Example of Extreme Wound Ballistics on heashshot

[Al Carrier]

It would be nice to hear more of your conclusions or ideas of what weapons were used to assassinate JFK 41 years ago, and how you came to these conclusions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Antti,

I believe the shooters in DP were using shoulder mounted weapons (for ease of panning and accuracy) firing a heavy (130gr plus) rifle caliber velocity (1800fps plus) bullet at the limo from three points of origin. The reason I believe in the heavier bullet is the greater chance of success with fatal wound achievement in a higher velocity, and a minimal effect of windage factor with the swirling winds in DP. I believe it had to be of rifle caliber velocity to achieve the desired wound effectiveness and minimize time in flight of the projectile when firing on a moving target. This does not narrow it down a great deal and I can only add, IMO that the rifles used were bolt action for greater accuracy.

Why I believe there were three points of origin for the shots fired is due to the witness reports, what was found in the TSBD and the Badgeman photo. The above covers two of the three points of shot origin and I firmly believe from a tactical sniper standpoint and what we see of the headwound being restricted to the right side, that there was a third position in the front to the left of the President that produced the fatal wound.

If you would like, I could add to this by detailing the reasons for the multiple positions for such a shot scenario which is consistent with what we have found in this investigation and what is trained to military snipers. It also deals with witness recall and the layout of the plaza.

Al

[Tim Gratz]

If you would like, I could add to this by detailing the reasons for the multiple positions for such a shot scenario which is consistent with what we have found in this investigation and what is trained to military snipers. It also deals with witness recall and the layout of the plaza.

Al[/color]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suspect we would all like! Thanks!

[Al Carrier]

If you would like, I could add to this by detailing the reasons for the multiple positions for such a shot scenario which is consistent with what we have found in this investigation and what is trained to military snipers. It also deals with witness recall and the layout of the plaza.

Al[/color]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suspect we would all like! Thanks!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First of all, Dealey Plaza has somewhat of an Amphitheatre effect as it has tall buildings to the rear, sloping grounds to each side and the triple underpass in the foreground. Where the sloping and curving roadway makes this a less than perfect ambush site, the terrain allows for multiple shooters and the ability to cover the origins of shooters who are in less than ideal positions that would allow their escape.

The military teaches their snipers a technique in setting up such an ambush that is referred to as a “canyon shoot”. In rural and even more so in urban situations, the shoot origin with the most ideal position is generally in an exposed placement. In order to eleviate the problem of allowing this ideal positioned shooter an unhampered escape, other snipers are brought in, in more ideal positions for escape and they will utilized their shot detonations to cover the origin of the exposed sniper.

In the sequence of events in DP, some 83% of the witnesses heard one shot origin for the three or more shots they heard fired on the Presidential motorcade. These 83% of the wits detected an original shot origin detonation and their critical stress recall placed all shots from that same position. Of the 17% that reported multiple shot origin positions, they would have been in close proximity to the limo or totally away from the plaza. Those in close proximity would have detected the bullet bow shockwave of the bullet in flight passing by them enroute to the target. Of those outside the theatre of operation, their stress level would have been lessened and they would have been able to rationalize other shot origins.

IMHO, the shot from the rear that so many of the wits and protective parties reported on, was the originating shot they cued the other shooters to fire and covered their origins. Audio Stimulus is the quickest reaction stimulus of the senses. While many report on radio traffic from each shot origin to the other and possibly from on the ground in DP, this would create a delay in follow-up shots to the originating shot and would not work in this situation. Often times radio traffic is not an option and in this case, it may have been the staging confirmation that all point of shot origin had a clear and unobstructed view of the target within the targets traveled path in the plaza. Once the shooting started, the radios would no longer be a factor in this.

I believe in three shot origins, possibly more. One being the one that starts the sequence and it originated from the rear on the 6th floor of the TSBD. This was not an ideal location for target elimination as it involved a sixty foot elevation that would create a gravitational pull factor and the terrain of the roadway would create additional problems. The second being on the north knoll. Although this was the closest in proximity to the target, it dealt with issues of a crossing target with variable speeds at close range. This would create a tracking problem. The third would be from the front to the south that would have the target closing in a more direct fashion at the time of the kill shot. The latter being the most ideal for panning on a moving target.

Al

[Shanet Clark]

Thanks Al, for fleshing out your views.

This is very much in keeping with my triangulated ambush theory.

The Fifty millimeter is an elephant gun, for large and threatening beasts on the order of the Rhinoceros or adult male lion.

The Mauser, a 30.06 and a few Il Duce Mussolini "black" 6.5 rifles would have done the job. The sporting goods junk rifle with the left mounted loose scope could not have done the job, as per the WC report.

Al- I only believe that a .22 was used in a forward, early throat shot because of the obliterated wound and the Zapruder reactions, Elbows up, reaching for throat with both hands. Like many other elements, it is not SOP, but there it is.

You and I differ on the motivation and implications, but I noticed on another thread

that you believe the 1963 Secret Service Lincoln was going Five Miles Per Hour,

and now your theory correllates closely with mine.

I have fired a 50 caliber and so I don't have to look at the pictures.

Cheers to LE.

If you would like, I could add to this by detailing the reasons for the multiple positions for such a shot scenario which is consistent with what we have found in this investigation and what is trained to military snipers. It also deals with witness recall and the layout of the plaza.

Al[/color]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suspect we would all like! Thanks!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First of all, Dealey Plaza has somewhat of an Amphitheatre effect as it has tall buildings to the rear, sloping grounds to each side and the triple underpass in the foreground. Where the sloping and curving roadway makes this a less than perfect ambush site, the terrain allows for multiple shooters and the ability to cover the origins of shooters who are in less than ideal positions that would allow their escape.

The military teaches their snipers a technique in setting up such an ambush that is referred to as a “canyon shoot”. In rural and even more so in urban situations, the shoot origin with the most ideal position is generally in an exposed placement. In order to eleviate the problem of allowing this ideal positioned shooter an unhampered escape, other snipers are brought in, in more ideal positions for escape and they will utilized their shot detonations to cover the origin of the exposed sniper.

In the sequence of events in DP, some 83% of the witnesses heard one shot origin for the three or more shots they heard fired on the Presidential motorcade. These 83% of the wits detected an original shot origin detonation and their critical stress recall placed all shots from that same position. Of the 17% that reported multiple shot origin positions, they would have been in close proximity to the limo or totally away from the plaza. Those in close proximity would have detected the bullet bow shockwave of the bullet in flight passing by them enroute to the target. Of those outside the theatre of operation, their stress level would have been lessened and they would have been able to rationalize other shot origins.

IMHO, the shot from the rear that so many of the wits and protective parties reported on, was the originating shot they cued the other shooters to fire and covered their origins. Audio Stimulus is the quickest reaction stimulus of the senses. While many report on radio traffic from each shot origin to the other and possibly from on the ground in DP, this would create a delay in follow-up shots to the originating shot and would not work in this situation. Often times radio traffic is not an option and in this case, it may have been the staging confirmation that all point of shot origin had a clear and unobstructed view of the target within the targets traveled path in the plaza. Once the shooting started, the radios would no longer be a factor in this.

I believe in three shot origins, possibly more. One being the one that starts the sequence and it originated from the rear on the 6th floor of the TSBD. This was not an ideal location for target elimination as it involved a sixty foot elevation that would create a gravitational pull factor and the terrain of the roadway would create additional problems. The second being on the north knoll. Although this was the closest in proximity to the target, it dealt with issues of a crossing target with variable speeds at close range. This would create a tracking problem. The third would be from the front to the south that would have the target closing in a more direct fashion at the time of the kill shot. The latter being the most ideal for panning on a moving target.

Al

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Frank Agbat]

I was reading a game-hunting related web page a few days ago, specifically because it had a section talking about 6.5mm ammunition.

It mentioned several flavors of 6.5mm (Mannlicher was one, Carcano was listed separately, and one or two others). The interesting comment that I noted from this site was that the 6.5mm never really caught on as a hunting round in the USA. It did mention that some big game hunters preferred it, even for elephant hunting, because of the bullet's ability to penetrate deep into a target. The rationale for this was credited to excellent sectional density of the bullet.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/6-5mm_rifle_cartridges.htm

I notice, however, that they weren't talking about WCC or SMI military-issue rounds in this article.

I also found it interesting that they commented on the relatively low recoil of the 6.5 round.

As a confirmed skeptic, though, I'd like to hear what other folks have to say about the feasibility of a 6.5mm FMJ round creating the Z312/313 headwound.

Regards,

Frank

[Al Carrier]

I was reading a game-hunting related web page a few days ago, specifically because it had a section talking about 6.5mm ammunition.

It mentioned several flavors of 6.5mm (Mannlicher was one, Carcano was listed separately, and one or two others).  The interesting comment that I noted from this site was that the 6.5mm never really caught on as a hunting round in the USA.  It did mention that some big game hunters preferred it, even for elephant hunting, because of the bullet's ability to penetrate deep into a target.  The rationale for this was credited to excellent sectional density of the bullet.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/6-5mm_rifle_cartridges.htm

I notice, however, that they weren't talking about WCC or SMI military-issue rounds in this article. 

I also found it interesting that they commented on the relatively low recoil of the 6.5 round.

As a confirmed skeptic, though, I'd like to hear what other folks have to say about the feasibility of a 6.5mm FMJ round creating the Z312/313 headwound.

Regards,

Frank

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Frank,

Ballisically speaking, the 6.5mm WCC 160grn FMJ MC bullet could have created the skull wound to JFK. It had a muzzle velocity of 2000fps and was an elongated round that would have yawed on impact and released sufficient energy dispersion into the enclosed cavity to create such a wound. The first problem is that is was far from being an ideal round of the period for accuracy and reliability. Considering it was going to be relied upon to eliminate a president in a moving vehicle, I believe it would not have been one to come up in conversation for planning.

Secondly, the way it is represented in the official findings, we are dealing with a short stock rifle that requires the shooter to come off the cheek weld in order to work the action to chamber the next round. In the tests that have been done with it, they have either fired on stationary preset location targets or movers on level ground and constant speed, which allows for more rapid reaquisition of the target than does the varying speed, varying angle and elevation that the motorcade represented. Add a misaligned scope and we have a comical equation of a possible sniper rifle situation. No need to mention the lack of evidence of Oswald having live-fire experience with the rifle or even any evidence that he fired it. Or that he had any experience with a scoped rifle.

In dealing with consistency with the wound and the shot origin of the TSBD, the test skulls that I posted on are far from consistent with what occurred with JFK. The Lattimer skull was hollow and had significant dispersion of the parietal on the left side of the skull and also into the frontal. This hollow skull cavity is useless as it does not address the issue of dispersion of energy within the cavity that we would see with a filled cavity. The Feds skull testing did utilized a filled cavity and resulted in obliteration of the right side of the skull from the occipital to the rear, through the parietal and into the frontal with removal of the right orbital. All inconsistent with the JFK Skull.

Yes, the 6.5mm MC 160gr WCC of 1958 had a very minimal recoil. Besides that, I cannot fathom any other reason one would choose it.

Al

Edited January 7, 2005 by Al Carrier

[Antti Hynonen]

Al Carrier  Yesterday, 07:04 AM Post #18 

Experienced Member

Group: Members

Posts: 140

Joined: 1-November 04

Member No.: 1814

QUOTE(Tim Gratz @ Jan 6 2005, 07:12 AM)

QUOTE(Al Carrier @ Jan 6 2005, 07:06 AM)

If you would like, I could add to this by detailing the reasons for the multiple positions for such a shot scenario which is consistent with what we have found in this investigation and what is trained to military snipers. It also deals with witness recall and the layout of the plaza.

Al[/color]

I suspect we would all like! Thanks!

First of all, Dealey Plaza has somewhat of an Amphitheatre effect as it has tall buildings to the rear, sloping grounds to each side and the triple underpass in the foreground. Where the sloping and curving roadway makes this a less than perfect ambush site, the terrain allows for multiple shooters and the ability to cover the origins of shooters who are in less than ideal positions that would allow their escape.

The military teaches their snipers a technique in setting up such an ambush that is referred to as a “canyon shoot”. In rural and even more so in urban situations, the shoot origin with the most ideal position is generally in an exposed placement. In order to eleviate the problem of allowing this ideal positioned shooter an unhampered escape, other snipers are brought in, in more ideal positions for escape and they will utilized their shot detonations to cover the origin of the exposed sniper.

In the sequence of events in DP, some 83% of the witnesses heard one shot origin for the three or more shots they heard fired on the Presidential motorcade. These 83% of the wits detected an original shot origin detonation and their critical stress recall placed all shots from that same position. Of the 17% that reported multiple shot origin positions, they would have been in close proximity to the limo or totally away from the plaza. Those in close proximity would have detected the bullet bow shockwave of the bullet in flight passing by them enroute to the target. Of those outside the theatre of operation, their stress level would have been lessened and they would have been able to rationalize other shot origins.

IMHO, the shot from the rear that so many of the wits and protective parties reported on, was the originating shot they cued the other shooters to fire and covered their origins. Audio Stimulus is the quickest reaction stimulus of the senses. While many report on radio traffic from each shot origin to the other and possibly from on the ground in DP, this would create a delay in follow-up shots to the originating shot and would not work in this situation. Often times radio traffic is not an option and in this case, it may have been the staging confirmation that all point of shot origin had a clear and unobstructed view of the target within the targets traveled path in the plaza. Once the shooting started, the radios would no longer be a factor in this.

I believe in three shot origins, possibly more. One being the one that starts the sequence and it originated from the rear on the 6th floor of the TSBD. This was not an ideal location for target elimination as it involved a sixty foot elevation that would create a gravitational pull factor and the terrain of the roadway would create additional problems. The second being on the north knoll. Although this was the closest in proximity to the target, it dealt with issues of a crossing target with variable speeds at close range. This would create a tracking problem. The third would be from the front to the south that would have the target closing in a more direct fashion at the time of the kill shot. The latter being the most ideal for panning on a moving target.

Al

Al,

Thank you for your assessment. Seems like you have given it a lot of thought and appropriately used witness testimony and what little other evidence there is to make your conclusions.

It seems like you would agree with what was presented on this issue in the movie JFK. Military style ambush, triangulation cross fire, hunting rifles, professional hit men or serious hunters. Of course in the film they elaborated and discussed 3 separate sniper teams with radio communication etc. nevertheless a well presented theory (if not fact).

[Al Carrier]

Al,

Thank you for your assessment. Seems like you have given it a lot of thought and appropriately used witness testimony and what little other evidence there is to make your conclusions.

It seems like you would agree with what was presented on this issue in the movie JFK. Military style ambush, triangulation cross fire, hunting rifles, professional hit men or serious hunters. Of course in the film they elaborated and discussed 3 separate sniper teams with radio communication etc. nevertheless a well presented theory (if not fact).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Antti, it is theory by connecting such an operation to the Kennedy assassination, as we cannot make the connections to prove this with what is left. I came to these conclusions by looking at the physical evidence, the witnesses observation and what has been practiced by our government in SE Asia, the middle-east, Africa, Central and South America.

A "military style ambush" of this nature is conducted by military snipers who have been trained for such operations. The operational order is handed down to a field agent or commander who then chooses the snipers for the operation and gives them their orders, travel papers, etc.. The same second level person or a subordinate then arranges on site, what is needed by the team to accomplish their mission, provides the target's position at various times and turns it over to the teams to accomplish their objective. The team will spend a matter of a few days at most determining the ambush site and will not coordinate it with anyone. Once the objective has been met, the team will depart the area and either meet and leave in unison or by seperate pre-planned modes. Nobody but one or two knew they were there and in the case of DP, I seriously doubt they were ever heard from again.

Al

[Ron Ecker]

Al,

If you go to this link, there is an excellent photo of your south knoll shooter position, where the banister slants eastward:

http://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/T...ctoryOfaLie.htm

Do you think a shooter would fire over the railing, or lie down and shoot through one of the openings?

Ron

[Al Carrier]

Al,

If you go to this link, there is an excellent photo of your south knoll shooter position, where the banister slants eastward:

http://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/T...ctoryOfaLie.htm

Do you think a shooter would fire over the railing, or lie down and shoot through one of the openings?

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ron,

Both offers a stabilizer with a concrete base at the top and bottom. IMO, the lower would be more ideal as the shooter would be better hidden and prone would be more stabilized as the top would put the shooter in a crouch. I have been up there and noted the heights of this.

Al

[Ron Ecker]

Al,

If the shooter was lying down, I think one of the officers at the north end may have seen his feet sticking out, and this was the origin of the freight train story. (IOW "Whoever you guys are, I didn't see nothing.")

Ron

[Al Carrier]

Al,

If the shooter was lying down, I think one of the officers at the north end may have seen his feet sticking out, and this was the origin of the freight train story. (IOW "Whoever you guys are, I didn't see nothing.")

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The photo you posted is restricted to the first section beyond the bend. A prone rifle position is not straight-on and is more in compliance to a rollover prone shooting position where the left leg of the right handed shooter is drawn up to balance the weight shift onto the right side. The body extension of a six foot shooter would be no more than three feet. Given the angle of the break at the south end, I doubt it would be noticed.

Al

[Ron Ecker]

Al,

Actually, as wide as that overpass is, wouldn't the officer stationed at the northwest side easily see someone behind the southeast banister even with the slant and no matter what shooting position?

Ron

[Al Carrier]

Al,

Actually, as wide as that overpass is, wouldn't the officer stationed at the northwest side easily see someone behind the southeast banister even with the slant and no matter what shooting position?

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ron, the officer positioning at the northwest side would be to focus attention on the opposite side of the overpass and would have had his back to the area of concern here. What should be noted is that the two officers assigned to the overpass should not have been assigned to the DP Side and the Stemmons side of the overpass, but to the ends of the overpass to assure that nobody came onto it. Concerns with overpasses is to keep pedestrians and vehicles off of it. Simply posting an officer at each end would shut it down. This did not happen in Dallas in DP.

Al

[Greg Wagner]

The theory of a shooter in this location certainly makes sense. Wouldn't the bullet hole on the driver's side of the windshield also seem to support a shooter in this position? Are there any photos of relevance in existence with regard to this location at the time of the assassination (eg. Moorman/Badgeman)?