed back into place.

Head wound witnesses and their statements/testimony:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2349

RJS

Edited November 27, 2006 by Richard J. Smith

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton,

I'm not trying to be a jerk or a naysayer, but I do have one observation about this model...

JFK was listing notable to the left at the time of the headshot *and* was facing more to the left. This might change perspectives a bit on feasible vs. non-feasible shot locations. In the case of the postulated location, it might make a shot that strikes the crown of the head more feasible.

It is, however, quite useful to see different angles and locations other than the same-old, same-old.

Perfectly good points to consider, Frank. I did give a bit of consideration to this, and in placing the stock figure made some effort to approximate the conditions, but there are so many other possible variables, including the exact elevation and position of the limousine that what I did here could never be anything more than an approximation.

I don't know when I might be able to get it more "calibrated," though I would love to. Meanwhile, this has been put forth, and from all I can tell at this point there is nothing to eliminate it from reasonable consideration.

Ashton

[Richard J. Smith]

Meanwhile, this has been put forth, and from all I can tell at this point there is nothing to eliminate it from reasonable consideration.

Ashton

What eliminates it from reasonable consideration is the account of nearly 30 witnesses to a large wound of exit in the rear of the head, and not one witness who saw a large wound of exit in the right front.

Jim Sibert interviewed by William Law in The Eye of History:

Law: Can you give me some information on the head wound?

Sibert: Oh, it was a good size, in the back part of the head there. Well, I think about 3 1/2 inches one way then quite a bit the other...now those two(Boswell and Humes) stayed there till about 5:30 in the morning as I recall. That was their admission--that they stayed and helped the morticians. In other words, they must have taken some other pictures too, because they showed the pictures at that deposition that were neat in appearance, and boy, I don't remember anything like that.

...but my recollection of the way the head looked is nothing that would appear as this photograph shows. This photograph is too neat. Right back here is where you would have had that massive wound, right in here, and you see that's neat. My thought was that that was probably taken after reconstruction was done...

Sibert: The thing that I remember was this massive head wound. I mean, we're talking about something that was 3 1/2 inches long and about that size(see photo below)

The hair was matted, but there was no question--and I'll tell you the statement I made to Frank. We were both standing there looking into this massive hole in the head. I said "Frank, think of all the top secret material that has gone through that brain. And now look at it". I remember saying that to Frank.

The photo Sibert referred to is the infamous rear of head autopsy photo.

Sibert showing the size of the wound in the back of the head. He was within a foot of JFK's head:

Edited November 27, 2006 by Richard J. Smith

[Ashton Gray]

I was wondering what other people thought regarding who were the shooters, and where they were located.

Ashton

Ashton,

How does a head shot fired from behind in the County Courts building relate to the large wound of exit in the right rear of the head?

RJS

Hi Richard.

I wouldn't assay even to attempt to account for every wound, real or imagined, that has been claimed and counterclaimed and reclaimed and exclaimed about in and around the so-called "medical evidence." The one wound I personally consider to be a very high relative certainty is a large chunk of skull blown out of the right front of JFK's head.

The Parkland doctors didn't see a large chunk of skull blown out of the right front of JFK's head.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Neither did the Bethesda witnesses. Around 30 witnesses from Parkland and Bethesda, including Gawler mortician Thomas Robinson, however, did see a large rear of head wound.

So I'm told. This is what I refer to, perhaps less than sensitively, as the Incredible Resizable Movable Hole. I believe the testimony you provided has it contracting and expanding from larger than a baseball to about an inch wide in its retrograde state, and that only one person of the whole crowd even attempted to say where on "the back of the head" it was (other than the inscrutable "cowlick area").

Also note that Saundra Spencer, who developed autopsy photos at the NPC, saw a photo which included the rear head wound.

And I want you to know, and I mean this sincerely, that I consider it a great pity that I haven't.

I believe the wound to which you refer is the "flap" seen in the Z film, which Jackie held in place during the ride to Parkland. It was not seen as a "large blown out chunk", since it was still attached and pushed back into place.

Hmm. Well, it definitely was seen as a "large blown out chunk" by me, attached though it remained. And I'm extremely curious how it got "pushed back into place" if nobody in a position to do such pushing saw it.

Now I'm also answering your last post to me, since I can't post more than one response at a time in a given thread:

Meanwhile, this has been put forth, and from all I can tell at this point there is nothing to eliminate it from reasonable consideration.

Ashton

What eliminates it from reasonable consideration...

Richard, I do understand that it is eliminated from your reasonable consideration. It is not eliminated from mine. Nor do anecdotal descriptions of the presence or absence of any other hole, even an Incredible Resizable Movable Hole, eliminate it from my reasonable consideration.

Ashton

Edited November 27, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Lee Forman]

If we have to have shooters hiding in nonexistent buildings, or buildings which are a pretty far distance from the plaza, best to incorporate the trees, the distance, and at a minimum, the location of Jackie's head, in any diagrams.

However, I still like the North Peristyle for a shot to the rear of the head, quickly followed by a shot from the front. As per a Doctor I exchanged with - it's possible that the shot to the rear may have weakened the skull for the shot from the front which then exited. As per numerous folks with experience, the indications in the z-footage [of the backwards movement] are of a heavy weight caliber round coming from the front. If there are frames missing, it would make sense. Additionally, if there is indeed evidence of an entry on the harper fragment, it could make sense as to why it may have been smashed up with a hammer or something when the brain was removed and placed there overnight for Harper to find the following day. I imagine if this were the case, it had a flat trajectory - indicating a shot from the rear, but not at elevation.

- lee

[Ashton Gray]

If we have to have shooters hiding in nonexistent buildings, or buildings which are a pretty far distance from the plaza, best to incorporate the trees, the distance, and at a minimum, the location of Jackie's head, in any diagrams.

I don't know what "nonexistent buildings" you're referring to, Lee, but here is the reverse view of what I posted earlier in this thread, this looking over the back of the limo from Kennedy's approximate position at the time of the headshot, towards the very substantially existent County Courts building, with the approximate relationship of relevant trees as I have been able to determine them to have been circa November 1963:

That view shows me a very liberal slop factor for a shooter in that building, which is why at the moment I am not overthrowing the rest of my life to try to get everything down to micrometer calibrations.

As for trajectories, here is a 2D image of possible trajectory paths that I first scribed—which is what led to the 3D model precisely for the purpose of factoring in the very things you specify:

The three trajectory lines there are all exactly the same length. At the time, I was uncertain of the possible interference of the larger tree of the three in the peristyle, but the 3D model has disabused me of the idea that it would have encumbered a shot from the majority of the windows in the County Courts building.

I also don't believe that Jaquie's position at the time of the head shot in any way complicates such a shot. In fact, in the Z-film she had leaned decidedly forward just a moment before the head shot. (Of course this is an open invitation for another 186 forum pages arguing about the Z-film. Which is where I'll leave the discussion.)

Ashton

Edited November 27, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[John Dolva]

Ashton, there are also the windows (red) in the setback connecting structure between the records and courts building. Possibly that is a unique formation that can cause sound to bounce and ripple like 'fire crackers'.

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton, there are also the windows (red) in the setback connecting structure between the records and courts building. Possibly that is a unique formation that can cause sound to bounce and ripple like 'fire crackers'.

Good point John. I'll get those put in (though I have no idea what's behind them in terms of rooms or floors, or the access to them).

In looking at that block of buildings I sometimes wonder if that's where the then-unaccounted-for J.D. Tippit might have been "having lunch." So to speak.

The "Tippit twosies" (threesies, with the alternate spelling "Tippet") have always held my attention more than just a bit, since the "twosies" trick is always, inevitably, invariably found wherever the CIA wants to create the most possible confusion.

Ashton

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Here are a few reconstructed images from various points

in Dealey Plaza.

Assuming the toppgraphy is accurate - which cannot be guaranteed - they

may help in the research into the position of possible shooters on 22nd November 1963.

The 'shooters' positions are: From the Court House - top right as you look at Court House Building,

From Daltex - a low and medium (high) position.

From the North Peristyle ( I hope I have picked the correct peristyle!)

I have not included the Picket or TSBD positions but can do so if needed.

As regards the Court House position I feel any shooter would have to be positioned well too the right and

high up to avoid the obstruction of the trees.

The shooters would probably have used telescopic sights.

To see what the telescoped view may have looked liked

zoom in to whatever may have been the telescopic power of the sight. (X3,X5 or X10?)

EBC

Edited November 29, 2006 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Ashton Gray]

As regards the Court House position I feel any shooter would have to be positioned well too the right and high up to avoid the obstruction of the trees.

Hi Eugene,

Beautiful images.

However, I think your trees in the north peristyle are much larger than they actually were on 22 November 1963. I don't have time right now to locate and post the images I've been using for reference but will as soon as I can. Hopefully some of the photo gurus here will beat me to it. It is a critical issue, and I may be wrong, but I don't believe those trees as they were then would have presented any obstruction at all to the majority of shooting locations from the County Courts building/complex windows that face Dealey.

Ashton

Edited November 28, 2006 by Ashton Gray