Denise's Scenario -- Shot 1

[Denise Hazelwood]

I've written a new article explaining my scenario for shot 1, with supporting evidence (witness accounts, etc.). My first shot occurs when the limousine was at the end of the turn onto Elm Street. I invite researchers on this site to read this article, and then respond. (Please do not respond without first reading the article, and if you disagree, please address the evidence presented with your own counter-evidence.) 

Those who have a passing familiarity with my work know that I support an AR-15 accident scenario. I try to address the critics of the AR-15 "Hickey" scenarios in my Introduction, and explain why this scenario deserves consideration. My scenario is different from Donahue's, so please do not say "The AR-15 accident theory was disproven" out of hand. When I post the information for Shot 4 (the AR-15 shot), you can 

On the other hand, if you disagree with my Shot 1 scenario, feel free to discuss that here. Again, please limit yourself to addressing the evidence presented, perhaps by offering a different explanation for the evidence I present? I am certain that the most reasonable conclusions are the ones I present, but I promise to consider any reasons you give for disagreeing with the information and conclusions I present. I do not, however, promise anything more than consideration of alternative hypotheses or scenarios. All I ask is your thoughtful consideration, as well.

The article can be found here: https://www.a-benign-conspiracy.com/what-happened---shot-1.html

Let me know what you think of my Shot 1 information.

-Denise

[Richard Bertolino]

Yo

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Denise Hazelwood]

4 hours ago, Richard Bertolino said:

You should examine the Towner film.

I have done that. It’s in my first book and my documentary, but I was trying to keep this article as short as possible (if you can believe that). I contend that BOTH the Z-film and the Towner film (and other images) were altered. Nix, who believed the Warren Report, complained that frames were missing from his film. The Bronson film has damaged frames. Robert Croft was certain that he took a picture at the exact moment of the head shot and gave his undeveloped film to the SS. When he got the pictures back, that one was missing. He was told that his camera must have “malfunctioned.” (Yeah, right!) The section in my book dealing with the Towner film is called “The Blockhead President” because Kennedy’s head takes on all kinds of weird shapes. So, yeah, I am an “alterationist.” Some alterations were as simple as removing or damaging frames. Others, like the Zapruder and Towner films (and autopsy photos and X-rays, required actual image manipulation.
 

It’s very difficult to find a good quality version of the Towner film. The best one I found was from a news segment. If you have a good online source for the film, I will use it to pull some frames to show you what I mean about the “Blockhead President.” It was never intended to be viewed as individual frames, but only as a movie, making it difficult to see how odd some of it is. But when you look at the individual frames, it becomes more apparent.

 I might go back later and add Towner film images to my article. 

Edited May 13 by Denise Hazelwood
Fixed auto correction mistake

[Richard Bertolino]

Okay.

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Denise Hazelwood]

I’m happy to debate my scenario. On this thread I would like to limit that discussion to Shot 1 of my scenario. Richard,Your comment about the Towner film reminded me that I need to address it in my article or at least somewhere on my website, so thank you for that reminder. It’s not a bother.

[Denise Hazelwood]

In a separate thread, Richard expressed his disagreement with my scenario due to the Croft photo. 

I contend that the Croft photo--like at least one Willis photo that Linda Willis said was "physically altered ...(because) something showed in it that the Secret Service did not want known," like the Z-film was altered, like the autopsy images were altered, etc.--I contend that the Croft photo was also altered. 

To support my contention, I wrote an article on my website at https://www.a-benign-conspiracy.com/the-altered-croft-photo.html describing various anomalies I see in the Croft photo indicating that it was altered.

[Ron Bulman]

On 5/12/2024 at 11:13 PM, Denise Hazelwood said:

I support an AR-15 accident scenario.

I support Eric Clapton.  AKA Bob Marley.  They shot the sheriff but missed the friggin deputy.

 

[Denise Hazelwood]

3 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I support Eric Clapton.  AKA Bob Marley.  They shot the sheriff but missed the friggin deputy.

At least Marley and Clampton owned up to it.
Did you read my webpage? Hickey didn’t “shoot the sheriff” with the first shot. 

[Richard Bertolino]

21 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I support Eric Clapton.  AKA Bob Marley.  They shot the sheriff but missed the friggin deputy.

 

 

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Ron Bulman]

I went back and read the Acknowledgements and The Critics sections.  I still see no reason to believe Hickey's AR-15 was fired at all, intentionally or by accident.  There still are no eyewitnesses, ear witnesses, photographs, film, statements or testimony to any of this.  The reason for my pessimism is I feel this theory distracts from serious discourse about the assassination just like the Greer did it theory.  Or the lone nut Oswald did it with two shots that hit from the rear theory.  That last one took a commission of "some of the most respected men" in the U S to get what, 30% now of our citizens to believe it.

I should have just ignored the thread/subject as I have in several cases recently.  The video was not intended to ridicule though I can see how it might be taken that way now.  It was posted as sarcasm resulting from my frustration, which I also should have ignored.  I too often feel sarcastic and think the site needs a little levity, which I realize some don't interpret the same way I do.  

[Pat Speer]

8 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I went back and read the Acknowledgements and The Critics sections.  I still see no reason to believe Hickey's AR-15 was fired at all, intentionally or by accident.  There still are no eyewitnesses, ear witnesses, photographs, film, statements or testimony to any of this.  The reason for my pessimism is I feel this theory distracts from serious discourse about the assassination just like the Greer did it theory.  Or the lone nut Oswald did it with two shots that hit from the rear theory.  That last one took a commission of "some of the most respected men" in the U S to get what, 30% now of our citizens to believe it.

I should have just ignored the thread/subject as I have in several cases recently.  The video was not intended to ridicule though I can see how it might be taken that way now.  It was posted as sarcasm resulting from my frustration, which I also should have ignored.  I too often feel sarcastic and think the site needs a little levity, which I realize some don't interpret the same way I do.  

I think it was fine, Ron. You expresed your disagreement but tried to make light of it. 

[Richard Bertolino]

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

I went back and read the Acknowledgements and The Critics sections.  I still see no reason to believe Hickey's AR-15 was fired at all, intentionally or by accident.  There still are no eyewitnesses, ear witnesses, photographs, film, statements or testimony to any of this.  The reason for my pessimism is I feel this theory distracts from serious discourse about the assassination just like the Greer did it theory.  Or the lone nut Oswald did it with two shots that hit from the rear theory.  That last one took a commission of "some of the most respected men" in the U S to get what, 30% now of our citizens to believe it.

I should have just ignored the thread/subject as I have in several cases recently.  The video was not intended to ridicule though I can see how it might be taken that way now.  It was posted as sarcasm resulting from my frustration, which I also should have ignored.  I too often feel sarcastic and think the site needs a little levity, which I realize some don't interpret the same way I do.  

O

Edited May 16 by Richard Bertolino

[Kevin Balch]

2 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I went back and read the Acknowledgements and The Critics sections.  I still see no reason to believe Hickey's AR-15 was fired at all, intentionally or by accident.  There still are no eyewitnesses, ear witnesses, photographs, film, statements or testimony to any of this.  The reason for my pessimism is I feel this theory distracts from serious discourse about the assassination just like the Greer did it theory.  Or the lone nut Oswald did it with two shots that hit from the rear theory.  That last one took a commission of "some of the most respected men" in the U S to get what, 30% now of our citizens to believe it.

I should have just ignored the thread/subject as I have in several cases recently.  The video was not intended to ridicule though I can see how it might be taken that way now.  It was posted as sarcasm resulting from my frustration, which I also should have ignored.  I too often feel sarcastic and think the site needs a little levity, which I realize some don't interpret the same way I do.  

An AR-15 being fired makes a sound of about 160 dB, equivalent to a commercial jet engine. Even with a suppressor, the loudness is about 132 dB.

A pistol is just about as loud as a rifle. What is claimed to be a pistol used by Greer to supposedly fire the headshot into JFK was too small to have had a suppressor.

How could others in either of the vehicles not have heard these discharges?

https://www.silencercentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Silencer_Sound_Comparsion_chart.pdf

[Denny Zartman]

3 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

The reason for my pessimism is I feel this theory distracts from serious discourse about the assassination just like the Greer did it theory.  Or the lone nut Oswald did it with two shots that hit from the rear theory. 

I understand exactly how you feel and I agree.

[Denny Zartman]

3 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

The reason for my pessimism is I feel this theory distracts from serious discourse about the assassination just like the Greer did it theory.  Or the lone nut Oswald did it with two shots that hit from the rear theory. 

Double post. Three Dog Night.

 

 

Edited May 16 by Denny Zartman