Did Decker & Skelton see the same bullet?

[Tony Krome]

 

[Tom Gram]

Speculation - but could a bullet have hit on Elm St. in that location and launched concrete into Tague? Seems like it but I have no idea. 

[Tony Krome]

The Skelton X mark and spray direction comes from the Skelton Exhibit in the WC. Skelton was presented with a crude and out of proportion map of Dealey, and he told them too, but he was asked to point out where the bullet strike was. What I did was re-proportion the crude map to fit Dealey and translate the X mark.

[Tony Krome]

2 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

Speculation - but could a bullet have hit on Elm St. in that location and launched concrete into Tague? Seems like it but I have no idea. 

That's the first thing I thought of, Tom, but I think Walthers imagined a direct strike on the kerb by Tague's feet. Possible though.

[Tony Krome]

Again, right near the triple underpass, same bullet?

 

Mrs. BAKER. Well, after he passed us, then we heard a noise and I thought it was firecrackers, because I saw a shot or something hit the pavement.

Mr. LIEBELER. Could you tell or did you have any idea where the noise came from when you first heard it? 
Mrs. BAKER. No; I thought there were some boys standing down there where he was--where the President's car was. 
Mr. LIEBELER. Down farther on the street, you mean? 
Mrs. BAKER. Yes; close to the underpass.

[Tony Krome]

Mrs. BAKER. Yes; close to the underpass.

Royce Skelton. Closer to the triple underpass.

X mark on Baker Exhibit, when over-laid, shows her pavement strike matches Skelton's X mark, which is possibly the same strike that Sheriff Decker witnessed.

[Benjamin Cole]

There are several witnesses reporting a bullet strike on the asphalt around the limo, 11/22/63.

Then the strike near Tague's feet, reported to be a lead slug (no copper found on the strike). 

Of course, if a bullet did strike the asphalt, that would mean another unexplained bullet. 

 

[Tony Krome]

39 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

There are several witnesses reporting a bullet strike on the asphalt around the limo, 11/22/63.

Here's the 4th witness;

DPD SGT Stavis Ellis (motorcycle cop in front of Limo near underpass): Then I looked back toward the President. They had made it around the corner off Houston and were now headed west on Elm in my direction. They had passed the worst of the crowding, and were then coming more into the open, but they were moving real slowly. That's when the first shot was fired. I was looking directly at the President, and I saw the concrete burst into a cloud of dust when that bullet hit the curb

So far we have a Sheriff, a motorcycle cop, and 2 civilian witnesses for a pavement strike.

[Benjamin Cole]

22 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Here's the 4th witness;

DPD SGT Stavis Ellis (motorcycle cop in front of Limo near underpass): Then I looked back toward the President. They had made it around the corner off Houston and were now headed west on Elm in my direction. They had passed the worst of the crowding, and were then coming more into the open, but they were moving real slowly. That's when the first shot was fired. I was looking directly at the President, and I saw the concrete burst into a cloud of dust when that bullet hit the curb

So far we have a Sheriff, a motorcycle cop, and 2 civilian witnesses for a pavement strike.

Verily. That was a thing---the strike of a bullet on the asphalt or curb, or even near a manhole cover just off of Elm.  

Remember, Gov. Connally twice testified he thought bullets were entering the cab of the limo as if by "automatic weapons fire." I thought he misspoke, and meant "semi-automatic," but he used the same language before the WC and the HSCA.  

I think it was SS'er Kellerman who described a "flurry" of shots, before being browbeat a bit. 

My guess is there were several shots that day, as well as a diversionary action on the GK. 

 

 

 

[Tony Krome]

3 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Verily. That was a thing---the strike of a bullet on the asphalt or curb, or even near a manhole cover just off of Elm.

We can keep going with reports further back up Elm;

Jean Hill reported that a secret service agent told her that a bullet kicked up dust right by her feet;

Mrs. HILL - Then, he asked me, I was asked did I know that a bullet struck at my feet and I said, "No; I didn't." And he said, "What do you think that dust was?" And I said, "I didn't see any dust."

[Benjamin Cole]

12 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

We can keep going with reports further back up Elm;

 

Jean Hill reported that a secret service agent told her that a bullet kicked up dust right by her feet;

Mrs. HILL - Then, he asked me, I was asked did I know that a bullet struck at my feet and I said, "No; I didn't." And he said, "What do you think that dust was?" And I said, "I didn't see any dust."

Maybe this topic has been addressed before, but I have never seen a summation of all these "bullets struck asphalt or manhole covers" etc.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49564/

This is a pic of the manhole cover-cement block some thought a bullet struck. 

 

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

On 12/14/2023 at 8:10 AM, Tony Krome said:

 

Hickey's last shot (the headshot)(say his shot-4) was at Z312.

His shot-3 dented the chrome trim.

His shot-2 might have hit tarmac (on a line halfway between the red-X & the south curb of Elm). Or it hit the concrete south curb of Elm. Or it hit the concrete paving between Elm & Main. In any case it passed say 12ft north of the manhole.

His shot-1 probly hit the tarmac of Main & then the south curb of Main near Tague.

I doubt that Ms Rachley (Baker) was in a position to see any of Hickey's ricochets, she was i think  standing directly on his line of fire, but behind.

She might have seen Oswald's shot-1 which ricocheted off the overhead signals, the remnant slug went throo the floor of the jfklimo & probly hit the driveshaft & tarmac. She did say that the sparks were behind the jfklimo, & that they were from the first of 3 shots.

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by Marjan Rynkiewicz

[Greg Doudna]

On 12/14/2023 at 3:37 PM, Marjan Rynkiewicz said:

Hickey's last shot (the headshot)(say his shot-4) was at Z312.

His shot-3 dented the chrome trim.

His shot-2 might have hit tarmac (on a line halfway between the red-X & the south curb of Elm). Or it hit the concrete south curb of Elm. Or it hit the concrete paving between Elm & Main. In any case it passed say 12ft north of the manhole.

His shot-1 probly hit the tarmac of Main & then the south curb of Main near Tague.

I doubt that Ms Rachley (Baker) was in a position to see any of Hickey's ricochets, she was i think  standing directly on his line of fire, but behind.

She might have seen Oswald's shot-1 which ricocheted off the overhead signals, the remnant slug went throo the floor of the jfklimo & probly hit the driveshaft & tarmac. She did say that the sparks were behind the jfklimo, & that they were from the first of 3 shots.

Marjan, on the Hickey shooting idea, may I ask why you think so? 

I have recently looked at the McLaren and Menninger books which make that case and can't see it. The 6.0 mm measurement for an entrance bullet wound I assume is too close to distinguish from human measurement error and coincidence, and that's about it for the positive case apart from an argument for plausibility.

However against plausibility is nobody in the followup car told of hearing Hickey firing (and they surely would have heard it), and its a bit extreme to assume a successful silencing and coverup of all the witnesses in that followup car without someone leaking. And even more, the hit to JFK's head is just obviously from someone intending to hit him, not an accident (too freak perfect of a hit). And Hickey for sure was not intentionally shooting JFK which excludes him as the source on that grounds (extreme improbability).  

So, no strong positive evidence, and two extreme improbabilities. Please say where you differ? Also, can you say which in-print or off-the-shelf available published argument is in your opinion the best, in making the Hickey case?

Incidentally, I think the witnesses who saw and smelled gunsmoke and heard a shot near the limousine probably reflect a gunman firing a shot from the storm drain, perhaps as source of the throat shot entering from the front in an upward trajectory and exiting at the lower back of JFK's head, at Z327, in keeping with the original bullet track of the autopsists (according to Sibert and O'Neill), not a Hickey shooting. So I do not see those arguments as calling for a Hickey shot or shots either. But never mind me, I'm interested in your argument if you can spell it out in a nutshell (and optionally give a reference to read more). Thanks.

Edited December 26, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Marjan, on the Hickey shooting idea, may I ask why you think so? 

I have recently looked at the McLaren and Menninger books which make that case and can't see it. The 6.0 mm measurement for an entrance bullet wound I assume is too close to distinguish from human measurement error and coincidence, and that's about it for the positive case apart from an argument for plausibility.

However against plausibility is nobody in the followup car told of hearing Hickey firing (and they surely would have heard it), and its a bit extreme to assume a successful silencing and coverup of all the witnesses in that followup car without someone leaking. And even more, the hit to JFK's head is just obviously from someone intending to hit him, not an accident (too freak perfect of a hit). And Hickey for sure was not intentionally shooting JFK which excludes him as the source on that grounds (extreme improbability).  

So, no strong positive evidence, and two extreme improbabilities. Please say where you differ? Also, can you say which in-print or off-the-shelf available published argument is in your opinion the best, in making the Hickey case?

Incidentally, I think the witnesses who saw and smelled gunsmoke and heard a shot near the limousine probably reflect a gunman firing a shot from the storm drain, perhaps as source of the throat shot entering from the front in an upward trajectory and exiting at the lower back of JFK's head, at Z327, in keeping with the original bullet track of the autopsists (according to Sibert and O'Neill), not a Hickey shooting. So I do not see those arguments as calling for a Hickey shot or shots either. But never mind me, I'm interested in your argument if you can spell it out in a nutshell (and optionally give a reference to read more). Thanks.

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27985-hickey-might-have-fired-his-ar15-members-survey/page/13/#comment-515142

Read my comments/postings on this forum (link above to one ovem). And on the jfkassassinationforum. I am No1 in the world on the jfk accidental homicide.

Then, if one atom of any of what i have said (written) is wrong, get back to me.

I of course have MORTAL ERROR & of course JFK THE SMOKING GUN. Wonderful works. But it appears that i am the only one in the world who ever realized that Hickey fired an auto burst (not just one shot). I am the only only one who realized that Bronson proves it (not disproves it).

All else supporting Hickey-did-it on the web is of little value, just a repeat of mortal error at best. 

Before i joined this forum i visited every thread on this forum (876 pages today i see). Took me weeks.

All u have to do is read my say 333 postings (easy). I will wait.

Edited December 26, 2023 by Marjan Rynkiewicz

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, Marjan Rynkiewicz said:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27985-hickey-might-have-fired-his-ar15-members-survey/page/13/#comment-515142

Read my comments/postings on this forum (link above to one ovem). And on the jfkassassinationforum. I am No1 in the world on the jfk accidental homicide.

Then, if one atom of any of what i have said (written) is wrong, get back to me.

I of course have MORTAL ERROR & of course JFK THE SMOKING GUN. Wonderful works. But it appears that i am the only one in the world who ever realized that Hickey fired an auto burst (not just one shot). I am the only only one who realized that Bronson proves it (not disproves it).

All else supporting Hickey-did-it on the web is of little value, just a repeat of mortal error at best. 

Before i joined this forum i visited every thread on this forum (876 pages today i see). Took me weeks.

All u have to do is read my say 333 postings (easy). I will wait.

Thanks Marjan, will do.