Oswald's Alleged Shooting Accuracy Versus The Experts?

[Joe Bauer]

Unable to find a recent appropriate subject thread for my post entry here so I decided to list it separately.

Lee Oswald allegedly fired at JFK three times from the TXSCB Depository 6th floor, hitting him twice.

In this charge he was able to hit JFK in the upper back at 165 feet away and then score a "bullseye" hit upon JFK's 10 inch wide and high skull at 265 feet away.

All while JFK is in a vehicle that is moving downward and away and ( regards the skull shot) JFK's upper body and head were also moving at the same time separately as he slumped leftward and downward into Jackie's midsection just after he was hit in the back and right up to the head shot.

That's three target moving dynamics that the shooter had to adjust to.

A bullseye hit upon a stationary 10 inch sized target at 265 feet away is not remarkable on it's own, but making a bullseye hit upon a 10 inch oblong square target that is not only moving and moving several feet a second straight away from you but also moving horizontally from right to left at the same time is trained marksmanship remarkable.

And even more remarkable considering the use of one the cheapest and least respected old WWII rifles known and with a scope that was also determined to be of poor quality, no?

All together, so remarkable that it took many of the world's top marksmen many tries to duplicate it. Especially in the rushed shooting time frame sequence attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission.

As if these scientifically proven facts aren't enough to suspect Oswald's bullseye head shot upon JFK was just "too" remarkable, consider this other fact.

How much practice and experience did the expert marksmen hired to duplicate Oswald's alleged head shot shooting accuracy have versus Oswald himself? How many tries did it take them to successfully make that shot?

The reports of Oswald going to practice shooting his rifle are sketchy at best. At a range or anywhere else. Even if Oswald made it to a practice range, how many times did he or could he have done so?

He didn't have access to his rifle in the months it was stored in Ruth Paine's garage except the night of November 21st allegedly.

Marina gave some vague responses in her WC testimony about whether Lee actually went off to practice with his rifle. All she could say was he "may" have done so in his off time but she wasn't sure. 

And any shooting range must have been far enough away that Oswald would have had to carry his rifle with him on a bus?

Marina said she thought Lee went to "Love Field" airport to shoot his rifle.

Seriously?

How many people would ever go to a busy airport to practice shooting their weapons?

She even said Oswald would shoot at leaves in parks they went to.

Really? With kids and families around and seeing or at least hearing these loud boom shots?

Oswald hardly ever left his Beckley room once he got there from work. He spent weekends with Marina at the Paines.

That leaves any practice firings by Oswald having to be done during his living in many different apartments with Marina from New Orleans to Dallas.

There was a report of Oswald being seen at a shooting range in Dallas. Really weak accounts.

And how did he get there with his long rifle? By bus? Did Buell Wesley Frazier take Oswald to this range where they both could blast away at targets? 

Oswald certainly didn't practice his shooting skills on his trip to Mexico City.

Even if Oswald did practice his shooting skills as much as these vague accounts propose, it still wasn't much and ridiculously nothing compared to the world class training and skills of the expert marksmen tasked with duplicating Oswald's alleged 265 foot, moving target bullseye shooting accuracy with Carcano rifles and cheap scopes. 

A task that wasn't easily duplicated even by them.

Sometimes it's worthy to step back and rethink some of the proven simple yet highly inconsistent foundational facts of the case imo.

A re-grounding if you will?

JFK's bullseye head shot while it, he and his limo were all moving in three dynamic ways at the same time begs such a rebooting look back every now and then. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 23, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[Pat Speer]

57 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Unable to find a recent appropriate subject thread for my post entry here so I decided to list it separately.

Lee Oswald allegedly fired at JFK three times from the TXSCB Depository 6th floor, hitting him twice.

In this charge he was able to hit JFK in the upper back at 165 feet away and then score a "bullseye" hit upon JFK's 10 inch wide and high skull at 265 feet away.

All while JFK is in a vehicle that is moving downward and away and ( regards the skull shot) JFK's upper body and head were also moving at the same time separately as he slumped leftward and downward into Jackie's midsection just after he was hit in the back and right up to the head shot.

That's three target moving dynamics that the shooter had to adjust to.

A bullseye hit upon a stationary 10 inch sized target at 265 feet away may not seem too remarkable on it's own, but making a bullseye hit upon a 10 inch oblong square target that is not only moving and moving several feet a second straight away from you but also moving horizontally from right to left at the same time is trained marksmanship remarkable.

And even more remarkable considering the use of one the cheapest and least respected old WWII rifles known and with a scope that was also determined to be of poor quality, no?

All together, so remarkable that it took many of the world's top marksmen many tries to duplicate it. Especially in the rushed shooting time frame sequence attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission.

As if these scientifically proven facts aren't enough to suspect Oswald's bullseye head shot upon JFK was just "too" remarkable, consider this other fact.

How much practice and experience did the expert marksmen hired to duplicate Oswald's alleged head shot shooting accuracy have versus Oswald himself? How many tries did it take them to successfully make that shot?

The reports of Oswald going to practice shooting his rifle are sketchy at best. At a range or anywhere else. Even if Oswald made it to a practice range, how many times did he or could he have done so?

He didn't have access to his rifle in the months it was stored in Ruth Paine's garage except the night of November 21st allegedly.

Marina gave some vague responses in her WC testimony about whether Lee actually went off to practice with his rifle. All she could say was he "may" have done so in his off time but she wasn't sure. 

And any shooting range must have been far enough away that Oswald would have had to carry his rifle with him on a bus?

Marina said she thought Lee went to "Love Field" airport to shoot his rifle.

Seriously?

How many people would ever go to a busy airport to practice shooting their weapons?

She even said Oswald would shoot at leaves in parks they went to.

Really? With kids and families around and seeing or at least hearing these loud boom shots?

Oswald hardly ever left his Beckley room once he got there from work. He spent weekends with Marina at the Paines.

That leaves any practice firings by Oswald having to be done during his living in many different apartments with Marina from New Orleans to Dallas.

There was a report of Oswald being seen at a shooting range in Dallas. Really weak accounts.

And how did he get there with his long rifle? By bus? Did Buell Wesley Frazier take Oswald to this range where they both could blast away at targets? 

Oswald certainly didn't practice his shooting skills on his trip to Mexico City.

Even if Oswald did practice his shooting skills as much as these vague accounts propose, it still wasn't much and ridiculously nothing compared to the world class training and skills of the expert marksmen tasked with duplicating Oswald's alleged 265 foot, moving target bullseye shooting accuracy with Carcano rifles and cheap scopes. 

A task that wasn't easily duplicated even by them.

Sometimes it's worthy to step back and rethink some of the proven simple yet highly inconsistent foundational facts of the case imo.

A re-grounding if you will?

JFK's bullseye head shot while it, he and his limo were all moving in three dynamic ways at the same time begs such a rebooting look back every now and then. 

 

 

 

 

 

I discuss Oswald's shooting ability and the shooting simulations off and on throughout my website, but have an extended discussion of these matters in Chapter 4g: Thoughts on Shots.

Here is a bit on the 1967 CBS tests... From chapter 3b:

 

In 1967, CBS News, realizing the Warren Commission's error in not conducting shooting simulations using civilian shooters, conducted some tests of their own. While the shooters used by CBS were all well-practiced rifleman, their over-all skill level was roughly that of Oswald at his best. (Of course, Oswald hadn’t been at his best since his first years in the Marines, a half a dozen years before the assassination.)

There were still other problems with the test. For one, the rifle used by these shooters was in prime operating condition, and was in no need of the adjustments performed by those test-firing Oswald's rifle for the Warren Commission. For two, the CBS shooters, unlike the man firing Oswald's rifle in Dealey Plaza, who was firing cold, were given NINE practice shots before making their attempts. For three, the target upon which these men fired, unlike the limousine in Dealey Plaza, moved at a constant speed away from the shooter, and at a constant angle.

Now, all these problems should have worked to the advantage of CBS' shooters, and have led to their easily replicating the shots purported for Oswald... That is, if the shots have been indeed easily replicable...

But let the test results speak for themselves…

1. Col. Jim Crossman, ret. (expert rifleman). First attempt--3 near misses in 6.54 seconds. Best attempt (of 6) ---2 hits and 1 near miss in 6.20 seconds. 2 hits or more in 3 of 6 attempts. (6.34, 6.44, and 6.2 seconds)

2. Douglas Bazemore (ex-paratrooper). First attempt—unable to operate bolt effectively to fire the shots. Best attempt (of 4)—unable to operate stiff bolt action; gives up. 2 hits or more in 0 of 4 attempts.

3. John Bollendorf (ballistics technician). First attempt—2 hits and 1 near miss in 6.8 seconds. Best attempt (of 4)—the same. 2 hits or more in 1 of 4 attempts. (6.8 seconds)

4. John Concini (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—no record of where shots went in 6.3 seconds. Best attempt (of 2)—1 hit and 2 near misses in 5.4 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 2 attempts.

5. Howard Donahue (weapons engineer). First attempt—too fast with bolt—gun jammed. Best attempt (of 3)—3 hits in 5.2 seconds. 2 hits or more in 1 of 3 attempts. (5.2 seconds)

6. Somersett Fitchett (sportsman). First attempt—gun jammed at 3^rd shot. Best attempt (of 3)—2 hits and 1 near miss in 5.5 seconds. 2 hits or more in 2 of 3 attempts. (5.9 and 5.5 seconds)

7. William Fitchett (sporting goods dealer). First attempt—3 borderline hits in 6.5 seconds. Best attempt (of 3)—the same. 2 hits or more in 1 of 3 attempts. (6.5 seconds)

8. Ron George (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—gun jammed at 2^nd shot. Best attempt (of 3)—2 hits and 1 near miss in 4.9 seconds. 2 hits or more in 1 of 3 attempts. (4.9 seconds)

9. Charles Hamby (shooting range employee). First attempt—gun jammed. Best attempt (of 3)—2 near misses and 1 complete miss in 6.5 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 3 attempts.

10. Carl Holden (shooting range employee). First attempt—gun jammed with first shot. Best attempt (of 3)—3 near misses in 5.4 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 3 attempts.

11. Sid Price (shooting range employee). First attempt—1 hit, 1 near miss, and 1 complete miss in 5.9 seconds. Best attempt (of 4)—the same. 2 hits or more in 0 of 4 attempts.

12. Al Sherman (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—2 hits and 1 near miss in 5.0 seconds. Best attempt (of 5)—the same. 2 hits or more in 2 of 5 attempts. (5.0 and 6.0 seconds)

Of the 12 first attempts, only 1 shooter was able to hit the target twice in less than 5.6 seconds. Of the 43 total attempts, moreover, these well-seasoned shooters were able to replicate Oswald’s purported feat—2 hits in less than 5.6 seconds—just 4 times.

In fact, it's even worse. Not counting Crossman, an acknowledged rifle expert, those purportedly of Oswald's skill level landed but 25 hits TOTAL, in their 20 successful attempts at getting off 3 shots. In other words, they hit 25 out of 60 shots--far worse on average than Oswald's purported 2 out of 3.

But it's actually FAR WORSE than that. You see, CBS counted any strike on the FBI silhouettes used as targets--even those far down the back, or out on the shoulders--as a hit. This, in effect, tripled or quadrupled the size of the target for their shooters, in comparison to the small area on the back and head purportedly hit by Oswald. It seems clear then that, of the 60 shots total, and 25 hits, no more than 9 hit the target in the small central area purportedly hit by Oswald, not once but twice. This, then, suggests that, even IF Oswald was a well-practiced shooter, and even IF his rifle were in optimal condition, and even IF he had been provided NINE practice shots, the odds of his hitting the small area he supposedly hit from the sniper's nest on any given shot were less than 1 in 6, and of his hitting this area 2 of 3 times something like 1 in 16.

In other words, Oswald's purported feat was highly unlikely...

(This fact has not escaped the attention of those continuing to argue Oswald acted alone. In his mammoth tome Reclaiming History, Vincent Bugliosi deceives his readers by arguing that, as Oswald was clearly aiming for Kennedy's head, he actually hit but one of three shots. This avoids, of course, that the vast majority of "hits" by the professional shooters attempting to simulate Oswald's purported feat for the Warren Commission, and what one can only assume were the vast majority of "hits" by the amateur shooters attempting to simulate Oswald's purported feat for CBS News in 1967, were torso hits even further from the center of the target as the hit on Kennedy's back.)

[James DiEugenio]

Even Liebeler had to admit that there was no credible accounting for Oswald practicing with his rifle in all of 1963.

In fact, he even went back to Russia and said, you should not include that since that was with a shotgun. 

Liebeler was very strong on this point and said it was one of the issues that would come back to haunt them.

[Pat Speer]

3 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Even Liebeler had to admit that there was no credible accounting for Oswald practicing with his rifle in all of 1963.

In fact, he even went back to Russia and said, you should not include that since that was with a shotgun. 

Liebeler was very strong on this point and said it was one of the issues that would come back to haunt them.

If I recall, he was upset that the commission decided to pretend Oswald's purported feat was no big deal, and suggested that they instead acknowledge that Oswald had been "lucky". 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:

All together, so remarkable that it took many of the world's top marksmen many tries to duplicate it. Especially in the rushed shooting time frame sequence attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission.

Which tests are you referring to?

[James DiEugenio]

Pat, I think he later said the best evidence of Oswald's marksmanship was that he did it.  🤐

[Paul Cummings]

In fairness to the experts they didn't have a magic bullet to work with. 

[James DiEugenio]

Nice one Paul.

Correction:  I think it was the HSCA who made the point about shotguns.

Liebeler said that in Russia Oswald was such a poor shot that his fellow hunters had to supply him with game to take home.

I just looked at Epstein's summary of the Liebeler Memorandum on this issue, and again, its pretty strong. He also predicted that Delgado would bite them in the butt. 

Edited July 22, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[Pat Speer]

28 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Nice one Paul.

Correction:  I think it was the HSCA who made the point about shotguns.

Liebeler said that in Russia Oswald was such a poor shot that his fellow hunters had to supply him with game to take home.

I just looked at Epstein's summary of the Liebeler Memorandum on this issue, and again, its pretty strong. He also predicted that Delgado would bite them in the butt. 

I include much of Liebeler's memo in chapter 3c.

Here are the two final points in his memo regarding Oswald's shooting capability.

 

16. The present section on rifle capability fails to set forth material in the record tending to indicate that Oswald was not a good shot and that he was not interested in his rifle while in the Marine Corps. It does not set forth material indicating that a telescopic sight must be tested and sighted in after a period of non-use before it can be expected to be accurate. That problem is emphasized by the fact that the FBI actually found that there was a defect in the scope which caused the rifle to fire high and to the right. In spite of the above the present section takes only part of the material in the record to show that Oswald was a good shot and that he was interested in rifles. I submit that the testimony of Delgado that Oswald was not interested in his rifle while in the Marines is at least as probative as Alba's testimony that Oswald came into his garage to read rifle--and hunting--magazines. To put it bluntly that sort of selection from the record could seriously affect the integrity and credibility of the entire report.

17. It seems to me that the most honest and the most sensible thing to do given the present state of the record on Oswald's rifle capability would be to write a very short section indicating that there is testimony on both sides of several issues. The Commission could then conclude that the best evidence that Oswald could fire his rifle as fast as he did and hit the target is the fact that he did so. It may have been pure luck. It probably was to a very great extent. But it happened. He would have had to have been lucky to hit as he did if he had only 4.8 seconds to fire the shots. Why don't we admit instead of reaching and using only part of the record to support the propositions presently set forth in the galleys. Those conclusions will never be accepted by critical persons anyway.

 

[Sean Coleman]

Am sure we’ll be reminded by DVP,WTP & BB that Oswald was a sharpshooter (212) and a marksman (191). 
Credentials for shooting a pig in a barrel.

[Allen Lowe]

I seem to recall that Carlos Hathcock, the greatest sniper in US military history, recounted that they tried to set up an equivalent to the shooting, and that he was unable to replicate Oswald‘s work. Pretty damning.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

59 minutes ago, Allen Lowe said:

I seem to recall that Carlos Hathcock, the greatest sniper in US military history, recounted that they tried to set up an equivalent to the shooting, and that he was unable to replicate Oswald‘s work. Pretty damning.

Yet we have this from Michael Yardley:

"The gun is up to the task, however - just. And, the shots with it are possible within the given time frame. I have made them again and again. Other reports not withstanding, I believe any competent rifleman would have had a good chance of connecting at least once."

Kennedy Assassination Latest (positiveshooting.com)

[Allen Lowe]

18 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Yet we have this from Michael Yardley:

"The gun is up to the task, however - just. And, the shots with it are possible within the given time frame. I have made them again and again. Other reports not withstanding, I believe any competent rifleman would have had a good chance of connecting at least once."

Kennedy Assassination Latest (positiveshooting.com)

Yeah that’s great, the conditions were completely different and he used the rifle with a much improved scope. He also says any competent shooter could’ve done it, and we know from Oswald’s Marine buddies he was not a competent shooter. Not to mention that he shot the rifle at a range. Not in the actual conditions that LHO did. It works better if you actually read the articles for which you give us citations.

Edited July 22, 2022 by Allen Lowe

[Pat Speer]

38 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Yet we have this from Michael Yardley:

"The gun is up to the task, however - just. And, the shots with it are possible within the given time frame. I have made them again and again. Other reports not withstanding, I believe any competent rifleman would have had a good chance of connecting at least once."

Kennedy Assassination Latest (positiveshooting.com)

Here are some other quotes from Yardley.

From chapter 4g:

• That the sniper shooting at Kennedy, should it have been but one sniper shooting at Kennedy, had a significant set of skills has been confirmed, moreover, in more recent years. In 2003 a Discovery Channel program entitled “The JFK Conspiracy Myths” attempted to show that Oswald had enough time to perform the shooting by having a sharpshooter on a scaffold shoot at watermelons riding in a remote-controlled limousine. That the sharp shooter hired by the program, Michael Yardley, was able to hit a moving target 3 times in 7.87 seconds (longer than the Warren Commission's favored scenario) was supposed to prove that Oswald, who hadn’t fired his rifle in months, if ever, and who had never been trained in shooting at a moving target from an elevated perch, would have been able to accomplish a similar feat. While the program mentioned that Yardley fired six other sets of three shots, and that four of these proved successful, with the other two marred by equipment failure (the rifle jammed 5 times in 21 tries), they failed to mention the timing of these other sets. This leads one to suspect the other sets took longer than the already too long 7.87 seconds quoted in the program. Even worse, when it came time to test the accuracy of Yardley’s shooting, they provided him with a rifle hooked up to a laser switch, which he then aimed at a pretend Kennedy, as the limo crossed the plaza at night. As a laser beam travels at the speed of light, making it dramatically easier to hit a moving target, and as a laser beam suffers no bullet drop or wind resistance, and as a laser rifle offers no recoil, making it easier to shoot and re-aim, this was akin to playing with a stacked deck.

• As if the clear but unacknowledged point made by the program--that Oswald's shooting Kennedy all by his lonesome was possible, but not likely--needed any clarification, its sharpshooter Michael Yardley wrote a short article on his experience entitled "Who Shot John F. Kennedy? It was me"that was published in his native England. While claiming he believed Oswald had indeed "fired three shots from the depository," Yardley nevertheless expressed serious doubts that these were the shots striking Kennedy, as he also claimed the head shot, "if taken from the Grassy Knoll, Badgeman or Walkway positions (all positions forward of the presidential vehicle) would have been much easier" and that "practical experience of the second gunman positions leads me to suspect that there could well have been another shooter." He then closed his article with "Of what can one be certain? That Oswald was a patsy." Of course, none of this was mentioned in the program.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Allen Lowe said:

Yeah that’s great, the conditions were completely different and he used the rifle with a much improved scope.

Any test will never match the conditions perfectly. My question would be is it a reasonable facsimile?

47 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Here are some other quotes from Yardley.

Yes, no doubt Pat-Yardley is a conspiracy promoter despite the fact that he can make the shots "over and over." Now, LHO was not as good a shot as Yardley. But he was (according to his actual MC records rather than anecdotal reports) a "competent" marksman.