Tink T. Explains GK Gunman, Mentions Bowers

[Benjamin Cole]

Tink Thompson makes his case for a gunman near the junction of the wooden fences atop the GK, on the north side of the fence. Excellent presentation. Thompson notes the credible witnesses who thought shots had come from the GK. 

Thompson is very believable, but then adds there was a fourth shot from behind that also struck JFK's head, shortly after the shot from the GK. 

It is true that some witnesses, including SM Holland, and Amos Euins, said they heard more than three shots. But no one in the limo recalls another shot hitting JFK. 

Thompson does an excellent job in laying out the splatter pattern from the putative GK shot, largely falling upon motorcycle officers Hargis and Martin, who were to the left side of the limo, and Thompson says the splatter pattern indicates a shot from the right-front. 

Yet, if there were a shot from the right-front to JFK's head...where did it exit? Would we not expect to see an exit in the left side of JFK's head, and through that exit the flesh and other matter splattered the two motorcycle officers? 

(I apologize for the gore in this comment). 

But, the most-clear copies of the Z Film appear to show a volcanic-type eruption from the right side of JFK's head. For me, that suggests a shot from the rear that exited right-front.  Bullets coursing through human bodies do not always take a straight line, confusing matters. Of course, a shot from the rear also does not explain why the gore on the motorcycle officers. 

Thompson doesn't really talk much about the throat wound (btw, did Parkland doctors ever probe the throat wound to found out if it actually penetrated the throat, or did they assume that?). 

Thompson only briefly mentions Lee Bowers, and makes mysterious reference to the "Bowers Tunnel."  I surmise this refers to Bowers' tunnel-like view onto Elm St. 

Thompson notes that Bowers would say he saw two strangers in the area of the wooden fence. 

But in his 11/22 affidavit, Bowers makes no reference to strangers in the area, only to possibly suspicious slowly cruising automobiles, the last of which left the lot about 10 minutes before gunfire. 

Only later did Bowers expand or embellish his observations, depending on your point of view. I cannot fathom any sane person, having seen men with guns in the area of the fence on 11/22 before the JFKA, not relaying that info in a same-day affidavit.  

One speculative possibility is that Bowers was actually hired as a lookout by the gunsels, and later felt remorse, and began to spill the truth. Then he was murdered. That is entirely speculative, of course. 

Anyway, Thompson is a serious researcher and this session worth watching. As usual, the more you know, the less you know. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 15 by Benjamin Cole

[Kevin Balch]

On 9/14/2024 at 5:42 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

Yet, if there were a shot from the right-front to JFK's head...where did it exit? Would we not expect to see an exit in the left side of JFK's head, and through that exit the flesh and other matter splattered the two motorcycle officers? 

 

1. It made a ~70 degree turn and exited from the right rear of the skull and somehow missed the Secret Service follow up car.
2. It stopped in the brain and was removed per the Lifton scenario.
3. It continued onward but the exit wound was missed at both Parkland and Bethesda.
4. There was no shot from the GK.

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

1. It made a ~70 degree turn and exited from the right rear of the skull and somehow missed the Secret Service follow up car.
2. It stopped in the brain and was removed per the Lifton scenario.
3. It continued onward but the exit wound was missed at both Parkland and Bethesda.
4. There was no shot from the GK.

It is confounding, no?

And was the throat wound ever probed to confirm it went through the anterior neck?

Side note: There could have been a shot from the GK, but it was a diversion.

[Bill Fite]

8 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

There could have been a shot from the GK, but it was a diversion.

Since the risk from a shot that was a diversion would be the same as an on-target shot -- why take the risk and not try for a hit?

Isn't a missed shot or a shot pulled due to Jackie being in the line of sight more likely?

[Benjamin Cole]

13 hours ago, Bill Fite said:

Since the risk from a shot that was a diversion would be the same as an on-target shot -- why take the risk and not try for a hit?

Isn't a missed shot or a shot pulled due to Jackie being in the line of sight more likely?

BF--

Thanks for your collegial comment.

Well, many moons ago I laid out my pet theory on the JFKA, involving the man flashing the phony Secret Service credentials seen by both a DPD'er and a Dallas Sheriff, near the GK. But the phony SS-credential guy was not carrying a rifle. 

The snub-nose Smith & Wesson .38 was the default concealed carry handgun of the time. The .38s are known for being very loud and for issuing smoke, especially if cheap ammo is used, or if the barrel of the gun was recently lubed.

Obviously, a guy could shoot off a .38, and then conceal it easily. He need not expose himself while firing, if his only goal was being a diversion. So, he could crouch down behind a tree, a high-cab pick-up truck or the wooden fence and fire off a round or two. 

The diversion worked well enough, and people converged on the GK area, while the real shooters were behind JFK somewhere, either in the TSBD or the Dal-Tex building. 

True, Marrion Baker, the DPD'er, did figure shots had come from the TSBD or the Dal-Tex building, and he ran into the TSBD.  No plan is perfect, but then JFKA may not have been planned by a huge aegis, but rather Alpha 66, and they worked with what resources and contacts they had, which were still enough for an assassination. 

I like to point out that the JFKA was never truly investigated, at least in 1963-4, and a lot of participants and evidence had faed by the time of the HSCA, and that can give the perspective that the JFKA must have been a sophisticated plot involving a lot of pre-event complicity and planning. 

Or maybe (I think likely) the JFKA was like the Chicago try, that is four guys with rifles driving there and seeing what would work (they were interdicted, by chance). 

Alpha 66 was no stranger to assassination efforts, having gone after Castro a few times. 

More later from me on Alpha 66. Stay tuned, same Bat channels, same Bat stations. 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 17 by Benjamin Cole

[Kevin Balch]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Alpha 66 was no stranger to assassination efforts, having gone after Castro a few times. 

The anti-Castro Cubans were incompetent. All their assassination attempts against Castro failed and they screwed up at Watergate.

They were also heavily infiltrated by Castro.

DPD officer J. M. Smith was posted at Elm and Houston. He ran to the railroad yard after a woman approached him and said “They are shooting the president from the bushes.” That woman could have been placed their to divert attention away from the TSBD/DalTex buildings. What’s often forgotten about Bowers testimony is how difficult it is to locate the origin of sounds in Dealey Plaza.

[Pat Speer]

6 hours ago, Bill Fite said:

Since the risk from a shot that was a diversion would be the same as an on-target shot -- why take the risk and not try for a hit?

Isn't a missed shot or a shot pulled due to Jackie being in the line of sight more likely?

I had a wild thought roughly twenty years ago and followed up by reading a couple of dozen military magazines from WWII, and additional books on sniping and military tactics. It turned out that yessiree, professional snipers used firecrackers as diversionary devices and that yessiree remote control diversionary devices were available in 1963. 

Well...that has led me to believe those claiming they heard shots from the knoll or saw smoke on the knoll were probably correct...as the use of a diversionary device to lure law enforcement from the actual location of the sniper or snipers was not just a possibility, but a likelihhood, should this have been a planned-out hit, as I presume, and not just an oddball hoping to get "lucky". 

[Bill Fite]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

It turned out that yessiree, professional snipers used firecrackers as diversionary devices and that yessiree remote control diversionary devices were available in 1963. 

Could be.

And maybe that would explain some of the ear witness statements that the first shot sounded like a firecracker and was different from the others?

[Chuck Schwartz]

I believe that there was at least one shooter behind the fence up on the grassy knoll...https://grassyknoll.us/John_F_Kennedy/Assassination/Witnesses

[Joe Bauer]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

It turned out that yessiree, professional snipers used firecrackers as diversionary devices and that yessiree remote control diversionary devices were available in 1963. 

Interesting. 

One cold and damp air evening several years ago I arrived home about 11:PM from a pet sitting job at a pet friendly hotel in Carmel, California. We live in a forested area of town. Pine trees and oak trees all around. Property lots quite spacious. 1/3 of an acre maybe?

Not many street lamps. No sidewalks. The only light was from homes set back from the street.

Just as I stepped out of my car...I was scarily shocked by a very loud explosion just 25 feet from me in the middle of the street between our home and the one across the street. 

The occupants of this rather run down home were a mix of rather edgy people. Bikers, criminal record types ... some sleeping in the garage.

I had seen and heard "cherry bombs" go off back when I was a teenager. I guessed that the explosion in the street was one of these. Tossed there to shock me by one of these edgy type neighbor fellows who probably got a kick out of doing so.

After I got more over the shock I got angry. I called the police.

They came and after hearing my story, walked over to the front door of the biker/meth house. A middle aged woman answered. I couldn't hear their conversation. The police gave her a warning after not being clearly able to determine for sure if one of her garage tenets had tossed the device.

Days later I noticed most of the tenets moving out.

The reason I share this story however was to highlight a physical aspect of the cherry bomb explosion. It occurred directly between me and the lighted windows of the biker house. I got a very clear view of the smoke this device created upon exploding. There was a lot! This smoke cloud hung solidly in it's place for a few seconds...and then slowly wafted away with the soft breeze present.

Mentioning the possibility of a "diversionary" explosive device going off at the tree and fence line on top of the grassy knoll might explain the very visible "smoke" cloud the railroad workers all reported seeing. Rifles generally do not create that much smoke upon firing. A cherry bomb device would.

Interesting diversionary action contemplation.

 

 

[Sean Coleman]

But if LHO was to be nominated the  (lone) 6th floor shooter, what would be the point of ‘diversionary’ tactics from a different location?

GK shooter works for me.

[Benjamin Cole]

5 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

But if LHO was to be nominated the  (lone) 6th floor shooter, what would be the point of ‘diversionary’ tactics from a different location?

GK shooter works for me.

A plan to create confusion. If the assassins had enough resources, perhaps they would have created several false gunshot locations.

That would increase the odds of successful escape by the true assassins.

Tink Thompson, certainly a serous researcher, agrees with you, there was a GK gunsel.

I do wonder---if a bullet struck JFK from the GK, as is suggested by the Z-film and witnesses...where did it exit JFK? 

 

 

 

Edited September 18 by Benjamin Cole

[Benjamin Cole]

10 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

The anti-Castro Cubans were incompetent. All their assassination attempts against Castro failed and they screwed up at Watergate.

They were also heavily infiltrated by Castro.

DPD officer J. M. Smith was posted at Elm and Houston. He ran to the railroad yard after a woman approached him and said “They are shooting the president from the bushes.” That woman could have been placed their to divert attention away from the TSBD/DalTex buildings. What’s often forgotten about Bowers testimony is how difficult it is to locate the origin of sounds in Dealey Plaza.

KB-

Do you have any evidence that Alpha 66 was infiltrated by Castro supporters? I don't doubt that it was possible, but that specific organization? 

You are correct about DPD'er Smith. He was the DPD'er who approached a man who flashed evidently phony SS credentials near the GK.  Seymour Weitzman was the Sheriff who also saw the ersatz credentials.  Sure seems like a man had phony SS credentials and was near the GK when JFK was shot.  

Since Mr. Phony Secret Service was not carrying a rifle...that made me think about a snub-nose .38. I suppose he  could have lit off a cherry bomb. 

Bowers did testify that it was difficult to tell where sounds came from, the triple overpass or towards the TSBD. 

Edited September 18 by Benjamin Cole

[Roger Odisio]

On 9/14/2024 at 8:42 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

Tink Thompson makes his case for a gunman near the junction of the wooden fences atop the GK, on the north side of the fence. Excellent presentation. Thompson notes the credible witnesses who thought shots had come from the GK. 

Thompson is very believable, but then adds there was a fourth shot from behind that also struck JFK's head, shortly after the shot from the GK. 

It is true that some witnesses, including SM Holland, and Amos Euins, said they heard more than three shots. But no one in the limo recalls another shot hitting JFK. 

Thompson does an excellent job in laying out the splatter pattern from the putative GK shot, largely falling upon motorcycle officers Hargis and Martin, who were to the left side of the limo, and Thompson says the splatter pattern indicates a shot from the right-front. 

Yet, if there were a shot from the right-front to JFK's head...where did it exit? Would we not expect to see an exit in the left side of JFK's head, and through that exit the flesh and other matter splattered the two motorcycle officers? 

(I apologize for the gore in this comment). 

But, the most-clear copies of the Z Film appear to show a volcanic-type eruption from the right side of JFK's head. For me, that suggests a shot from the rear that exited right-front.  Bullets coursing through human bodies do not always take a straight line, confusing matters. Of course, a shot from the rear also does not explain why the gore on the motorcycle officers. 

Thompson doesn't really talk much about the throat wound (btw, did Parkland doctors ever probe the throat wound to found out if it actually penetrated the throat, or did they assume that?). 

Thompson only briefly mentions Lee Bowers, and makes mysterious reference to the "Bowers Tunnel."  I surmise this refers to Bowers' tunnel-like view onto Elm St. 

Thompson notes that Bowers would say he saw two strangers in the area of the wooden fence. 

But in his 11/22 affidavit, Bowers makes no reference to strangers in the area, only to possibly suspicious slowly cruising automobiles, the last of which left the lot about 10 minutes before gunfire. 

Only later did Bowers expand or embellish his observations, depending on your point of view. I cannot fathom any sane person, having seen men with guns in the area of the fence on 11/22 before the JFKA, not relaying that info in a same-day affidavit.  

One speculative possibility is that Bowers was actually hired as a lookout by the gunsels, and later felt remorse, and began to spill the truth. Then he was murdered. That is entirely speculative, of course. 

Anyway, Thompson is a serious researcher and this session worth watching. As usual, the more you know, the less you know. 

 

 

 

 

 

I have seen the tape of the Thompson presentation at the 6th floor museum you posted.  I have his book, Last Second in Dallas.  And I saw remotely Thompson's presentation with Gary Aguilar and Bill Simpich last fall at Duquesne U., which expanded on his museum talk.

 

Your main questions have clear answers it seems to me. The shot from the right front that splattered Hargis and Martin exited the back of Kennedy's head before striking Hargis with such force he thought at first he was hit be a bullet.  The exit wound is blacked out in the Zfilm.

 

The Thompson group thinks there was two, not one, head shots within less than one second of each other.  Thompson thinks the second shot hit Kennedy about 5/6 of a second after the first.  The first came from the GK, the second from the BDB. He bases that conclusion on both Z film and acoustical information.

 

The idea that none of the people in the limo said anything about more than 1 shot hitting Kennedy is virtually meaningless. Shots so close together wouldn't have registered separately. Connelly did insist he was hit by a different bullet than that which struck Kennedy.  He was ignored, of course, because that would have contradicted the magic bullet.   

 

For me, an important anomaly has been the bulbous wound that appears on Kennedy's forehead around Zfilm 313.  No doctor mentioned this; it doesn't appear in any of the hospital photos.  I have always assumed it was added to the film to try show a shot from the back.  It's evidence of film alteration, nothing else.

 

Two shots so close together is a possible explanation for Brugioni's statements of seeing debris shooting several feet in the air and lasting multiple frames.  Unlike what the extant Z film shows. 

 

There is no way of knowing the effect of two shots from different directions, particularly without a real autopsy, and a thorough examination of the limo crime scene.  Neither of which we had.

 

I think the idea of 2 head shots is worth pursuing.

 

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

I have seen the tape of the Thompson presentation at the 6th floor museum you posted.  I have his book, Last Second in Dallas.  And I saw remotely Thompson's presentation with Gary Aguilar and Bill Simpich last fall at Duquesne U., which expanded on his museum talk.

 

Your main questions have clear answers it seems to me. The shot from the right front that splattered Hargis and Martin exited the back of Kennedy's head before striking Hargis with such force he thought at first he was hit be a bullet.  The exit wound is blacked out in the Zfilm.

 

The Thompson group thinks there was two, not one, head shots within less than one second of each other.  Thompson thinks the second shot hit Kennedy about 5/6 of a second after the first.  The first came from the GK, the second from the BDB. He bases that conclusion on both Z film and acoustical information.

 

The idea that none of the people in the limo said anything about more than 1 shot hitting Kennedy is virtually meaningless. Shots so close together wouldn't have registered separately. Connelly did insist he was hit by a different bullet than that which struck Kennedy.  He was ignored, of course, because that would have contradicted the magic bullet.   

 

For me, an important anomaly has been the bulbous wound that appears on Kennedy's forehead around Zfilm 313.  No doctor mentioned this; it doesn't appear in any of the hospital photos.  I have always assumed it was added to the film to try show a shot from the back.  It's evidence of film alteration, nothing else.

 

Two shots so close together is a possible explanation for Brugioni's statements of seeing debris shooting several feet in the air and lasting multiple frames.  Unlike what the extant Z film shows. 

 

There is no way of knowing the effect of two shots from different directions, particularly without a real autopsy, and a thorough examination of the limo crime scene.  Neither of which we had.

 

I think the idea of 2 head shots is worth pursuing.

 

RO--

Thanks for your collegial comments. We may not be on the same page on this one, but that is what a forum is for.