Oswald Leaving TSBD?

[Thomas Graves]

Maybe his irradiated apple was glowing, Tommy?

So it would have to be something that was not noisy enough to attract the attention of people near him but shiny enough for Weigman to see.

I can't get past a silver camera (or maybe a white one). Did they have white cameras back then?

Lee Harvey Oswald was waving a "sparkler," knowing it would be caught on film and prove his innocence.

--Tommy

Edited April 17, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

I'll be honest with everyone; I actually asked the question about the two SS agents peering intently at the TSBD steps in order to demonstrate something else entirely, and to show how easily the senses are deceived by the appropriate technology.

Let's take another look at this close up view from the Altgens 6 photo:

Looking at this photo, it is easy to assume the two SS agents have seen something unusual on the steps of the TSBD, and are attempting to investigate it. Of course, this is only an assumption, and we have to keep in mind it may be something these two heard, rather than saw, that has attracted their attention.

I have discussed this subject before but I feel it is worth bringing up again. As many of you are likely aware, I believe the first shot hit JFK in the back at the level of and just to the right of the T3 vertebra and, contrary to popular belief, it was not a shallow wound but, rather, penetrated the top section of JFK's right lung. I also believe that, due to the construction of this bullet, it broke apart entirely in JFK's lung instead of exiting the front of his chest, as a full metal jacket bullet would be expected to do, and that this disintegration of the bullet caused a pneumothorax in JFK's right lung, as noted in the testimony of Dr, Marion T. Jenkins.

Back to the Altgens photo. In analyzing this photo, the first thing that comes to mind is the total lack of startle response in the faces of the crowd on the sidewalk.

Outside of the occupants of the limo, the only thing resembling a startle reaction are the reactions of the two SS agents and the motorcycle cop to the right of the limo. This is extremely odd, considering the fact that, at this point in time (according to the WC), two shots have been fired almost directly above these spectators' heads a mere 60 feet, almost 4 seconds before this photo was taken. Startle reactions to loud unexpected noises are, invariably, instantaneous and involuntary. Not only that, the rifle was pointed downwards at the limo, placing every spectator in this photo directly in the loudest portion of the forward cone of the rifle's muzzle blast. The Carcano short rifle also has a very loud muzzle blast, due to the fact that, with a 21 inch barrel, it is shooting the same cartridge originally made to fire in the Carcano M91 long rifle, with a 31 inch barrel.

So, why is the crowd not reacting? Where are the startled faces and involuntary crouching recoils one would expect from two such loud reports?

To answer this, it is necessary to look at a device for rifles (and pistols) called a "silencer" or "suppressor". They are not complicated devices and, in fact, there are several Youtube videos showing how one can be quickly made from an oil filter.

The important thing to know about "silencers" is that they will only make a shot completely silent if the bullet is travelling at subsonic speeds, or lower than the speed of sound, which is roughly 1035 feet per second. At supersonic velocities (greater than the speed of sound), the muzzle blast will be eliminated, but the bullet will make a sharp "crack", similar to a firecracker, as it breaks the sound barrier travelling through the air. This "crack" will be startling to those in the immediate vicinity of its path but will only be an unusual sound to those further away, such as the spectators on the sidewalk. Most rifles have muzzle velocities far in excess of 1035 fps. For example, the 6.5mm Carcano allegedly used by LHO was tested by the FBI, and found to have an average muzzle velocity of 2165 fps, and it is considered to be a medium powered rifle by many, and quite slow in comparison to modern rifles.

So, why even bother fitting a rifle with a silencer, you might ask, if it does not completely silence a rifle?

There are two reasons. First, many snipers are capable of making kills at extreme ranges. If one looks at the ballistics tables for a particular calibre of bullet, it will show that, while a bullet may be travelling at supersonic speeds leaving the barrel, after a few hundred yards it may have slowed to subsonic speeds. It is still quite lethal at this point but no longer breaking the sound barrier and, therefore, completely silent to those in the vicinity of the kill, completely masking the fact a shot has even taken place. However, this was not the case in Dealey Plaza that day, at least as far as I am aware, anyways.

The second reason to equip a high powered rifle with a silencer is to mask the location of the shooter, and to give the shooter greater time to effect his egress from the scene. In the case of Dealey Plaza, it also spreads confusion amongst the eyewitnesses as to the origin of the shot, as each witness, depending where he was standing in relation to the mini-sonic boom being made by this bullet, will have a different opinion on this matter.

I believe the first shot, striking JFK in the back, came from either a lower level of the Dal-Tex Building, or from a location further up Elm St. I believe the two SS agents are looking around in attempt to comprehend what has just happened simply because a silenced rifle shot has taken place behind them, and they have heard the crack of this bullet breaking the sound barrier as it passes just to the right of their heads. As they are the closest to the path of the bullet, they are the only ones startled by its noise. The fact they are looking at the steps of the TSBD for an answer merely proves how effective a silencer is at spreading confusion.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme

[Chris Davidson]

I believe the first shot, striking JFK in the back, came from either a lower level of the Dal-Tex Building, or from a location further up Elm St. I believe the two SS agents are looking around in attempt to comprehend what has just happened simply because a silenced rifle shot has taken place behind them, and they have heard the crack of this bullet breaking the sound barrier as it passes just to the right of their heads. As they are the closest to the path of the bullet, they are the only ones startled by its noise. The fact they are looking at the steps of the TSBD for an answer merely proves how effective a silencer is at spreading confusion.

http://www14.zippyshare.com/v/C5ENAktM/file.html

Robert,

A little support for you.

chris

[Thomas Graves]

I'll be honest with everyone; I actually asked the question about the two SS agents peering intently at the TSBD steps in order to demonstrate something else entirely, and to show how easily the senses are deceived by the appropriate technology.

Let's take another look at this close up view from the Altgens 6 photo:

Looking at this photo, it is easy to assume the two SS agents have seen something unusual on the steps of the TSBD, and are attempting to investigate it. Of course, this is only an assumption, and we have to keep in mind it may be something these two heard, rather than saw, that has attracted their attention.

I have discussed this subject before but I feel it is worth bringing up again. As many of you are likely aware, I believe the first shot hit JFK in the back at the level of and just to the right of the T3 vertebra and, contrary to popular belief, it was not a shallow wound but, rather, penetrated the top section of JFK's right lung. I also believe that, due to the construction of this bullet, it broke apart entirely in JFK's lung instead of exiting the front of his chest, as a full metal jacket bullet would be expected to do, and that this disintegration of the bullet caused a pneumothorax in JFK's right lung, as noted in the testimony of Dr, Marion T. Jenkins.

Back to the Altgens photo. In analyzing this photo, the first thing that comes to mind is the total lack of startle response in the faces of the crowd on the sidewalk.

Outside of the occupants of the limo, the only thing resembling a startle reaction are the reactions of the two SS agents and the motorcycle cop to the right of the limo. This is extremely odd, considering the fact that, at this point in time (according to the WC), two shots have been fired almost directly above these spectators' heads a mere 60 feet, almost 4 seconds before this photo was taken. Startle reactions to loud unexpected noises are, invariably, instantaneous and involuntary. Not only that, the rifle was pointed downwards at the limo, placing every spectator in this photo directly in the loudest portion of the forward cone of the rifle's muzzle blast. The Carcano short rifle also has a very loud muzzle blast, due to the fact that, with a 21 inch barrel, it is shooting the same cartridge originally made to fire in the Carcano M91 long rifle, with a 31 inch barrel.

So, why is the crowd not reacting? Where are the startled faces and involuntary crouching recoils one would expect from two such loud reports?

To answer this, it is necessary to look at a device for rifles (and pistols) called a "silencer" or "suppressor". They are not complicated devices and, in fact, there are several Youtube videos showing how one can be quickly made from an oil filter.

The important thing to know about "silencers" is that they will only make a shot completely silent if the bullet is travelling at subsonic speeds, or lower than the speed of sound, which is roughly 1035 feet per second. At supersonic velocities (greater than the speed of sound), the muzzle blast will be eliminated, but the bullet will make a sharp "crack", similar to a firecracker, as it breaks the sound barrier travelling through the air. This "crack" will be startling to those in the immediate vicinity of its path but will only be an unusual sound to those further away, such as the spectators on the sidewalk. Most rifles have muzzle velocities far in excess of 1035 fps. For example, the 6.5mm Carcano allegedly used by LHO was tested by the FBI, and found to have an average muzzle velocity of 2165 fps, and it is considered to be a medium powered rifle by many, and quite slow in comparison to modern rifles.

So, why even bother fitting a rifle with a silencer, you might ask, if it does not completely silence a rifle?

There are two reasons. First, many snipers are capable of making kills at extreme ranges. If one looks at the ballistics tables for a particular calibre of bullet, it will show that, while a bullet may be travelling at supersonic speeds leaving the barrel, after a few hundred yards it may have slowed to subsonic speeds. It is still quite lethal at this point but no longer breaking the sound barrier and, therefore, completely silent to those in the vicinity of the kill, completely masking the fact a shot has even taken place. However, this was not the case in Dealey Plaza that day, at least as far as I am aware, anyways.

The second reason to equip a high powered rifle with a silencer is to mask the location of the shooter, and to give the shooter greater time to effect his egress from the scene. In the case of Dealey Plaza, it also spreads confusion amongst the eyewitnesses as to the origin of the shot, as each witness, depending where he was standing in relation to the mini-sonic boom being made by this bullet, will have a different opinion on this matter.

I believe the first shot, striking JFK in the back, came from either a lower level of the Dal-Tex Building, or from a location further up Elm St. I believe the two SS agents are looking around in attempt to comprehend what has just happened simply because a silenced rifle shot has taken place behind them, and they have heard the crack of this bullet breaking the sound barrier as it passes just to the right of their heads. As they are the closest to the path of the bullet, they are the only ones startled by its noise. The fact they are looking at the steps of the TSBD for an answer merely proves how effective a silencer is at spreading confusion.

Dear Robert,

Maybe Prayer Man fired some kind of high-tech, silenced gizmo gun held like a camera.

--Tommy

PS You did suggest that we start thinking "outside the box," right?

Edited April 17, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

Just out of curiousity --

Where was JFK's limo when Weigman "captured" Prayer Man on film?

http://www.jfk-info.com/paschall.htm

--Tommy

[Robert Prudhomme]

Wiegman was in Camera Car #1, two cars ahead of the camera car Malcolm Couch filmed Baker from. Although not visible in the Couch film, it is assumed Camera Car #1 came to a halt at the same time as the rest of the motorcade, following JFK's limo neither slowing nor coming to a halt.

[Thomas Graves]

Wiegman was in Camera Car #1, two cars ahead of the camera car Malcolm Couch filmed Baker from. Although not visible in the Couch film, it is assumed Camera Car #1 came to a halt at the same time as the rest of the motorcade, following JFK's limo neither slowing nor coming to a halt.

So where, approximately, was JFK's limo when Weigman "captured" Prayer Man on film?

According to this impressive-looking animation, JFK's limo was pretty darn close to the fatal head shot position when Weigman's car was passing in front of the TSBD.

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/animation.htm

--Tommy

Edited April 17, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Greg Parker]

Gentlemen and Ladies,

I have just hidden a post for inappropriate use of language.

Please be more circumspect.

This is a very important thread and you are all showing how well you are working together and collaborating on an issue that could be of real importance in JFK research.

Please bear in mind the use of language on a forum that is open to the public.

James

No, not all of these are from the "old regime"

Yes, I know you are not omnipresent.

But I think the sheer volume as shown indicates a systemic problem. That problem being that it depends on who "transgresses" as to what - if any - action is taken.

All I ask is for a bit of fairness and consistency.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Wiegman was in Camera Car #1, two cars ahead of the camera car Malcolm Couch filmed Baker from. Although not visible in the Couch film, it is assumed Camera Car #1 came to a halt at the same time as the rest of the motorcade, following JFK's limo neither slowing nor coming to a halt.

So where, approximately, was JFK's limo when Weigman "captured" Prayer Man on film?

According to this impressive-looking animation, JFK's limo was pretty darn close to the fatal head shot position when Weigman's car was passing in front of the TSBD.

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/animation.htm

--Tommy

You are probably quite close in your estimation. Baker testified that he did not rev his motorcycle up to cover the 180-200 feet to where he parked it until he heard the third shot fired. I believe Couch's car, two cars behind Wiegman, was already halted at the corner when Baker got off his bike and ran for the TSBD, presumably placing Wiegman's car at a halt further down Elm St. Oddly, Camera Car #1 is not seen in the Couch film, although Camera Car #2 can be seen parked ahead of Couch's car. Logic tells us that Camera Car #2 would not have come to a halt if Camera Car #1 had not halted in front of it.

The Wiegman film is not a lot of help here, although the line on the pavement, next to Camera Car #1, does not appear to be moving when Wiegman apparently exits the vehicle, and this appears to be just past the corner.

P.S.

Did you not pick up on the sarcasm, Thomas, when I wrote "following JFK's limo neither slowing nor coming to a halt."? I thought it was rather clever, myself.

P.P.S.

Studying the animation again, something very interesting is revealed. According to the animation the National Press Car (7), the car immediately ahead of Wiegman's Camera Car #1 (8), has barely begun the turn off Houston onto Elm at the time of the fatal head shot. However, in Couch's film, we can see Camera Car # 1 & 2 (I was mistaken about not being able to see Wiegman's Camera Car #1 in the Couch film) sitting stationary on Elm St. ahead of Couch's Camera Car #3, which has also completed the turn off Houston St., and is sitting stationary on Elm St. as well.

The question is, when the limo came to a halt, forcing the rest of the motorcade to come to a halt, did the vehicles bunch up enough to let all four cars (National Press Car and Camera Cars #1,2 & 3) make the corner off of Houston, or did the fatal shot occur further down Elm St. by the steps of the pergola, where J. Edgar Hoover originally said it did in WCD 298?

Edited April 18, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme

[Vanessa Loney]

Hi James

I have to say I was not aware that 'sh*te' was a swear word. Isn't it the more polite form of 'sh*t'?

If you are that concerned about language maybe EF should have a list of words that aren't acceptable. But personally I wouldn't have thought that 'sh*te' would be on it.

[B. A. Copeland]

Just a quick question (not to divert the topic but slightly related to it) but doesn't anyone else (unless there are visual elements I am unaware of in photography which I admit, may be quite a handful) see the oddity in Lovelady's extremely "slanted" or cut left shoulder in the Altgen's photo? Please tell me I am missing something.

Edited April 18, 2015 by B. A. Copeland

[Vanessa Loney]

Hi B.A.

I'm not sure but I think its shadow. I don't mean to be rude but Bob, Randy and others have raised some very good points. Could we please discuss Altgens on another thread?

[James R Gordon]

Hi Vanessa and others,

I agree I may well have been blind other uses of inappropriate language - which I should have dealt with. Greg has identified a number of examples for me.

It was more the expression than a single word that alerted me.

I believe we are all aware of the kinds of words and expressions that might offend.

Yes, I agree, I can be inconsistent and I am certainly intervening on an issue that other forums are more relaxed about.

However I feel we ought to be able to discuss without profanity - and certainly not the kind of profanity that I hid.

You and others - and especially the person whose post I hid - have taken forward this topic in a very positive way. I am very proud of the passion, determination and serious JFK research that members are under taking on this thread.

I feel members ought to de able to discuss and debate without the kind of language use I objected to

James

[James R Gordon]

Yes Vanessa probably a good idea to open a new thread. However this is such a wide ranging thread it may not be possible to limit the new thread to a single issue.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Just a quick question (not to divert the topic but slightly related to it) but doesn't anyone else (unless there are visual elements I am unaware of in photography which I admit, may be quite a handful) see the oddity in Lovelady's extremely "slanted" or cut left shoulder in the Altgen's photo? Please tell me I am missing something.

Just a quick reply, Mr. Copeland, and then back to the main topic. The most interesting thing about the Altgens 6 photo is the extreme foreshortening and compression of everything that is achieved by Mr. Altgens' telephoto lens. The "extremely slanted" arm you see does not actually belong to Lovelady but, rather, to one of the onlookers on the sidewalk, quite some distance from Lovelady, actually.