Evidence for the location of limo at moment first rifle shot is heard

[Tom Neal]

Robert Mady,

YES it is my opinion that this hole in fact was punched into his back

"Opinion." Prior to this you are presenting it as a fact. I don't know what caused it, you don't know what caused. Without a full explanation, it is not a fact, it's a theory. The more evidence you present to support this theory the stronger it is. Burkley was not the only person to see this back wound at Parkland. IIRC the nurses washed the body and were well aware of the wound. The original myth was that Parkland did not know about the back wound, and Bethesda didn't know about the throat wound. Both were proven to be incorrect.

Whether Burkley told the truth about the back wound or not, others DID see it. Who said they looked at his back, and there was no wound? No one. Burkley, the nurses, and someone else that I can't recall. When was there any opportunity for someone at Parkland to punch a whole in JFK's back? He was never alone.

I agree that this a suspicious wound, but it is FAR from a proven fact that it was manufactured, so stop presenting it as one, and remember even you stated it's an opinion.

Unless you have a reasonable explanation for the shallow back wound

Right back at you. What's YOUR reasonable explanation? The conspirators who screwed up so many things had planned the fake back wound all along and had prearranged for Burkley to lie, and the nurses et al to swear to it? This would require Burkley to be guilty of conspiracy to murder the president, rather just another person who was somehow convinced to cover up the conspiracy. If this was all preplanned they would have planted an MC bullet on JFK's stretcher or forced it into the wound.

please consider stopping the ridicule of this concept.

"Ridicule?" If objecting to you calling a theory a fact is "ridiculing" then you need to consult a dictionary. It was your ridicule of others that don't accept your theory as a fact that prompted me to respond. And now you ARE ridiculing me for not accepting YOUR unproven argument, so take your own advice.

There is not enough evidence to state the wound was manufactured, or it was real. Thus, NEITHER theory is a fact.

4) How is it germane? BURKLEY lied about the wounds being identical, BURKELY LIED, if he lied once there is no reason not be believe he lied more than once...

Did he lie about EVERYTHING from the time of JFK's murder, or was he induced to become part of the coverup, along with every other official involved? Where is the evidence that he punched a hole in JFK's back (or was a party to it) minutes after the assassination? Was this idea cooked up MINUTES after the assassination? When did they have the opportunity to do this? If Burkley was a party to creating this wound then he MUST have been a conspirator in the assassination, not a conspirator in the coverup. I have not heard anyone suggest that Burkley was involved in the actual assassination...

5) Just because I have not analyzed how or when the back wound was created is not an acceptable rejection of the argument.

Okay, here you go with the "straw man" tactic. How is objecting to you presenting your theory as a fact, "ridiculing" you and "rejecting" your argument? Conversely, how can you present this a fact when you have "not analyzed how or when the back wound was created." Yet that is EXACTLY what your are doing. How can you consider yourself credible when you haven't even done the BASIC research to support your alleged "fact"?

Others such as LIFTON have done extensive work on this, you want to know about it I would suggest that you review Mr. Lifton's work.

This is a WELL-informed group, yet you regularly presume that anyone who doesn't agree with you does so out of ignorance. You're the one that needs to "review" David Lifton's work. Why didn't you present a quote from Lifton stating that the back wound unquestionably was manufactured? Surely you have done a thorough review of his work or you wouldn't have cited him as proof of your THEORY. So why don't you know how Lifton explains how and when the back wound was created, and that it is a FACT, not a theory? Could it be that Lifton would not present something as a fact without proof positive?

Tom

[Tom Neal]

Robert Mady,

Your comment raises a question: How much of the physical record implicating Oswald was planted pre-assassination, and how much was fabricated post-assassination?

It's clear to me the pristine bullet was fabricated post-assassination. If the back wound was fabricated. it was fabricated post-mortem on 11-22-63.

I've never thought the back wound was fabricated. If as you say it was, in order to link the pristine bullet to a JFK wound, than I credit the plotters with excellent plotting that failed to achieve its objective. No one other than you, as far as I know, has made this link.

I've thought the plotters had one initial objective for Oswald: to get him arrested for JFK's murder (or Tippit's murder). He was a hot potato for the FBI and the CIA, and therefore those agencies would make sure he was never investigated honestly.

I've thought the plotters had simply one more objective for Oswald: to make sure he didn't talk openly.

The plotters didn't have to worry about cover-up once Oswald was dead. J. Edgar Hoover, acting out of self interest, would see to the cover-up.

Given that Oswald was arrested and charged before any physical record implicating him (except apparently a backyard photo that Oswald dismissed) had come to light. fabricating a physical record implicating him would have been fairly easy.

In my estimation, the whole physical record implicating Oswald has been fabricated. In my view therefore whether the back wound was fabricated is a minor issue.

Jon,

A PERFECT summation.

Tom

[Robert Mady]

There are a five Parkland nurses that testified to the WC.

Two of them were involved with KENNEDY

Mr. SPECTER - Did you see any wound anywhere on his body?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - Yes; he was very bloody, his head was very bloody when I saw him at the time.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you ever see any wound in any other part of his body?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - When I first saw him---except his head.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you see any wound on any other part of his body?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - Yes; in the neck.
Mr. SPECTER - Will you describe it, please?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - It was just a little hole in the middle of his neck.
Mr. SPECTER - About how big a hole was it?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - About as big around as the end of my little finger.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had any experience with bullet holes?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - And what did that appear to you to be?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - An entrance bullet hole it looked to me like.
Mr. SPECTER - Could it have been an exit bullet hole?
Miss HENCHLIFFE - I have never seen an exit bullet hole I don't remember seeing one that looked like that.

Mr. SPECTER - You saw the condition of his what?
Miss BOWRON - The back of his head.
Mr. SPECTER - And what was that condition?
Miss BOWRON - Well, it was very bad---you know.
Mr. SPECTER - How many holes did you see?
Miss BOWRON - I just saw one large hole.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you see a small bullet hole beneath that one large hole?
Miss BOWRON - No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you notice any other wound on the President's body?
Miss BOWRON - No, sir.

And an Affidavit

Pat Hutton Affidavit " I then left at the request of the supervisor to get a plastic cover to line the coffin. I returned with it, and Mr. Kennedy was placed in the coffin to await orders to move him by ambulance."

Edited December 14, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Tom Neal]

Robert,

In my opinion, a pristine bullet with a pointed nose really was found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital,

Agreed.

by sheer coincidence, and it had nothing to do with the assassination.

I used to unquestioningly believe the SS/FBI took advantage of the "found" bullet to plant the "magic bullet" and that's all there was to it. This is one of many reasons I believe the coverup was dynamic rather than following a static pre-assassination script. I still believe they did perform a switch, but I wonder if they had to hide the found bullet as much as, or even more than they had to produce the magic bullet.

The recent statement by Sam Kinney's close friend, that Sam himself had placed that bullet on the stretcher was quite a shock. This is of course "hearsay" because Kinney didn't write all this down...The guy appears credible to me, and the way Kinney presented the info to him doesn't indicate that he misunderstood. Unless the friend simply didn't understand how important this information was, it's virtually impossible to think he wouldn't have said "Where did you find that bullet, and why didn't you turn it in instead, Sam?"

What little I've seen of this interview makes no mention of these questions, and if this guy is telling the truth, I can only think of one reason why Kinney would do what he did. Either before or immediately after the shooting, Kinney thought SS people were involved. IMO, their involvement is QUITE likely so does lend a degree of credibility to the claim.

Do you think Kinney's friend is not believable? Sorry if I'm hijacking, but I'm hoping you or someone else can add some more info to this story...

Tom

Edited December 14, 2014 by Tom Neal

[Robert Prudhomme]

Hello Jon

The first thing to understand about Humes is that he told a rather outrageous lie about JFK's pulmonary condition that actually made its way into the Warren Commission Report. I should perhaps be more lenient, as the lie was so ridiculous, and there were other ways to cover up the problem. It may very well have been overzealous Commission lawyers that perpetrated the lie.

The lie I am referring to is how the insertion of bi-lateral chest tubes into JFK was explained in the WCR. In Appendix IX of the WCR, Humes writes the following:

"Incisions were made in the upper anterior chest wall bi-laterally to combat possible subcutaneous emphysema."

At first glance, it would seem that Humes has made a legitimate statement, until this statement is analyzed. Fortunately, for Humes, 99.99% of the population does not have the first clue what subcutaneous emphysema actually is. Subcutaneous emphysema, or SE for short, is literally air bubbles trapped under the skin. It is often associated with pneumothoraces, as the increased pressure in the pleural cavity can find its way to the surface of the skin. It is a benign condition, most definitely NOT a medical emergency, and is not even treated unless the volume of air trapped is so massive, it interferes with normal functions. ER surgeons faced with a pulseless patient bleeding profusely from a head wound would not even consider addressing something so minor as SE.

To further put the lie to Humes' statement is this from Dr. Perry's medical report:

"Closed chest cardiac massage was instituted after placement of sealed drainage chest tubes, but without benefit."

And from Dr. Baxter's medical report:

"A tracheotomy was performed by Dr. Perry and I and a chest tube inserted into the right chest (2nd intercostal space anteriorally)."

Once again, the full meaning of these statements may not be apparent but I will attempt to clarify them. The treatment for SE, if it is even applied, involves the placement of very shallow tubes (just under the skin) in the vicinity of the area affected, and these tubes are left open to the atmosphere.

What Drs. Perry and Baxter are describing is something totally different, and can only be interpreted as measures taken to relieve a life threatening tension pneumothorax of JFK's right lung.

1. "Sealed drainage chest tube". As I stated in an earlier post, it is essential to vent the built up air volume of a tension pneumothorax, but the vent cannot be left open as the patient inhales, or it becomes an open pneumothorax. A one way valve is needed and, in 1963, the method employed was to connect the chest tube to a sealed water bottle, thus allowing built up pleural air to escape, but maintaining the integrity of the pleural cavity for inspiration by not allowing air to return to the pleural cavity via the chest tube. Hence, Perry's reference to "sealed" drainage chest tubes.

2. "2nd intercostal space anteriorally". If Humes knew the first thing about pulmonary emergencies, he would have instantly recognized these words. To this day, the relief of air build up from a tension pneumothorax is accomplished by insertion of a large bore needle or tube anteriorally in the intercostal space, at the mid-clavicular line, between the 2nd and 3rd rib. Once again, Baxter only mentions a chest tube in the right lung, confirming my suspicions of damage in that lung alone.

It should be quite apparent, from this discussion, that, early on in the investigation, efforts were being made to hide the true nature of the effects of JFK's back wound, and the ensuing pulmonary emergency. Whether or not these efforts were made to further the Single Bullet Theory, and the belief of a bullet missing the top of JFK's right lung and exiting his throat, is difficult to say with any real certainty.

I shall end this post here, and continue this discussion in the next post.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Robert Prudhomme

[Robert Prudhomme]

Hello again Jon

I should take a moment here to explain why I believe a shallow back wound to be unbelievable, and why I cannot imagine any serious conspirator would even attempt to pass off anything so nonsensical.

Those who believe in a shallow back wound attribute its cause to a faulty rifle cartridge resulting in something known as a "short shot". According to their theory, either deteriorated gunpowder or a faulty primer resulted in a bullet leaving the muzzle of the rifle at a velocity only a fraction of the normal muzzle velocity of that rifle.

Once again, this sounds quite believable, until a closer look is taken.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that JFK's back wound was made with a 6.5mm Carcano M91/38 short rifle, shooting a 162 grain FMJ bullet at a normal muzzle velocity of 2200 feet per second (fps), at a target roughly 50 yards out. This bullet, possessing a thicker than average copper alloy jacket, is a very long bullet that is exceptionally stable in flight, and possesses great penetration capabilities. We are constantly told, by WC apologists, that this bullet is capable of penetrating 48 inches of pine lumber, without significant deformation, and it is a fact that 6.5mm FMJ bullets, of a similar construction to the Carcano bullet but fired from a 6.5mm Mannlicher-Schoenauer rifle, were used to shoot elephants in the head, as this bullet was capable of penetrating the thick elephant skull bone without deformation.

IMHO, a 6.5mm Carcano bullet leaving the muzzle at 2200 fps and striking JFK's back 50 yards out would have gone straight through JFK's chest, leaving a small entrance hole and a slightly larger exit hole. It would then, in my opinion, still have ample energy to go through Connally's jump seat and through Connally as well, leaving similar sized wounds in Connally. It MIGHT have slowed down enough to come to a halt somewhere in the seat occupied by Kellerman, but I would not volunteer to sit in that seat and try it out.

(I should point out here, to those that study the SBT, that, in my opinion, the relatively small amount of tissue the SBT was supposed to have gone through was really not enough to slow it down as much as we are told, and the thigh wound on Connally, as well as the wrist wound, should have been far more severe. All that this bullet did was pass through a few inches of neck muscle, and follow the outside of Connally's 5th rib prior to hitting his wrist.)

In order to make this bullet stop after only travelling an inch through flesh, it would be necessary to reduce the muzzle velocity to under 1000 fps, possibly as low as 500 fps. There are two critical problems with this:

1. Bullet stabilization. Exiting at 2200 fps, a high enough rate of spin has been imparted to the bullet, by the riflings of the barrel, to stabilize this bullet in flight on its way to the target. Lowering the muzzle velocity also lowers the rate of spin, and it is highly likely this bullet would de-stabilize and begin tumbling on its way to JFK's back. Even if it actually made it to JFK's back, it would have made the typical "keyhole" entrance wound one would expect of a tumbling bullet.

2. Bullet drop. Bullets do not follow a flat path to a target but, rather, follow a parabolic trajectory; due to the fact the bullet must overcome gravity. If the Carcano was sighted in to be accurate at 100 yards, one could aim dead on at 100 yards and be confident of hitting that target. Shooting at 50 yards, one would aim a bit low, as at 50 yards the bullet would be at the apogee of its trajectory. However, should you rob the bullet of 50-75% of its muzzle velocity, aiming at the normal point will result in a bullet landing far short of its intended target, simply because it now does not have the "legs" to go as far. It is called a "short" shot for a reason, for the fact the bullet will land far short of its target. I estimate a bullet with this little penetrating power would have landed well behind the limousine.

And THAT is why I think the "shallow" back wound is utter rubbish.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Robert Prudhomme

[Robert Prudhomme]

I hope that all of you are paying enough attention to spot a very obvious contradiction in my beliefs. On the one hand, I speak of the Carcano bullet's ability to penetrate two people, yet, on the other hand, I speak of a Carcano bullet that only penetrated a few inches into JFK's right lung before coming to a halt.

How can this be?

For those of you who have read my material at the Deep Politics Forum, the answer is already known to you. For the rest of you, stick around, as this is where it gets really interesting.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Robert Prudhomme

[Robert Prudhomme]

So, what kind of bullet can penetrate the back of JFK's rib cage at just over 2000 fps, and not exit the front of the rib cage?

For starters, it most definitely was NOT a 162 grain, round nosed, full metal jacket 6.5mm Carcano bullet. Uh uh, just didn't happen. The 6.5mm Carcano was given the nickname, by the troops who used it, of the "Humanitarian Rifle", mainly because the long, stable FMJ bullet it fired generally went straight through its victims, and out the other side, without inflicting a lot of damage.

Next up would be a soft tipped bullet (lead tip exposed). It might have done the job, but I don't really think so. The hardest thing this bullet could possibly have hit was a couple of ribs, or maybe a rib and the sternum, which is mostly cartilage. There would be very little there to induce a soft tipped bullet to expand.

Next would be a hollow point bullet. These bullets are designed to open up and expand as they go through soft tissue, and need not hit anything hard to cause expansion, as a soft point bullet must. Once again, the right kind of hollow point just might have stopped partway through JFK's lung but, considering how little soft tissue there is at the upper part of the lung, I think even an expanded hollow point would have exited JFK's chest. Besides, there are several medical clues from the head shot that would indicate a completely different kind of bullet, such as the hundreds of dust like particles seen in the x-ray of JFK's skull.

The type of bullet I believe was used in the assassination of JFK was an early variant of the modern lethal bullet that can be seen at this website. Click on "DRT Technology" once at the site.

www.drtammo.com

This bullet is properly referred to as a "hollow point frangible" bullet. It has a very unique construction, and does things that no other bullet is capable of doing.

While the outer jacket is quite normal, and made from a copper alloy, the core of this bullet is not made from solid lead, as is the norm. The core of this bullet is a non-lead alloy, and is made by compressing metal powder under great hydraulic pressure. As the name of the bullet reveals, the tip of this bullet has a small hollow point, and one can see the compressed metal core through this hollow point.

In a wound, the hollow point frangible bullet works like this. It will penetrate thin bone, such as skull bone, leaving only a neat little entrance wound, no larger than an FMJ or soft tipped bullet will. Once the bullet begins travelling through soft tissue, the hollow point fills with semi-liquid matter, creating enormous temporary pressures inside the hollow point. As is the case with all hollow points, the hollow point opens up at this point, allowing the enormous pressure to be applied to an even greater area on the nose of the bullet. Within 2 inches of the point of entry, the pressure is so great, the compressed metal core particles lose adhesion for each other, and the compressed metal core disintegrates into a cloud of metal powder, plus segments of the bullet jacket. This cloud comes to an immediate halt within the wound, transferring ALL of its energy to surrounding tissue. This transfer of energy wreaks utter havoc on surrounding tissue, and dissections of game animals showing a zone of destruction 4 inches in diameter are quite common.

Before frangible bullets were used as lethal bullets, they were used as safe bullets for shooting at indoor ranges. These bullets also have the unique ability to not ricochet, if they strike a hard surface, such as steel, rock or concrete. If they hit such a surface, these bullets simply disintegrate into a cloud of dust. The people at DRT Ammo actively promote this feature in their product, as it makes these bullets much safer in an urban environment where collateral damage is always a concern.

Frangible bullets for the Carcano were manufactured by the Italians, and the last model produced were designated the M37 bullet. These were manufactured, for indoor ranges, as late as 1953, and possibly well into the 60's. These bullets were made solely for the fact they would not ricochet, and I am told the backstops for the targets, at these indoor ranges, were simply concrete walls. The reason for these late manufacture dates is that, while the 6.5mm Carcano ended its military service at the close of WW II, Italian shooting teams used the Carcano M91/41 in international competitions right into the 60's.

The M37 bullet has a rather strange construction. The copper alloy jacket is made from two pieces soldered end to end. Inside the nose is a tiny solid pellet, made from either lead or maillechort. Behind this pellet, the midsection of the bullet is powdered lead, and the base of the bullet is filled with sand. Due to the lower mass of the bullet, the gunpowder charge is reduced in the cartridge, although the muzzle velocity of this bullet is almost identical to that of a standard cartridge.

There is a small hole left open in the nose of this bullet's jacket, exposing the solid pellet, although it is important to note this is not a hollow point. I do not fully understand the mechanics involved here but, it would seem the open point is there only to begin the disintegration of the bullet.

While the M37 is slightly cruder in design than the DRT Ammo frangible bullet, I believe an effective and lethal bullet could be made from an M37, simply by carefully drilling a small hollow point partway into the centre of the solid pellet in the tip.

I also believe there is a distinct possibility JFK's throat wound was made by a fragment of the small metal pellet in the nose of the frangible M37 bullet that entered the back of JFK's skull at the external occipital protuberance.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Robert Prudhomme

[Robert Prudhomme]

Is it safe to assume your lack of response means all of you concur with my theory?

[David Josephs]

This is the reason the FBI nor the WC attempted to establish the location of the limo for any of the shots, because this evidence reveals that the sequence established for the WC three shots is incorrect.

The only shot the WC was explicit about was the shot at Z-313, in which they were emphatic that this was the last shot fired. Which is a bold faced lie.

The shot at Z-313 was the second shot fired but the first rifle shot that was heard.

Twelve people bare witness to the first shot they heard to be when the limo was located at about Z-313, this is a fact according to twelve witnesses.

I know there are those that will say, it is just wrong, they got it wrong, Robert Mady got it wrong, will you still be so sure if I post another 12 witnesses that support the first shot they heard occurring at Z-313? How many witnesses accounts do I need to post for this to become real? Or are you totally convinced that the WC lies already entrenched in your mind are true? This is why you can't understand the assassination, this is why the testimony makes no sense, this is why the photographic evidence does not correlate to any story WC or conspiracy, because your timing of shots and number of shots is not correct.

For those awake enough to grasp this novel information, it will be the start to unveil the truth of the assassination.

Oh, but the FBI and SS did indeed tell us where they thought each of the shots was in relation to the limo Robert...

CE884 tell us that the final shot was 1) SS: 4 feet from marker 5+00 which is 35-40 feet further down Elm than Z313 according to the West Survey and SS market system.

WCD298 shows us the three shots exactly as the FBI's exposure to evidence allowed them: and when photos of this model were entered into evidence they become CE879 with no strings and nomention of this being a model designed to show where the shots were according to the FBI.

The preface of this Commission Document 298 - FBI Letter from Director of 20 Jan 1964 with Visual Aides Brochure tells us that the model is so exact - well, here's the preface

These conclusion have nothing to do with what people heard and when which at best is about as subjective as it gets.

The FBI used films, photos and surveys of DP to pinpoint these shots. I can understand a few feet one way or the other, but the final shot was NOT at the foot of the steps 40 feet past z313, at least not based on the evidence WE are shown

The SS contradicts West's survey along with the legend of his survey they "changed" to fit the facts they wanted.

You can also read Leo Gauthier's testimony as he was the FBI agent who delivered this to the WC. NO SBT, NO SHOT prior to Z224 and a final shot at around Z375.

MANY state that the first shot was as the limo finished the turn onto Elm... SOMETHING happened at around z157 - Isn't there a break in the film at that point?

Pretty fast head turn for one frame, no?

[Robert Prudhomme]

What has become of Robert Mady?

[James R Gordon]

Robert,

I believe I am responsible for Robert Mady's absence. I hid a third thread he created on this same narrative. I informed what I did and that I understood his present threads discussed his narrative. He informed me he may no longer post on this forum.

Robert is not banned, nor is he on moderation. He is welcome to post here as and when he wishes.

James

[David Josephs]

Continues to boggle my mind how our community ignores WCD298 and the conclusions of the Secret Service about the location of shots based on their available evidence.

People on this forum have been trying to find a smoking gun and here we have the FBI/SS telling us about a shot 40 feet down Elm at the foot of the stairs

Altgens & Hudson tell us the same thing.

If the last shot was Z313... how can we as a community let go the conclsuions and images offered in WCD298, which was not only buried but completely misrepresented in the WCR Exhibits.

The FBI/SS placing a shot at the equivilent of Z375 contradicts every piece of physical evidence offered.

I've been posting the conclusions from this Document for years here and elsewhere and it has yet to be picked up as significant by anyone.

Can anyone here explain how we can dismiss this obvious evidence that all the DP evidence given to the WC was a complete lie. The SBT, a complete lie and confirmed as such in this exhibit.

Okay, one last time and then I'll move on. The following shows where the shots hit JFK according to the FBI and SS.

Shot #2 at the "X" in the street at Z313

Shot #3 at the foot of the steps...

The question remains: From what source evidence does the FBI conclude the last shot is where they placed it - in direct conflict with the final conclusions, the films, & the photos in evidence.

I simply cannot understand how this is so easily minimized in the scheme of things. The FBI knew they couldn't show anyone this - so it was buried.

Am I overstating the significance of this Doc under Hoover's signature?

I estimated Z375 from seeing the base of the lamppost in the background based on the line of sight. Hoc can the FBI place a shot there?

[Robert Prudhomme]

No Dave, I don't think you are understating this at all. I was quite surprised when I watched an interview done with Mary Moorman, in which she quite adamantly stated she snapped her famous Polaroid at the sound of the first shot, and that she heard two more shots following this one.

I believe there were more than three shots but, as some of these shots were suppressed, people at different locations in Dealey Plaza would hear different shots, depending on how close they were to the path of those suppressed shots. This assassination is a perfect example of the ability of a rifle suppressor to mask the location of a shooter and to spread confusion.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Robert Prudhomme

[Chris Davidson]

Continues to boggle my mind how our community ignores WCD298 and the conclusions of the Secret Service about the location of shots based on their available evidence.

People on this forum have been trying to find a smoking gun and here we have the FBI/SS telling us about a shot 40 feet down Elm at the foot of the stairs

Altgens & Hudson tell us the same thing.

If the last shot was Z313... how can we as a community let go the conclsuions and images offered in WCD298, which was not only buried but completely misrepresented in the WCR Exhibits.

The FBI/SS placing a shot at the equivilent of Z375 contradicts every piece of physical evidence offered.

I've been posting the conclusions from this Document for years here and elsewhere and it has yet to be picked up as significant by anyone.

Can anyone here explain how we can dismiss this obvious evidence that all the DP evidence given to the WC was a complete lie. The SBT, a complete lie and confirmed as such in this exhibit.

Okay, one last time and then I'll move on. The following shows where the shots hit JFK according to the FBI and SS.

Shot #2 at the "X" in the street at Z313

Shot #3 at the foot of the steps...

The question remains: From what source evidence does the FBI conclude the last shot is where they placed it - in direct conflict with the final conclusions, the films, & the photos in evidence.

I simply cannot understand how this is so easily minimized in the scheme of things. The FBI knew they couldn't show anyone this - so it was buried.

Am I overstating the significance of this Doc under Hoover's signature?

I estimated Z375 from seeing the base of the lamppost in the background based on the line of sight. Hoc can the FBI place a shot there?

David,

This might help others.

The entire Zfilm including the pre-limo footage (132 frames@18.3fps = 7.21 seconds) is 486 frames.

486/18.3 frames per sec = 26.55seconds

26.55sec + 7.21sec = 33.76 sec

So, if one were to include an extra 7.21seconds segment of limo coverage, then the 33 second version might ring true for that particular document.

chris