"The Trajectory We Must Have" Necessitates "Crazy" Conclusions?

[Richard Bertolino]

That's what is wrong here, if I'm allowed to say so.

 

 

 

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Richard Bertolino]

c

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Richard Bertolino]

On 5/11/2024 at 3:54 AM, Richard Bertolino said:

Maybe I should make it more explicit for the one or two people who might read this. Kevin Hofeling, within these hallowed halls, presented us with a trajectory which could only have originated inside the car, and when he was confronted with that said that the only possible explanation for his "must have" trajectory was "batshit insane," apparently because it violated the William Greer Taboo. And then he proceeded to debunk William Cooper, as if that matters. That's what's wrong here. It's a stark example of what is wrong here, in these hallowed halls.

I

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Kevin Balch]

1 hour ago, Richard Bertolino said:

I'll also mention that we have three witnesses, Jean Hill, Jack Franzen and Mrs. Jack Franzen who said that one shot sound or something which sounded like a firecracker going off seemed to come from inside the car itself, and one witness, Austin Miller, who was on the overpass, said that the shots sounded as if they came " from right there in the car." And Hugh Betzner thought he saw somebody with a "nickel revolver in someone's hand in the President's car..." This would seem to support Kevin Hofeling's "must have" trajectory, but somehow,  I doubt that Mr. Hofeling will use this evidence for support of his trajectory, not within these hallowed halls.

What did the witnesses INSIDE the car hear?

[Charles Blackmon]

Don't we really need to see a 3-D rendering (meaning computer graphics) rather than the 2-D rendering that Keven offered in order to better understand where the shot might have originated?

[Richard Bertolino]

On 5/11/2024 at 9:26 AM, Charles Blackmon said:

Don't we really need to see a 3-D rendering (meaning computer graphics) rather than the 2-D rendering that Keven offered in order to better understand where the shot might have originated?

x

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Kevin Balch]

25 minutes ago, Charles Blackmon said:

Don't we really need to see a 3-D rendering (meaning computer graphics) rather than the 2-D rendering that Keven offered in order to better understand where the shot might have originated?

On that thread, I posted a photo of the actual view a sniper on the south knoll would have had using an actual reproduction of the limo and actors portraying the occupants staged right on the “X”. It was not a good shot. Further, the reenactors failed to position the occupants just as they were at frame 312 which would actually have made the shot even harder as it would have placed JFK’s head even lower in the car. Had they showed the view from a position slightly to the east as proposed, it is likely either Greer, Nellie Connally or the frame of the windshield would have been in the way. I am not sure that the glare of the windshield would have allowed such a sniper to even see his target. And that’s assuming no bystanders on the grassy infield between Elm and Main Streets were in the way.

 

The photo failed to change any minds.

[Richard Bertolino]

On 5/11/2024 at 9:54 AM, Richard Bertolino said:

Maybe Dale Myers would be willing! He's an expert!

 

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Denny Zartman]

2 hours ago, Richard Bertolino said:

I am willing to dismiss the possibility that Nellie Connally fired the shot.

Based on what?

[Richard Bertolino]

On 5/12/2024 at 7:52 AM, Denny Zartman said:

Based on what?

 

g

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Richard Bertolino]

Ridiculous!

 

 

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Denise Hazelwood]

But if this trajectory was from the FIRST shot, as I contend, and JFK was looking to his right as he often did, and the shot came from the TSBD, as I contend, then this trajectory works. The only thing is that he had to have been looking upward somewhat.

[Richard Bertolino]

On 5/14/2024 at 6:38 AM, Denise Hazelwood said:

But if this trajectory was from the FIRST shot, as I contend, and JFK was looking to his right as he often did, and the shot came from the TSBD, as I contend, then this trajectory works. The only thing is that he had to have been looking upward somewhat.

v

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Denise Hazelwood]

1 hour ago, Richard Bertolino said:

How about the Croft photo on Elm Street? Do you contend that was also altered?

The photo Croft was sure he had taken at the moment of the head shot? The one for which he was told that his “camera must have malfunctioned”? Which photo are you referring to? And yes, I do think many of the photos and films were altered, in addition to being “accidentally” damaged, frames removed, etc. Linda Willis described at least one of her father’s photos as having been “physically altered because something showed in it that the SS did not want known.”

[Denise Hazelwood]

1 hour ago, Richard Bertolino said:

Vickie Adams actually described JFK turning to somebody who had called out as the car passed in front of the TSBD. This would seem to challenge your TSBD First Shot Theory. Have you dealt with Vickie Adams? It seems to me that every piece of evidence which speaks to the question contradicts your theory.

Point me to the Vickie Adam’s statement and I will take a look at it.