Clint Hill - First shot hit the president

[Mike Williams]

Weren't there any witnesses at the east corner of Elm who recalled any movement by JFK, as is conveniently missing from Towner and the other film?

I don't see anything in any film that shows Greer nearly hitting the curb. There were people standing there, and that would have caused a ripple in the crowd. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing cars veering toward unsuspecting bystanders to compare reactions with.

I think Greer misperceived which street he was supposed to turn down and had to correct at the last second, which would have been a couple feet later than if he had not made his mistake. Locals in the crowd probably did a silent "Oops!" in their heads, knowing what almost happened. But do we see anyone in the crowd reacting with any concern in Towner? Kennedy seems the only person fazed by by any part of the turn...we'll never really know if he's reacting to a missed shot, or if he gave a little "Oops!" at the short turn himself, feeling the way one does when one misses a step on the stairs.

Any bets on whether JFK's dropped wave is a reaction to a pavement hit, or to the short turn? Either way, it's a significant moment that deserves exploration, and I'm glad Bob Harris brought it up.

Thanks David.

I think if JFK's reaction had been to the limo striking the curb or braking, he might have been thrown forward, but not to his left, toward Jackie. And the others riding with him would have reacted similarly. Nor would he have balled his hand into a fist.

Those reactions were unique. JFK never reacted like that during the motorcade previously or undoubtedly, any other time in his life. And the reactions began JUST as the limo pulled in front of the Daltex building and the window that was partially broken out on the third floor.

In the past, people blew off the notion that there was a shot then, because most witnesses said they never heard shots until later. But we have ignored the possibility that a suppressed weapon was used, which not only explains why most people never heard that shot, but why shots were fired wildly, missing the entire limousine. Suppressors are notorious for causing problems like that. And the mafia had been using suppressors for decades prior to 1963. There is no reason at all that they wouldn't have used them in the attack on JFK - when the limo was relatively close.

Harris you are a trip.

Seems you never learn your lesson. We have already proven that there was no exterior damage to the Limo, indicating no fragments struck it, we have already determined that no other occupant was hit by your imaginary fragments, so somehow these managed to not hit the Limo or anyone but JFK? :unsure: Were these special "controlled fragmentation" rounds, much like Fetzer's "controlled demolition" charges?

As you have also been told a silencer would still have emitted well over 100db, unless you are really going to contend someone was shooting sub sonic ammunition, which is idiotic at best. The shot would have been perfectly audible.

JFK's movements are replicated in other parts of the motorcade, as Mark Henceroth pointed out to you.

Not to mention that just scant seconds later the President is smiling widely and waving to the crowd. Would you do that if you had just been struck so severely by fragments that you ducked for cover?

And you have yet to prove that JFK was making a fist at all. You seem like this is a forgone conclusion, but how could you tell this when you apparently can't determine the color of the 20 foot long several thousand pound limo the man was riding in?

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.~Robert Harris

Um.....Robert....once again the limo was blue...... :ice

Edited June 17, 2010 by Mike Williams

[John Dolva]

there is the coneshaped shockwave that precedes the bullet, spreading out in a fan behind the bullet.. There are also buzzes or flutters, and there are echoes.

[Mike Williams]

there is the coneshaped shockwave that precedes the bullet, spreading out in a fan behind the bullet.. There are also buzzes or flutters, and there are echoes.

Precisely! This is what makes the thought of silencers to ridiculous for any one who knows ballistics to contemplate.

[David Andrews]

Does anybody watch shows about modern sniping on The Military Channel, like Top Sniper or Weaponology? There seems to be a bunch of these shows lately, I guess because everybody would like to kill somebody in this recession. Has anybody seen any good historical material there on period suppressors?

P. S. Bob, all - notice in the Hughes film, just after the right turn onto Houston, how Kennedy leans left to talk to Jackie, who is facing him at the moment. It may be useful to compare body movements and "body language" between the two turns.

Anyways...do we now have more fertile ground for speculation as to why the turn is missing in Zapruder?

Edited June 18, 2010 by David Andrews

[Mike Williams]

Does anybody watch shows about modern sniping on The Military Channel, like Top Sniper or Weaponology? There seems to be a bunch of these shows lately, I guess because everybody would like to kill somebody in this recession. Has anybody seen any good historical material there on period suppressors?

P. S. Bob, all - notice in the Hughes film, just after the right turn onto Houston, how Kennedy leans left to talk to Jackie, who is facing him at the moment. It may be useful to compare body movements and "body language" between the two turns.

Anyways...do we now have more fertile ground for speculation as to why the turn is missing in Zapruder?

Dave,

Some years ago I was involved in making a short piece for a special on sniping. It was made over seas and was a very short portion of the show. I believe I was visible for about 15 seconds, and was in the background working with some fellows on the firing line.

I really do not think we need to take a very close look at what suppressors in 1963 were capable of, as we have much better technology today, and still can not manage to get the sound levels under 100dB for high power rifles. I would think that if we can not do it today, than we would not have been able to do it in 1963.

I really should do an article for my website about suppressors and put this to rest once and for all.

Mike

[David Andrews]

Do a study on Mitch WerBell. I'd like to see a second opinion.

[John Dolva]

Finnish poachers, in the early 1900's used captured Russian guns and its cartridges to reload with a short stubby bullet and a lesser load, fitting the narrower bullet onto the larger cartridge by narrowing the neck. What they had then was a shot so quiet it became know as the cats sneeze. A five shot pattern shows holes, 3 out of 5 looking like the suggested back wound. The accuracy was sufficient and the method was also used in assassinations back then as it was soft lead and fragmented in the person shot. ensuring minimum collateral damage. The bullet tumbles and I presume therefore, as well as being stocky, has its accuracy, which is good over shorter distances, due to having some more of the chracteristics of a ball than a long bullet depending on gyro.

Mike could you (or anyone) comment, correct, the above statement, please?

edit:typo

Edited June 18, 2010 by John Dolva

[Mike Williams]

Finnish poachers, in the early 1900's used captured Russian guns and its cartridges to reload with a short stubby bullet and a lesser load, fitting the narrower bullet onto the larger cartridge by narrowing the neck. What they had then was a shot so quiet it became know as the cats sneeze. A five shot pattern shows holes, 3 out of 5 looking like the suggested back wound. The accuracy was sufficient and the method was also used in assassinations back then as it was soft lead and fragmented in the person shot. ensuring minimum collateral damage. The bullet tumbles and I presume therefore, as well as being stocky, has its accuracy, which is good over shorter distances, due to having some more of the chracteristics of a ball than a long bullet depending on gyro.

Mike could you (or anyone) comment, correct, the above statement, please?

edit:typo

John,

I don't think JFK was shot by Finnish poachers.....

[Mike Williams]

Do a study on Mitch WerBell. I'd like to see a second opinion.

David,

I would like to, and will read more about him. I doubt he had the tech ability of the US Gov. and certainly did not have anywhere near as good of silencers as we have today, which are still at best feeble.

Mike

[John Dolva]

Smartarse

[Mike Williams]

Smartarse

Im sorry buddy, I just had to it was to good to pass up.

Anyhow.

JFK's wounds do not appear to be tumbling, nor soft lead. in order for them to be that silent they would certainly have to be subsonic and likely in the range of 800 fps, any idea how inaccurate that would be at say 50 yards? I would like to read more about their weapons though, its just plain interesting.

Mike

[John Dolva]

No worries, Mike.

I did a topic called the cats whisper or sneeze. It has links and some deatils. I'm just looking at things from different angles. From memory the accuracy was 30 or 50 meters (a tight pattern). For a moment suspend the notion that all shots came from the nest? But either way. Can you see any way that this COULD explain the crimped cartridge (which on color analysis does not seem to have the same heat discoloration, nor expansion, as the other two.)

I think they (the poachers) used mauser derivatives as well.

edit:add, typo

http://educationforu...?showtopic=9192

http://www.guns.connect.fi/gow/arcane1.html

Edited June 18, 2010 by John Dolva

[Robert Harris]

Weren't there any witnesses at the east corner of Elm who recalled any movement by JFK, as is conveniently missing from Towner and the other film?

I don't see anything in any film that shows Greer nearly hitting the curb. There were people standing there, and that would have caused a ripple in the crowd. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing cars veering toward unsuspecting bystanders to compare reactions with.

I think Greer misperceived which street he was supposed to turn down and had to correct at the last second, which would have been a couple feet later than if he had not made his mistake. Locals in the crowd probably did a silent "Oops!" in their heads, knowing what almost happened. But do we see anyone in the crowd reacting with any concern in Towner? Kennedy seems the only person fazed by by any part of the turn...we'll never really know if he's reacting to a missed shot, or if he gave a little "Oops!" at the short turn himself, feeling the way one does when one misses a step on the stairs.

Any bets on whether JFK's dropped wave is a reaction to a pavement hit, or to the short turn? Either way, it's a significant moment that deserves exploration, and I'm glad Bob Harris brought it up.

Thanks David.

I think if JFK's reaction had been to the limo striking the curb or braking, he might have been thrown forward, but not to his left, toward Jackie. And the others riding with him would have reacted similarly. Nor would he have balled his hand into a fist.

Those reactions were unique. JFK never reacted like that during the motorcade previously or undoubtedly, any other time in his life. And the reactions began JUST as the limo pulled in front of the Daltex building and the window that was partially broken out on the third floor.

In the past, people blew off the notion that there was a shot then, because most witnesses said they never heard shots until later. But we have ignored the possibility that a suppressed weapon was used, which not only explains why most people never heard that shot, but why shots were fired wildly, missing the entire limousine. Suppressors are notorious for causing problems like that. And the mafia had been using suppressors for decades prior to 1963. There is no reason at all that they wouldn't have used them in the attack on JFK - when the limo was relatively close.

Harris you are a trip.

Seems you never learn your lesson. We have already proven that there was no exterior damage to the Limo, indicating no fragments struck it, we have already determined that no other occupant was hit by your imaginary fragments, so somehow these managed to not hit the Limo or anyone but JFK? :unsure: Were these special "controlled fragmentation" rounds, much like Fetzer's "controlled demolition" charges?

As you have also been told a silencer would still have emitted well over 100db, unless you are really going to contend someone was shooting sub sonic ammunition, which is idiotic at best. The shot would have been perfectly audible.

JFK's movements are replicated in other parts of the motorcade, as Mark Henceroth pointed out to you.

Not to mention that just scant seconds later the President is smiling widely and waving to the crowd. Would you do that if you had just been struck so severely by fragments that you ducked for cover?

And you have yet to prove that JFK was making a fist at all. You seem like this is a forgone conclusion, but how could you tell this when you apparently can't determine the color of the 20 foot long several thousand pound limo the man was riding in?

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.~Robert Harris

Um.....Robert....once again the limo was blue...... :ice

Michael, you did not prove that the limo was never pelted by debris from a missed shot, by citing Frazier stating that a bullet didn't damage the limo. The most that would result from a piece of asphalt striking the vehicle would be a tiny scratch - if that. You seem to be desperate to refute what 99% of your fellow nutters already believe.

And the only one who told me that all suppressors generated "well over 100db", was YOU. This video, which I showed you before, give us a good perspective on the levels generated by small, suppressed weapons - a pistol AND a rifle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfPO6cFstTk

And even if you were right, 130db which is the level generated by Oswald's rifle is EIGHT TIMES louder than 100db. The difference is huge.

[Mike Williams]

Weren't there any witnesses at the east corner of Elm who recalled any movement by JFK, as is conveniently missing from Towner and the other film?

I don't see anything in any film that shows Greer nearly hitting the curb. There were people standing there, and that would have caused a ripple in the crowd. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing cars veering toward unsuspecting bystanders to compare reactions with.

I think Greer misperceived which street he was supposed to turn down and had to correct at the last second, which would have been a couple feet later than if he had not made his mistake. Locals in the crowd probably did a silent "Oops!" in their heads, knowing what almost happened. But do we see anyone in the crowd reacting with any concern in Towner? Kennedy seems the only person fazed by by any part of the turn...we'll never really know if he's reacting to a missed shot, or if he gave a little "Oops!" at the short turn himself, feeling the way one does when one misses a step on the stairs.

Any bets on whether JFK's dropped wave is a reaction to a pavement hit, or to the short turn? Either way, it's a significant moment that deserves exploration, and I'm glad Bob Harris brought it up.

Thanks David.

I think if JFK's reaction had been to the limo striking the curb or braking, he might have been thrown forward, but not to his left, toward Jackie. And the others riding with him would have reacted similarly. Nor would he have balled his hand into a fist.

Those reactions were unique. JFK never reacted like that during the motorcade previously or undoubtedly, any other time in his life. And the reactions began JUST as the limo pulled in front of the Daltex building and the window that was partially broken out on the third floor.

In the past, people blew off the notion that there was a shot then, because most witnesses said they never heard shots until later. But we have ignored the possibility that a suppressed weapon was used, which not only explains why most people never heard that shot, but why shots were fired wildly, missing the entire limousine. Suppressors are notorious for causing problems like that. And the mafia had been using suppressors for decades prior to 1963. There is no reason at all that they wouldn't have used them in the attack on JFK - when the limo was relatively close.

Harris you are a trip.

Seems you never learn your lesson. We have already proven that there was no exterior damage to the Limo, indicating no fragments struck it, we have already determined that no other occupant was hit by your imaginary fragments, so somehow these managed to not hit the Limo or anyone but JFK? :unsure: Were these special "controlled fragmentation" rounds, much like Fetzer's "controlled demolition" charges?

As you have also been told a silencer would still have emitted well over 100db, unless you are really going to contend someone was shooting sub sonic ammunition, which is idiotic at best. The shot would have been perfectly audible.

JFK's movements are replicated in other parts of the motorcade, as Mark Henceroth pointed out to you.

Not to mention that just scant seconds later the President is smiling widely and waving to the crowd. Would you do that if you had just been struck so severely by fragments that you ducked for cover?

And you have yet to prove that JFK was making a fist at all. You seem like this is a forgone conclusion, but how could you tell this when you apparently can't determine the color of the 20 foot long several thousand pound limo the man was riding in?

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.~Robert Harris

Um.....Robert....once again the limo was blue...... :ice

Michael, you did not prove that the limo was never pelted by debris from a missed shot, by citing Frazier stating that a bullet didn't damage the limo. The most that would result from a piece of asphalt striking the vehicle would be a tiny scratch - if that. You seem to be desperate to refute what 99% of your fellow nutters already believe.

And the only one who told me that all suppressors generated "well over 100db", was YOU. This video, which I showed you before, give us a good perspective on the levels generated by small, suppressed weapons - a pistol AND a rifle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfPO6cFstTk

And even if you were right, 130db which is the level generated by Oswald's rifle is EIGHT TIMES louder than 100db. The difference is huge.

How typical of you to not realize the difference in the sound of a video and the sound in real life.

"Live tests by independent reviewers of numerous commercially available suppressors find that even low caliber unsuppressed .22 LR firearms produce gunshots over 160 decibels.[7] In testing, most of the suppressors reduced the volume to between 130 and 145 dB, with the quietest suppressors metering at 117 dB. The actual suppression of sound ranged from 14.3 to 43 dB, with most data points around the 30 dB mark."

Does that video sound like 130 to 145 dB to you? hahahahahahahah!

Robert your inability to comprehend the obvious never ceases to amaze me.

Oh yea....and the Limo was blue.....

[Robert Harris]

"JFK's movements are replicated in other parts of the motorcade, as Mark Henceroth pointed out to you."

Absolute BS. But don't be bashful Michael. Show us the video in which you saw JFK react as he did during the Towner film.