PatSpeer.com

[Mark Knight]

The question comes to my mind...IF the survey was primarily the result of the evidence from the Zapruder film...AND the "experts" agree that, according to the Z-film, JFK was hit by the first shot BEFORE he emerged from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign...

...from THAT evidence, how was ANYONE able to establish a first-shot point of impact as precise as street elevation 423.07?

From the evidence at hand--the Z-film--that level of accuracy would've been impossible, IMHO.

Or am I missing something here?

Edited February 15, 2008 by Mark Knight

[Pat Speer]

I have moved that portion of the FBI 2/7/64 attachmet to here in order that another important issue can be again pointed out.

This too was long ago brought to the surface and John Dolva and I discussed it.

Perhaps there are those who are new here and who are unaware of how much the survey work reveals the duplicity of the FBI as well as WC.

I would remind, that this attachement is actually what is on CE585

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0144b.htm

with the exception that this work had drawn in the impact point of the Z313 shot (in pencil) for the reference of SS Agent Howlett.

Beginning with the first shot impact point, which point is clearly established, and which point the SS work of 12/5/63 (survey plat date, work done on 12/2, 3, & 4) is exactly the same.

Tom, is it clear from the plat or West's recollections that the 267 foot trajectory is supposed to replace the 294 foot trajectory? Or is it possible that for one brief moment they thought there were four shots?

Also, was there an FBI agent whose name was mentioned as arranging the 2/7/64 plat? Hoover had sent Gauthier's report, with its 307 foot final shot head shot, over to the Commission only two weeks earlier. I wonder who was second-guessing his work, and on whose behalf? I wonder if one or more of the Commissioners caught Gauthier's error after viewing the Z-film the week before, and asked the FBI and SS to fix their trajectories and at least be consistent. This would explain the sudden change and Howlett's involvement.

The Warren Commission was a whitewash...That would explain why there's no record of this change in the Commission's records. (Of which I am aware. If anyone knows of an internal WC or FBI memo from this period asking that a change be made, please let us know...)

Thanks once again for sharing this valuable information.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Questions? (in regards to street elevation 423.07)

Questions? (in regards to street elevation 423.07)

And Mark, you have asked a salient question, which most certainly deserves some thought.

In that regards:

1. The posted survey notes which demonstrate the "B.M. 423.07" as well as the note regarding the top of the concrete pillar where Zapruder was standing, "ELEV. 430.8", have considerable relevance to your question.

This information was gathered for the WC at the same time that Mr. West was acquiring the sign size locations and sizes.

Now, one might ask exactly why, prior to coming down for their assassination re-enactment, did the WC want all of these elevations.

In that regards, on must recall that the "distances" from Zapruder to these features can be scaled in off either the SS or FBI survey plats, as well as the fact that Mr. West had established these distances and locations during his work.

HOWEVER!

A prudent person would most probably ask exactly why the WC decided that they needed to know the exact elevations of the concrete steps as well as the primary "dome wing"/aka main walking area.

Now, exactly what purpose could that serve????????

And, we shall return to that!

(hint) one might want to take a look at backgound elevation differences between Z210 and the Z210 re-enactment photo, as well as the lateral alignment of backgound items.

One happens to have been taken from a lower position, which was left of the original as well.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

I have moved that portion of the FBI 2/7/64 attachmet to here in order that another important issue can be again pointed out.

This too was long ago brought to the surface and John Dolva and I discussed it.

Perhaps there are those who are new here and who are unaware of how much the survey work reveals the duplicity of the FBI as well as WC.

I would remind, that this attachement is actually what is on CE585

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0144b.htm

with the exception that this work had drawn in the impact point of the Z313 shot (in pencil) for the reference of SS Agent Howlett.

Beginning with the first shot impact point, which point is clearly established, and which point the SS work of 12/5/63 (survey plat date, work done on 12/2, 3, & 4) is exactly the same.

Tom, is it clear from the plat or West's recollections that the 267 foot trajectory is supposed to replace the 294 foot trajectory? Or is it possible that for one brief moment they thought there were four shots?

Also, was there an FBI agent whose name was mentioned as arranging the 2/7/64 plat? Hoover had sent Gauthier's report, with its 307 foot final shot head shot, over to the Commission only two weeks earlier. I wonder who was second-guessing his work, and on whose behalf? I wonder if one or more of the Commissioners caught Gauthier's error after viewing the Z-film the week before, and asked the FBI and SS to fix their trajectories and at least be consistent. This would explain the sudden change and Howlett's involvement.

The Warren Commission was a whitewash...That would explain why there's no record of this change in the Commission's records. (Of which I am aware. If anyone knows of an internal WC or FBI memo from this period asking that a change be made, please let us know...)

Thanks once again for sharing this valuable information.

Pat:

Although I will attempt to give some answers, at this point there are still items as regards the elevation 423.07/aka first shot/aka road sign elevation issues which have not been fully explained.

And, to branch away into other areas will only create additional confusion.

All aspects of the WC obfuscation must be approached as if it were a relatively complicated algebraic problem.

One can not get the correct final answer until they have progressively resolved each portion of the problem in it's sequential order..

Tom, is it clear from the plat or West's recollections that the 267 foot trajectory is supposed to replace the 294 foot trajectory? Or is it possible that for one brief moment they thought there were four shots?

It is absolultely clear, as I will later demonstrate when I get to the "changing" impact point in which the FBI attempted to delete the impact at street elevation 418.35/aka Z313, and move it back up the street 24.5 feet to a point which has street elevation 419.07, and had this point labeled as "#2" on the FBI Survey Plat.

For the benefit of those who have only limited knowledge of the survey information, I did not desire to "jump into" other waters until such time as the first shot impact/aka street elevation 423.07 point had been completely beat to death.

And, in addition to the "comparison" survey which was prepared for SS Agent Howlett, please recall that I am also in possession of Mr. West's survey notes from his work for the SS, as well as the FBI and for the WC.

Also, was there an FBI agent whose name was mentioned as arranging the 2/7/64 plat? Hoover had sent Gauthier's report, with its 307 foot final shot head shot, over to the Commission only two weeks earlier. I wonder who was second-guessing his work, and on whose behalf? I wonder if one or more of the Commissioners caught Gauthier's error after viewing the Z-film the week before, and asked the FBI and SS to fix their trajectories and at least be consistent. This would explain the sudden change and Howlett's involvement.

Although I could (or could not) have that information somewhere, I do not specifically recall as it is of little significance in relationship to the actual survey data, and although Mr. West and I discussed the "changing" of the impact point, I do not recall any specific discussions in regards to agent's names other than SS Agent Howlett's.

In hindsight, it would certainly be of some importance to know exactly WHO? it was that informed Mr. West to re-survey in a position some 24.5 feet back up Elm St. and call it shot#2.

However, the reality is that Mr. West was contacted with sufficient lead time that he designated his survey crews to go out and perform much of this work, and other than considerable time spent on the ground with the WC re-enactment, he actually spent very little time with either the SS or the FBI crews.

Therefore, Mr. West himself was not personally involved in each and every aspect of each and every survey, and in that regards there were various personnel changes within the actual crews depending on which crew was designated the task "for the day" if you will.

Mr. West stated that the only means to determine exactly who was on any given crew at any given time would be from his billing records sent in for the work, as the crew chief kept this information and turned it in to the office for billing purposes.

Mr. West did not know where any of his copies of any such billing records might be, and about all that we discussed further along these lines was how long it took for him to get paid by the Government for the work which he had done.

To a large extent this is why no one has ever caught on to the changes, as personnel who were present for one work, were not necessarily present for another, and despite what Breneman may or may not have claimed, Mr. West specifically informed me that those in charge looked at photo's and told him/his personnel where to survey in something and what to call it.

As to "Gauthier's Error", I am not that certain that it was necessarily an error.

Mr. West's works, distances and angles (for the SS & FBI work) were computed, based on two erroneous areas.

(Which of course is not the fault of Mr. West as he/his crew chief merely did what they were told to do)

1. All distances and angles were to the window sill and elevation 490.9, whereas the FBI had additional information relative to the actual heighth of the stacked boxes of books.

If one searches through the WC, they will find those photo's which the FBI took from inside the TSDB, with an elevation pole at the windows.

Thusly, if Gauthier had what he thought was a "higher" elevation than the top of the window sill for the actual firing position of the rifle,, then he could have (assuming that he knows basic trig) recalculated with Mr. West's given data, and with this rise in firing position elevation, actually had a longer hypotenuse/aka slope distance than did Mr. West.

2. All of Mr. West's work for the SS & FBI was calculated to an impact point on the street, whereas JFK's head was in reality some 3+ feet above the actual street elevation.

In that regards, Mr. West's personnel did not take this into consideration either.

When the WC came along, all impact elevations were calculated to include the actual height of JFK's head above the pavement.

In addition, the angles and distances back to the TSDB were shot and determined "K-R"/ being Kennedy to Rifle.

Based on this, someone quite obviously informed the WC that in order to be absolutely "accurate", one would have to determine angles and distances from the actual height of JFK's head above the pavement, as well as angles and distances from this point above the street, back to the elevation of the rifle in the window, as opposed to the window sill/ledge.

Thusly, it would appear that perhaps Gauthier, in his "gusto" to impress, demonstrated that the FBI knew far more about determination of accuracy than had previously been done, and in that regards, his 307 feet distance (as opposed to the SS/FBI 294 foot distance, gave sufficient reason for the WC to self-justify going down and straightening out this whole mess and completely dis-regarding the previous survey work.

Additionally, the Eisenberg drawing information as provided to FBI Agent Frazier on 3/27/64 clearly demonstrates that the height difference of JFK's head above Elm St. as well as the rifle height in the window were items which had to be considered.

So, either Eisenberg was also a math major, or else someone who recognized that the SS & FBI surveys were lacking in this detail, was coaching him.

It is specifically noted that Eisenberg did not allow Frazier access to the FBI Survey Plat of 2/7/64, and from my own personnal as well as written communications with Robert Frazier, I am of the full opinion that he was not a knowing participant in any part of the WC lies.

However, rest assured that Frazier knew that things were not on the up and up, and he most certainly deserves a "Beret" for the sneaky manner in which he gave us considerable information, without actually giving us that information.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Questions? (in regards to street elevation 423.07)

Questions? (in regards to street elevation 423.07)

And Mark, you have asked a salient question, which most certainly deserves some thought.

In that regards:

1. The posted survey notes which demonstrate the "B.M. 423.07" as well as the note regarding the top of the concrete pillar where Zapruder was standing, "ELEV. 430.8", have considerable relevance to your question.

This information was gathered for the WC at the same time that Mr. West was acquiring the sign size locations and sizes.

Now, one might ask exactly why, prior to coming down for their assassination re-enactment, did the WC want all of these elevations.

In that regards, on must recall that the "distances" from Zapruder to these features can be scaled in off either the SS or FBI survey plats, as well as the fact that Mr. West had established these distances and locations during his work.

HOWEVER!

A prudent person would most probably ask exactly why the WC decided that they needed to know the exact elevations of the concrete steps as well as the primary "dome wing"/aka main walking area.

Now, exactly what purpose could that serve????????

And, we shall return to that!

(hint) one might want to take a look at backgound elevation differences between Z210 and the Z210 re-enactment photo, as well as the lateral alignment of backgound items.

One happens to have been taken from a lower position, which was left of the original as well.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

The question comes to my mind...IF the survey was primarily the result of the evidence from the Zapruder film...AND the "experts" agree that, according to the Z-film, JFK was hit by the first shot BEFORE he emerged from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign...

...from THAT evidence, how was ANYONE able to establish a first-shot point of impact as precise as street elevation 423.07?

From the evidence at hand--the Z-film--that level of accuracy would've been impossible, IMHO.

Or am I missing something here?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://www.patspeer.com/chapter2b%3Athesecretservicesecrets

Frazier has already tested the rifle and found that a shooter would need at least 2.3 seconds between shots?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pat;

That happens to be another of those "Factoid's"!

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazr1.htm

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. The first series of three shots were approximately--from 4 to 5 inches high and from 1 to 2 inches to the right of the aiming point, and landed within a 2-inch circle. These three shots were fired in 4.8 seconds. The second series of shots landed--one was about 1 inch high, and the other two about 4 or 5 inches high, and the maximum spread was 5 inches.

That series was fired in 4.6 seconds.

Mr. FRAZIER - I fired three shots in 4.6 seconds at 25 yards with approximately a 3-inch spread, which is the equivalent of a 12-inch spread at a hundred yards. And I feel that a 12-inch relative circle could be reduced to 6 inches or even less with considerable practice with the weapon.

Mr. EISENBERG - That is in the 4.6-second time?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. I would say from 4.8 to 5 seconds, in that area 4.6 is firing this weapon as fast as the bolt can be operated, I think.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is 4.6 to 4.8, to as much as 5.0 seconds for THREE shots fired.

And, if one takes the minimal of either 4.6 to 4.8 seconds, that IS NOT 2.3 seconds per shot.

Furthermore:

Mr. McCLOY - Did you shoot offhand or did you shoot with a rest?

Mr. FRAZIER - We shot with a rest, both the other individuals and myself, on each occasion, with one arm resting on a bench or a table.

Mr. McCLOY - Were you prone, or were you standing up?

Mr. FRAZIER - Well, we were sitting, actually, sitting or kneeling, in order to bring the arm down to the rest we were using.

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, this is shooting from a rest at a stationary target.

Mr. EISENBERG - Based on your experience with the weapon, do you think three shots could be fired accurately within 5 1/2 seconds if no rest was utilized?

Mr. FRAZIER - That would depend on the accuracy which was necessary or needed-or which you desired. I think you could fire the shots in that length of time, but whether you could place them, say, in a 3- or 4-inch circle without either resting or possibly using the sling as a support--I doubt that you could accomplish that.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The operative word here is "rest", as in bench rest shooting.

Frazier and his group utilized the scope in target acquisition for each shot, as well as having utilized a "rest" for each shot.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In that regards, one must take into consideration what is referred to as a "snap shot", and is in fact now a part of many shooting events.

So, the fact that the weapon had a scope on it, does not mean that LHO/aka the shooter, was required by some law to utilize that scope for each and every shot made.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/jfk8/mc.htm

The test was conducted primarily to answer the question, would it have been possible for Lee Harvey Oswald to fire two shots in less than 1.7 seconds?

(1) The weapon can be quite accurately fired more rapidly using open iron sights than the FBI tests in 1963 indicated, where the telescopic sight was used. For example, Officer Masson, during one test series, hit the body silhouette at 143 and 165 feet on the first two shots, and missed the head portion of the silhouette at 266 feet on the third shot by approximately one inch (1"), taking 2.0 seconds between shots 1 and 2, and a total of less than 5 seconds for all three shots. Two other series, one by officer Smith and another, again, by Officer Masson, were fired in which only 1.9 seconds elapsed between two shots, and one of the three shots scored a "kill". [3]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bang:----------------------------------------------Bang:------------------Bang

Z210 (+/-)--------------------------------------- Z313-------------------Altgens shot!

Shot/impact-----5.6 to 5.9 seconds------------Shot/Impact-----------Shot/impact

Scope shot---------------------------------------Scope Shot------------Snapshot

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg

1.9 X 18.3 = 34.77 elapsed frames of film/aka 35 elapsed frames.

Z313 impact shot fired at approximately Z311/312--+ 35 = Z346/347

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. ALTGENS - This would put me at approximately this area here, which would be about 15 feet from me at the time he was shot in the head--about 15 feet from the car on the west side of the car--on the side that Mrs. Kennedy was riding in the car.

There was flesh particles that flew out of the side of his head in my direction from where I was standing

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Failure to understand the evidence has no bearing on the validity of that evidence.

As a general rule, it merely means that one does not understand the evidence.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://www.patspeer.com/chapter2b%3Athesecretservicesecrets

Frazier has already tested the rifle and found that a shooter would need at least 2.3 seconds between shots?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pat;

That happens to be another of those "Factoid's"!

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazr1.htm

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. The first series of three shots were approximately--from 4 to 5 inches high and from 1 to 2 inches to the right of the aiming point, and landed within a 2-inch circle. These three shots were fired in 4.8 seconds. The second series of shots landed--one was about 1 inch high, and the other two about 4 or 5 inches high, and the maximum spread was 5 inches.

That series was fired in 4.6 seconds.

Mr. FRAZIER - I fired three shots in 4.6 seconds at 25 yards with approximately a 3-inch spread, which is the equivalent of a 12-inch spread at a hundred yards. And I feel that a 12-inch relative circle could be reduced to 6 inches or even less with considerable practice with the weapon.

Mr. EISENBERG - That is in the 4.6-second time?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. I would say from 4.8 to 5 seconds, in that area 4.6 is firing this weapon as fast as the bolt can be operated, I think.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is 4.6 to 4.8, to as much as 5.0 seconds for THREE shots fired.

And, if one takes the minimal of either 4.6 to 4.8 seconds, that IS NOT 2.3 seconds per shot.

Furthermore:

Mr. McCLOY - Did you shoot offhand or did you shoot with a rest?

Mr. FRAZIER - We shot with a rest, both the other individuals and myself, on each occasion, with one arm resting on a bench or a table.

Mr. McCLOY - Were you prone, or were you standing up?

Mr. FRAZIER - Well, we were sitting, actually, sitting or kneeling, in order to bring the arm down to the rest we were using.

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, this is shooting from a rest at a stationary target.

Mr. EISENBERG - Based on your experience with the weapon, do you think three shots could be fired accurately within 5 1/2 seconds if no rest was utilized?

Mr. FRAZIER - That would depend on the accuracy which was necessary or needed-or which you desired. I think you could fire the shots in that length of time, but whether you could place them, say, in a 3- or 4-inch circle without either resting or possibly using the sling as a support--I doubt that you could accomplish that.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The operative word here is "rest", as in bench rest shooting.

Frazier and his group utilized the scope in target acquisition for each shot, as well as having utilized a "rest" for each shot.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In that regards, one must take into consideration what is referred to as a "snap shot", and is in fact now a part of many shooting events.

So, the fact that the weapon had a scope on it, does not mean that LHO/aka the shooter, was required by some law to utilize that scope for each and every shot made.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/jfk8/mc.htm

The test was conducted primarily to answer the question, would it have been possible for Lee Harvey Oswald to fire two shots in less than 1.7 seconds?

(1) The weapon can be quite accurately fired more rapidly using open iron sights than the FBI tests in 1963 indicated, where the telescopic sight was used. For example, Officer Masson, during one test series, hit the body silhouette at 143 and 165 feet on the first two shots, and missed the head portion of the silhouette at 266 feet on the third shot by approximately one inch (1"), taking 2.0 seconds between shots 1 and 2, and a total of less than 5 seconds for all three shots. Two other series, one by officer Smith and another, again, by Officer Masson, were fired in which only 1.9 seconds elapsed between two shots, and one of the three shots scored a "kill". [3]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bang:----------------------------------------------Bang:------------------Bang

Z210 (+/-)--------------------------------------- Z313-------------------Altgens shot!

Shot/impact-----5.6 to 5.9 seconds------------Shot/Impact-----------Shot/impact

Scope shot---------------------------------------Scope Shot------------Snapshot

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg

1.9 X 18.3 = 34.77 elapsed frames of film/aka 35 elapsed frames.

Z313 impact shot fired at approximately Z311/312--+ 35 = Z346/347

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. ALTGENS - This would put me at approximately this area here, which would be about 15 feet from me at the time he was shot in the head--about 15 feet from the car on the west side of the car--on the side that Mrs. Kennedy was riding in the car.

There was flesh particles that flew out of the side of his head in my direction from where I was standing

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Failure to understand the evidence has no bearing on the validity of that evidence.

As a general rule, it merely means that one does not understand the evidence.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/jfk8/mc.htm

3) It is not difficult to fire two consecutive shots from a Mannlicher-Carcano within 1.66 seconds, and to "point aim", if not carefully "sight" it, on the target of each shot. Cornwell fired the rifle twice in 1.2 seconds, and I fired it twice within 1.5 seconds. In both cases the second shot missed, but was close to the silhouette. In fact, my second shot only missed the silhouette by approximately 2". [4]

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Street elevation 418.35 for impact location by the initial SS work and what the FBI eventually re-corrected their survey plat to demonstrate.

Street elevation 418.48 by the WC standards of determination.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0139a.htm

And, this would somewhat make one wonder exactly how it was that on 3/27/64, that the firm of Specter, Eisenberg, Hoover, Ford, & Company could have had the 418 street elevation.

Just good "guessing" I would suppose!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Thanks, Tom, for your input. I would like to make my chapter as clear as possible. So you're saying that the drawing with the two impacts, and included in the early FBI report, was based on the Time/Life study? Is this the same study that was reported in newspaper accounts and FBI memos as a Secret Service study? The newspaper accounts made it sound like the SS study was on the 27th? Did it really take place on the 26th?

Also, did Howlett work with West on this study? or Breneman?

1. As you can see, according to the survey data block, the Time/Life work was done on 11/26/63.

And although I can not specifically recall all that was discussed with Mr. West in regards to the dates on the various survey's, it seems as though he stated that the survey work and survey plat were done the same date.

This, the Time/Life work, actually had three impact points, of which only two reportedly struck anyone.

The information was posted before, in that there is "K1" which when transposed to the larger WC Survey Plat utilizing the given Time/Life survey data, places the first shot impact at a point between Z204 to Z206.

Next, came "P" which stood for a pavement strike. However, this supposed impact location to the street is only approximately 17.5 feet farther down Elm St. from the "K1" impact point.

Mr. West and I discussed this and he stated that there was absolutely no indication of any bullet impact to the street.

Nevertheless, they/West were told to survey in this point as a pavement strike, and place it on the survey plat.

This purported "pavement strike" is what lead to Mr. West and I discussing any indications of any bullets striking pavement, sidewalk, curb, etc;. And, Mr. West clearly stated that multitudes of personnel, which included his crew as well as SS & FBI, had looked for any significant sign of such an impact and other than the "Tague" curb strike, there were none.

After the purported pavement strike came "K2" which is the Z313 head shot impact.

However, due to poor survey data, when Paul Hardin drew the survey plat up, the impact point is just about centered with where the yellow curb mark in the background (Moorman/Hill location) is.

This slight differentiation is nothing more than a "plotting" error on the part of Hardin due to the insufficient information which was provided for him to work with in plotting the actual location of the yellow curb mark as well as having angles which were turned to only the degree and minute, whereas "Legal" survey work (as well as accurate plotting information) must have the data to the degree/minute/& second.

That this is merely a "plotting " error becomes quite obvious when one takes the SS Survey plat and notes and follows up on it.

During the Time/Life work, a NAIL was installed directly in alignment from the Z-position, over the Z313 impact point of JFK, to the nail in the background.

This nail was referred to as the "Point in the Park", and when re-surveyed and platted during the far more accurate SS survey work, it placed JFK within a matter of only a few inches of where the WC determined as well.

So, in conclusion, the Time/Life survey plat had only two impacts to occupants of the car, and neither of these made any reference to injury to JBC and/or what bullet was responsible for this damage.

And, it was in fact the "beginning" which would later constitute the WC fairy tale of "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

2. The SS "Study" was that work done through December 2, 3, & 4th, with the resulting Survey Plat dated December 5th, 1963.

The work by Breneman for Time/Life was done with no "topo" work of the surrounding areas; grade of Elm St.; and only a random/assumed elevation.

All of which when coupled with the lack of survey angles down to the second and lack of measurements to the nearest 0.1 ft, created a relatively inaccurate map.

Thus, when the SS decided to do there work, they had Mr. West carry true elevation control into Dealy Plaza, and as discussed with John Dolva (here) long ago, this was done from an established USGS marker which was just up from the corner of Elm & Houston St.

In this survey, Mr. West established multiple SCP (survey control points/stations) and in addition to taking shots from primary stations, also took "backshots" from these other stations as well.

All of which gave Paul Hardin considerably more accurate information with which to accurately work with and establish the SS Survey plat.

Thus, when the FBI as well as the WC did their assassination re-enactments, Mr. West merely utilized those SCP/stations which he had previously established, and that is why anything from one work can be easily transferred/transposed to another work.

In that regards, I have, as a "double check" often taken survey plat as well as survey note information from the SS and/or FBI works, and double checked this by actually plotting it onto the far larger scale WC survey plat.

Note: Time/Life; SS; & FBI plats were all on a scale of 1-inch = 20 feet.

WC Survey plat is on a scale of 1-inch = 10 feet.

3. I did not ask Mr. West for specific names relative to who? was involved in each of the survey works and survey re-enactments, and truthfully, he could not specifically recall names at that time.

He did recall Howlett due to the fact that Howlett came to his office when it was found that the FBI was now conducting another survey and re-enactment, and this is when he asked that he be provided with a copy of the FBI's survey plat.

This was a specific question which I had for Mr. West, since I had previously received the survey plats and survey information, and had seen Howlett's name and address written down on the copy of the plat.

The "survey information" gets completely confusing when one attempts to follow along on "Gauthier's" garbage.

Apparantly, Gauthier has made some attempt to make himself look important in the eyes of JEH, as his ramblings about vehicle speeds, etc; have no foundation and or basis in fact, and have only added confusion.

Along with his attempt to interject firing distances.

There is nothing that complicated about understanding the difference from each survey, as it was not until the WC that actual angles and distances to what would have been the elevation of JFK's head were utilized.

Previous works merely determined angles and distances to an impact point on Elm St.

Gauthier was somewhat "eat up" with how important his little tinker toy model of Dealy Plaza was, when in reality it would have been thrown out of virtually any courtroom in the land, as being worthless in determination of anything.

That Gauthier was JEH's "Boy" becomes quite obvious when it is observed that he was utilized to "slip" the altered survey data into evidence while keeping the actual WC survey plat in it's "sealed envelope" and admission of it into evidence.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; the tracing is wrapped, and sealed in this container.

Mr. SPECTER. Without breaking the seal, I will ask you if the cardboard which has been set up here--may the record show it is a large cardboard. I will ask you for the dimensions in just a minute.

Does the printing on the cardboard represent an exact duplication of the tracing which you have in your hand?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will mark the tracing Commission Exhibit No. 882, and not take it out, since the cardboard represents it, and place Commission Exhibit No. 883 on the cardboard drawing itself, and I would like to move for the admission into evidence of both Exhibits Nos. 882 and 883.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At least the "record" shows that it was a "large cardboard" replica, even if it is not an EXACT replica.

Forgot to add!

Breneman, according to West, only worked on the Time/Life survey work.

Breneman was not an employee of Mr. West, and was only utilized when Mr. West had more work than he could handle.

Due to the "no notice" exercise of the Time/Life bunch, Mr. West's crews were already pretty well booked on other work.

Thus, he called Breneman to come in and assist in this work.

Other than that, Breneman did not participate in any of the other Survey Plat work, although he did show up at some point during some of these other works and Mr. West specifically recalled that he was there during one of those times when every one was searching and attempting to find any indication of a curb/pavement strike of a bullet.

Other than that, Mr. West did call Breneman in to help him when he got a call from the WC and they specifically wanted Mr. West to go out and measure the exact dimensions of the highway signs as well as their "EXACT" location in relationship to the the distance of the posts back from the sidewalks and from established/fixed points.

Gauthier was somewhat "eat up" with how important his little tinker toy model of Dealy Plaza was, when in reality it would have been thrown out of virtually any courtroom in the land, as being worthless in determination of anything.

That Gauthier was JEH's "Boy" becomes quite obvious when it is observed that he was utilized to "slip" the altered survey data into evidence while keeping the actual WC survey plat in it's "sealed envelope" and admission of it into evidence.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; the tracing is wrapped, and sealed in this container.

Mr. SPECTER. Without breaking the seal, I will ask you if the cardboard which has been set up here--may the record show it is a large cardboard. I will ask you for the dimensions in just a minute.

Does the printing on the cardboard represent an exact duplication of the tracing which you have in your hand?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will mark the tracing Commission Exhibit No. 882, and not take it out, since the cardboard represents it, and place Commission Exhibit No. 883 on the cardboard drawing itself, and I would like to move for the admission into evidence of both Exhibits Nos. 882 and 883.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At least the "record" shows that it was a "large cardboard" replica, even if it is not an EXACT replica.

Leo J. Gauthier:

The scene is a Boston courtoom in the fall of 1950. Eight defendants are being tried in the famous Brinks Bank Robbery--case in which some $ 1,219,000 was stolen from a North Boston plant. Chief defense counsel Paul T. Smith introduces the first drfense exhibit, a scale model of the Brinks plant and the surrounding area in Boston. The F.B.I. man responsible for the research and construction of the model is Les J. Gauthier. Sauthier tesifies that his job with the F.B.I. is to appear as an "expert witness" in federal cases in which the Federal Bureau is involved, Agent Gauthier testifies further that he has constructed models and testified in other cases such as the Graham Trail in which he constructed a scale model of teh United Air Lines plant which was allegedly blown up by John P. Graham. Agent Gauthier has seen a lot of our remarkable county and the road to his success began back at Two Rivers, Wisconsin.

Lea Gauthier was born on October 4, 1907, in Two Rivers, and was one of eleven children born to Charles L and Harriet LaFond Gauthier. Leo attended St. Lukes Parochial School and graduated from Washington High School in 1926. He was employed by Eggers Veneer Factor and the Aluminum Goods Manufacturing Company before enlisting in the Coast Guard in 1929. From 1929-34, Lea Gauthier was assigned to the New York area, While in New York he took evening courses at the Drake School of Asrchitecture and the Cooper Union School of Art. Leo's life took on added meaning when he marrier adelaide Joseph of Brooklyn on July 2, 1932. After completion of his Coast Guard duty he was appointed Administrative Clerk of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 1935. He the attended Columbus Law School, now a part of Catholic University and graduated in 1939 with a law degree (LLB). Gauthier was appointed a special agent of the F.B.I. in 1939. In 1955 he was made an F.B.I Inspector and he retired in 1965 wutg 30 years of serive to his credit.

Leo Gauthier became an aide to Director J. Edgar Hoover during his F.B.I. years and was assigned to all major cases as an "expert witness" Some of the better known cases Leo worked on were the Greenlease Kidnapping case, coplan Espionage Case, and the Brinks Boston Bank Robbery, In 1963, he was a part of the Warren Commission's investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

For many year Gauthier was the director of the F.B.I.'s extensive drafting and sketching division. In later years Gauthier was responsible for the designing of the safety features of vehicles which carried the Presidents.

In January of 1966, Leo Gauthier was appointed Market Specialist for the Eastern United Sates by the Vogue Type and Rubber Company, a Chicago and Los Angeles based firm. At present he is Vice-President of th Vogue Tyre and Rubber Company and resides in suburban Maryland just outside of our nations capital. Leo Gauthier is a member of Sigma Delta Kappa; a natinal legal fraternity and also a member of the society of Former Agents of the F.B.I.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well! He most certainly "aided" JEH & Company in feeding a line of BS to the American Public in regards to the WC & it's ever so accurate assassination re-enactment.

Take your place in the "History Books" Mr. Gauthier!

[Pat Speer]

To clarify, Tom, it appears that the WC immediately disregarded Gauthier's and the SS's depiction of a head shot after Z-313, and had it re-interpreted on 2-7, and yet placed nothing in the record showing that they'd re-interpreted the shot locations. Is that correct? If so, it appears that the 5-24 re-enactment was performed in part to "correct" the FBI's earlier "mistakes" without ever putting anything in the record showing that the WC had already decided to disregard the earlier work of the SS and FBI. Now this could have been done for a number of reasons. One possibility is that they were trying to hide that they were 're-doing" work already done by the FBI, and were trying to save the SS and FBI, and the government as a whole, embarrassment. Another is that they were trying to hide that they were pushing an agenda, and forcing the FBI and SS to go along with a new pre-determined interpretation of events, against their will.

Am I correct to believe that you suspect the latter?

Also, I take from your articles on the information block of CE 882, that you have a clear version of it. Can you show us the top part, with the trajectories? It's different from the others and seems to show a shot around location A of the re-enactment.

Edited February 18, 2008 by Pat Speer

[Thomas H. Purvis]

To clarify, Tom, it appears that the WC immediately disregarded Gauthier's and the SS's depiction of a head shot after Z-313, and had it re-interpreted on 2-7, and yet placed nothing in the record showing that they'd re-interpreted the shot locations. Is that correct? If so, it appears that the 5-24 re-enactment was performed in part to "correct" the FBI's earlier "mistakes" without ever putting anything in the record showing that the WC had already decided to disregard the earlier work of the SS and FBI. Now this could have been done for a number of reasons. One possibility is that they were trying to hide that they were 're-doing" work already done by the FBI, and were trying to save the SS and FBI, and the government as a whole, embarrassment. Another is that they were trying to hide that they were pushing an agenda, and forcing the FBI and SS to go along with a new pre-determined interpretation of events, against their will.

Am I correct to believe that you suspect the latter?

Also, I take from your articles on the information block of CE 882, that you have a clear version of it. Can you show us the top part, with the trajectories? It's different from the others and seems to show a shot around location A of the re-enactment.

================================================================================

April 27, 1964

MEMORANDUM

TO: J. Lee Rankin

FROM: Norman Redlich

The purpose of this memorandum is to explain the reasons why

certain members of the staff feel that it is important to take certain

on-site photographs in connection with the location of the approximate

points at which the three bullets struck the occupants of the

Presidential limousine.

Our report presumably will state that the President was hit by

the first bullet, Governor Connally by the second, and the President

by the third and fatal bullet. The report will also conclude that the

bullets were fired by one person located in the sixth floor southeast

corner window of the TSBD building.

As our investigation now stands, however, we have not shown

that these events could possibly have occurred in the manner suggested

above. All we have is a reasonable hypothesis which appears to be

supported by the medical testimony but which has not been checked out

against the physical facts at the scene of the assassination.

Our examination of the Zapruder films shows that the fatal

third shot struck the President at a point which we can locate with

reasonable accuracy on the ground. We can do this because we know the

exact frame (no. 313) in the film at which the third shot hit the

President and we know the location of the photographer. By lining up

fixed objects in the movie frame where this shot occurs we feel that

we have determined the approximate location of this shot. This can be

verified by a photo of the same spot from the point where Zapruder was

standing.

We have the testimony of Governor and Mrs. Connally that the

Governor was hit with the second bullet at a point which we probably

cannot fix with precision. We feel we have established, however, with

the help of medical testimony, that the shot which hit the Governor

did not come after frame 240 on the Zapruder film. The governor feels

that it came around 230, which is certainly consistent with our

observations of the film and with the doctor's testimony. Since the

President was shot at frame 313, this would leave a time of at least 4

seconds between the two shots, certainly ample for even an

inexperienced marksman.

Prior to our last viewing of the films with Governor Connally

we had assumed that the President was hit while he was concealed

behind the sign which occurs between frames 215-225. We have expert

testimony to the effect that a skilled marksman would require a

minimum 2 seconds between shots with this rifle. Since the camera

operates at 18 1/3 frames per second, there would have to be a minimum

of 40 frames between shots. It is apparent, therefore, that if

Governor Connally was even as late as frame 240, the President would

have to have been hit no later than frame 190 and probably even

earlier.

We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine

whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to

frame 190. We could locate the position on the ground which

corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish

by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the

President prior to this point. Our intention is not to establish the

point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the

hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole

assassin.

I had always assumed that our final report would be

accompanied by a surveyor's diagram which would indicate the

approximate location of the three shots. We certainly cannot prepare

such a diagram without establishing that we are describing an

occurrence which is physically possible. Our failure to do this will,

in my opinion, place this Report in jeopardy since it is a certainty

that others will examine the Zapruder films and raise the same

questions which have been raised by our examination of the films. If

we do not attempt to answer these observable facts, others may answer

them with facts which challenge our most basic assumptions, or with

fanciful theories based on our unwillingness to test our assumptions

by the investigatory methods available to us.

I should add that the facts which we now have in our

possession, submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and

Secret Service, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will

present a completely misleading picture.

It may well be that this project should be undertaken by the

FBI and Secret Service with our assistance instead of being done as a

staff project. The important thing is that the project be undertaken

expeditiously.

===============================================================================

"Tunnel Vision" is not limited to JFK researchers.

The Z313 impact point was a "given" which, due to the yellow curb mark at the Moorman/Hill location, absolutely could not be made to disappear.

Far too many had observed it, and it was for all practical purposes caught in three seperate films.

In addition, Time/Life had this point surveyed in (even though when the plat was made it places the shot in alignment with the yellow mark, which is nothing more than a drafting error due to poor information gathered to produce the plat), and the SS also had this point surveyed in.

JEH & Company's little episode of moving the Z313 impact was a completely stupid move. One in which apparantly no one took the yellow curb mark into consideration as the "move" was drawn up on paper and given to Mr. West prior to even going into Dealy Plaza to conduct the work.----Dumb/dumb/& Dumber.

Because JEH had now gone out on a limb and had in reality caused to be produced a completely false survey, his neck was now on the line as well.

And thusly the combined "you cover my A** and we will cover your A**" of the FBI and WC lies to the public.

As I have demonsrated, were it not for the "slip" of Ronald Simmons in letting out that there was a "prior" survey plat, then in all probabilitly much of this would have never been known.

Nevertheless, it was allowed to admitted as the SS Survey Plat of December 5, 1963, when in reality it is the FBI survey plat of 2/7/64, and conveniently reduced down to such small detail and size that no-one would truly ever recognize or know the difference.

Another of those "slight/sleight-of-hand" maneuevers which the WC effectively utilized many times.

One can rest assured that those such as "Specter & Company" who were in the know, fully understood the reasons that they were manipulating the facts.

Those such as Rankin and a few others, were merely fed information relative to "incorrect" data which needed the great auspices and intellilgence of the WC to straighten out for us.

The 40 to 41 elapsed frames of the Z-film which they had computed, tied their hands in now having to insure that JEH & Company's 2/7/64 survey plat was never fully seen, as much as did it cause them to attempt to eliminate all trace of the third/last/final shot which occurred directly in front of James ALtgens.

(18.3 frames per second X 2.3 seconds of rifle operating time = 42 elapsed frames of the film.

Z313 + 42 = Z355 (+/-) before a third/last/final shot could be fired.

In this "tunnel vision" mode, the WC went out of their way to attempt to determine if LHO was, or could have fired the rifle from a left-handed position.

To a "shooter", this happens to be a dead give-away, in that they were attempting to pin down some means by which the rifle could have been fired faster than what they were looking at in the 2.3 to 2.4 second timeframe.

In keeping too close to them certain knowledge, and not having and allowing anyone who was a true shooter to offer input, the WC blindly accepted that the 40 to 44 frame elapsed time between shots was "fixed in stone".

In this, they never took into consideration several essential variables of the shooting event.

1. Robert Frazier's time, WAS NOT 2.3 to 2.4 seconds BETWEEN SHOTS. It was in fact 4.6 to 4.8 seconds for ALL three shots, which, however slight it may be, does not mean that it took 2.3 to 2.4 seconds to operate and refire the rifle for a second time.

2. Frazier's time was determined in which he utilized the rifle scope in ALL three shots. Thusly, an extremely rushed event in which one is attempting to "stuff" into the equation the actual time for target acquisition through a scope, when in fact one can not even determine if the scope were in fact utilized at all.

3. Frazier's time was determined in firing from the bench rest position, which always takes additional time.

---------------------------------

Now, we have had mulltitudes of "shooters" how have become involved in discussion of the "NAY's" of the Dealy Plaza shooting scenario.

And, not unlike the purported "Great Minds" who have given us so much BS on the subject matter, NONE told you that Z313 was the SECOND SHOT FIRED, just as apparantly none of them ever even considered this aspect of the equation.

Yet, some of these persons, claim great abilities in the application of "LOGIC"!

Logic, not unlike any other application of problem solving technique application, firstly requires a definitive explanation of the problem.

Secondly, and more importantly, it requires the acquisition of ALL KNOWN FACTS and information relative to the problem.

------------------------------------------

Anyone who claims to be a shooter, and is unfamiliar with the "snap-shot"/aka "target of opportunity"/aka USMC Firing Range Qualification station which is known as "Suprise Fire", truly should stay out of conversations which deal with the ability of someone to shoot a rifle.

For this reason, I long ago posted information here in regards to shooting events which specifically incorporate into them the event which is referred to as the "Snap Shot" in which a person standing, operates and fires the rifle just as fast as is feasibly possible.

And, in the one event posted, FEMALE shooters, operating bolt action rifles, were easily and accurately shooting in the 1.8 to 1.9 second elapsed time.

--------------------------------------------------

Some within the WC were manipulating and presenting the lie, strictly for the ASININE political reason which I have previously stated.

Some within the WC were assisting in this manipulation, merely due to a lack of understanding of the total realm of the facts.

Some within the WC were merely being manipulated by the two above.

----------------------------------------------------

Now, back to the actual shooting event:

1st shot was, most probably within the Z204 to Z206 timeframe.

2nd shot/aka Z313 impact was some 5.6 to 5.9 seconds after the first shot. Anyone think that LHO did not have sufficient time to fully utilize the scope in target acquisition, especially when the target was in fact slowing down it's forward movement?

3rd shot/aka the Altgens impact came at some point which was approximately 1.8 to 1.9 seconds after the Z313 impact.

This shot, due to the extremely short elapsed time (bang/bang) was without any doubt a "snap shot", which was done as fast as LHO could operate the bolt and fire the weapon.

Now! For the CT side of the fence, the fact that LHO had been observed by his wife, conducting "rapid fire" bolt action operation of the Carcano, is completely indicative that one has some intention of being in the situation in which they will need such capabilities.

New Orleans, (after Katrina), could no doubt utilize such talents. However, in 1962 to 1962, such actions had some other purpose, which by all indications was a plan to get LHO into Cuba to shoot Castro.

--------------------------------------------

Long-winded answers, huh!

The SS was now in virtual complete disgrace as they had allowed an individual, firing a bolt action rifle, to get off three shots and three hits on the President of the US, while for they most part (other than Clint Hill) they merely "non-reacted".

The FBI/aka JEH & Company, who could have cared less about the SS, attemted his own little lie for the WC, in attempt to make it seem that JBC was hit early in the event, and that all of his "reacting to severe external stimuli" was actually reacting to having been shot.

When the reality is that JBC, who was the only person close enough to JFK, and who also by his own admission recognized that it was shots, PANICKED!

Thusly, everyone around, allowed JFK to ride down the road with a hot bullet lodged into his back, (which is why he happens to be "hunched" over and attempting to get out of his coat), and only a small insignificant wound of the anterior throat where the small fragment of lead came out the throat, which all were in fact only minor wounds, until some 5.6 to 5.8 seconds later the second shot blew his head off.

And, the SS Agent driving the car acctually "reacted" by slowing the vehicle down due to unsureness as to what was going on!

So yes, me thinks that there was more than sufficient reason for certain "Higher ups" within the SS to cooperate, as well as now having JEH, "America's Crimefighter" caught in an absollute and intentional lie.

Whew!

Did I get it all?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Also, I take from your articles on the information block of CE 882, that you have a clear version of it. Can you show us the top part, with the trajectories? It's different from the others and seems to show a shot around location A of the re-enactment. "

Pat;

You and I know what CE882 is, but others less familiar with my rants and ravings, most probably are not.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0464a.htm

-----------------------------------------------

Does the printing on the cardboard represent an exact duplication of the tracing which you have in your hand?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will mark the tracing Commission Exhibit No. 882, and not take it out, since the cardboard represents it, and place Commission Exhibit No. 883 on the cardboard drawing itself, and I would like to move for the admission into evidence of both Exhibits Nos. 882 and 883.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

------------------------------------------------

Now, most of those who have "faith" in the WC's actions, (as well as those who search for mythological multiple assassins; unicorns; the golden fleece; etc.) probably believe that CE882 is a copy of Mr. West's ORIGINAL survey plat.

IT IS NOT!.

The "Original", also contains the location of the Tague/"Curb" impact location point.

So, one could suppose that CE882, is in reality CE883, the "EXACT" duplication on cardboard.

Methinks the WC has pulled upon the viewing public, another "slight"/sleight-of-hand!

And, although long ago clarified on this forum, here again for the enjoyment of the viewing public, in order to insure no "Hanky Panky/Sleight-of-hand" from Tom, is the curb strike from a real and true "Original Copy" of the WC Survey Plat.

I do not believe that you will find this information on CE882.

(P.S. Gotta love anyone who can pull stuff like this off)

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"It's different from the others and seems to show a shot around location A of the re-enactment. "

Yeah it is!

It would appear that either you were not enrolled in that lecture which dealt with "Position "A"", or elsewise I put you to sleep during it.

I do believe that Mr. Healy knows the answer to this one.

Nevertheless! "Position "A"" has absolutely nothing to do with any shot which was purportedly fired.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Mr. SPECTER - Mr. Frazier, referring to Commission Exhibit No. 886, did you view through the sight that depicted in "photograph through rifle scope" on the positioning of the Presidential limousine or the car to simulate the limousine at position A?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; this would be the first position that an individual in that sixth floor window could sight at the car due to the interference of the window ledge of the building and the fact that the angle downward is limited by the partially lowered window.

--------------------

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The first position we established that morning was frame 161.

Mr. SPECTER. Was there not a position established prior in sequence to frame 161, specifically that designated as position A?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was actually established later. But the first one to be actually located was 161. And we went back later and positioned point A.

Mr. SPECTER. Well, let's start with the position which is the most easterly point on Elm Street, which I believe would be position A, would it not?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. Have you a photographic exhibit depicting that position?

----

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Station C is on a line drawn along the west curb line of Houston Street in a direct line, and station C is at a point along that line that is in line with where the car would have turned coming around that corner. It is on a line which is an extension of the west curb line of Houston Street.

Mr. DULLES. Where is position A on that chart?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Position A is here.

Mr. McCLOY. That is before you get to the tree?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he isn't under the tree yet.

Mr. SPECTER. And what occupant, if any, in the car is position A sighted on for measuring purposes?

--------------------

Mr. SPECTER. Was there any prior position, that is a position before position A, where the marksman from the sixth floor could have fired the weapon and have struck the President at the known point of entry at the base of the back of his neck?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; because as the car moves back, you lose sight of the chalk mark on the back of his coat.

Mr. SPECTER. And what is the distance between that point on the President and station C?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 44 feet from station C--91.6 feet to the rifle in the window from the actual chalk mark on the coat. All measurements were made to the chalk mark on the coat.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hope "you-all" got and understood all that!

Now, if you want to know what "Position "A"" was truly about:

1. It gave the WC a "point" back behind, in which they could have Mr. West draw a downward angle too, which in reality meant nothing, but when placed onto the (WC) West Survey Plat, would make it look as if the WC were drawing in the approximate/possible impact point of some mythological first shot, and would therefore not conflict that terribly with the 3-shot drawing of the fBI's 2/7/64 fantasyland drawing.

(except of course to someone who had better in life to do than to "nitpick" apart the evidence of the WC.

2. More importantly, the WC had Mr. West establish "Position A" as well as "Station C", and thusly make measurements, etc; from these two completely random as well as completely unknown positions.

(except to those who happen to have his survey notes).

And, although Mr. West did what the WC wanted, (he thought that they were merely stupid), Mr. West also knew that he had long prior (during the SS work of December 1963) established horizontal control for Dealy Plaza as well as for Elm St.

And thusly, Mr. West platted ALL WC work to correspond with the prior horizontal control stationing which was established by the SS, utilized by the fBI, and is now a highly accurate part of the WC Survey Plat.

Had this not been done by Mr. West, and it would appear that the WC was unaware that he had reverted to his old stationing/horizontal control, then we would be with the WC about like we are with the Time/Life Survey plat.

In that we would have no true means of correlating the data between the various works, and thusly the "4+95" stationing for the impact point of the third/last/final/aka Altgens impact, would have no true meaning on the WC survey.

Something which the WC apparantly counted on by establishment of the new "Position A" , but also something which they did not count on in that Mr. West utilized his previously established SCP stations as well as elevations.

In fact, from his survey notes, when he did the WC's Z313 impact location and nail, he also referenced in his notes the short distance and direction to the previously established nail at the SS's 418. 35 (vs WC 418.48) street location and elevation.

There are many such errors within the WC documents.

However, in order to find these errors, one must completely apply the principle of "Reading Comprehension" and, if they are off chasing those "Logical" mythololgical beings, which someone who has applied absolutely zero logic (and little factual research in determination of,) then they too will and may as well begin to look for unicorns and the golden fleece.

Might I state that "applied logic" would state that in event that it were a true "covert assassination", then only a lone gunman would be utilized.

To do otherwise would definitively present that this was not the work of some lone nut assassin on which it could be blamed.

This same applied logic would dictate that "As long as you keep them chasing the smoke, it is most unlikely that they will ever find the actual fire".

In fact, they will in all probabilty merely become lost in the forest as the smoke evaporates.

Note: For those who are attempting to make sense, it is not difficult to recognize that little "proofreading" is being done.

Of Import, I just read this and corrected the WC street elevation (418.48) for the Z313 impact.

This IS IMPORTANT, as the SS elevation was 418.35.

Grammer & Spelling count only if one is being graded on that content and context.

And I personally could care less about it at this stage in life.

Tom

Edited February 18, 2008 by Thomas H. Purvis