In article
<d2959c77-3d58-453d-a0f1-a9813efed
...@b8g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
charles wallace <chas112
...@gmail.com> wrote:
You make some statements on that page that I find to be quite curious.
"At approximately 12:23 PM B. R. Williams is at the sixthfloor SE corner
window of the TSBD according to the witness testimony of Arnold Rowland,
and also Oswald is looking out the doorway of the domino room on the
first floor. While eating his cheese sandwich he sees Harold Norman and
Junior Jarman come in the back door turn their backs to him going to the
western elevator to go to the fifth floor. DPD Captain Will Fritz's
notes confirm this."
I have recently re-read Fritz's notes, and I do not recall him claiming
that Oswald specifically said he saw Jarman and Norman come in the back
door and turn their backs to him. Perhaps I just missed that? Please
quote verbatim from Fritz's notes where he says Oswald told him this. I
only recall Fritz saying that he saw the two men at some point during
lunch.
"I contend Oswald then goes to the front of the TSBD eating an apple. He
is out front standing behind Bill Shelley finishing his lunch and sees
the excitement. Again this is confirmed by Fritz's testimony and notes.
Could I have made an error? Of course, I could have the place where he
ate the apple and the cheese sandwich reversed."
Har. Nothing of the sort is "confirmed" by Fritz's testimony and notes.
Fritz said Oswald claimed that he was *inside* the building when the
motorcade passed by and did not go outside until *afterward* to go talk
to William Shelley across the street. And where are you getting Oswald
standing behind Shelley from? I do hope you are not one of those people
who "still believes" that that is Oswald instead of Billy Lovelady this
many decades after that silly myth was conclusively debunked. Or are
you referring to some other person in the photographs? I've never seen
anyone in those photographs who looks even remotely like Oswald. I
never did even think that Lovelady looked all that much like Oswald,
although others have said they do.
Below this, when talking about the Dillard and Murray photos, you say,
"Upon close examination of this figure in the window, it appears that it
is a white male, Caucasian, approximately 35 years old."
Good lordy, how on earth can you, or any other human, possibly come even
remotely close to attributing an *age* to that extremely blurry and
grainy image, which might or might not even be a person?
Then further down:
"This is a cropped photo showing the shooter. Can you see him?
No, I honestly can't.
"A face circled cropping of the shooter appears on down the web page. Or
if you go to the address
http://community.webtv.net/ccwallace/YellowHighlighter
you can see where I have highlighted it."
Yeah, and in the original black and white, I can't even tell there's
anyone there. In your yellow highlighted version, it appears to me that
you simply chose a spot to put that in arbitrarily. And you're getting
all sorts of things like age and race from THAT? Even in your
highlighted version no facial features can be made out at all. Can't
even tell if it's a man or woman, if it really is someone there. This
is awfully meager evidence.
Further down:
"The first shot is fired at approximately Zapruder frame number 180-181.
This is the shot that Governor Connally hears."
It is? Strange then that this conflicts directly with what Connally
actually said. He said he heard a shot and turned to his right to look
for the source of the sound. His head plainly turns to the right no
later than Z165 and remains continuously facing right all the way to
when he disappears behind the sign. When he emerges from behind the
sign his head is still turned to the right for a few more frames. He
said he turned to the right *after* he heard the shot, not *before* he
heard the shot. You've got him hearing the shot *after* he turned to
the right, which is exactly the opposite of what he said.
In the sentences immediately following what I quoted above you say this
was the shot that hit JFK in the back only, but that he didn't
necessarily think it to be different from his normal back pain. You
also say that this bullet penetrated only a little way. But nowhere do
you explain why it would penetrate such a short distance, "no more than
a little finger's depth," when it had not yet struck anything hard
enough, such as bone, to penetrate much farther in.
In the next paragraph:
"The second shot is from the grassy knoll and strikes JFK in the throat.
This occurs at approximately Zapruder frame number 199-200. This
bullet's fragments were reported by autopsy x-ray technician Jerrol
Custer to have been seen on an x-ray that is now missing. I postulate a
small .22 caliber hollow nose short lead bullet and subsonic velocity.
The autopsy doctors did not know of this bullet entry during its
procedures. After the autopsy, the autopists learned from Parkland
Hospital's Dr. Perry about the small throat wound that was obscured by
the tracheostomy performed to assist the President's breathing. All
Parkland Hospital medical personnel that saw this wound thought that it
was one of entrance. I speculate that this projectile was fired from one
of the two barrels of a hunter's 'over and under' rifle. The shooter is
behind the small concrete wall on the grassy knoll to JFK's right front.
JFK unmistakably reacts to these first two shots at Z225."
So you have JFK waiting to react to both shots until Z225. Strange.
And again, nowhere here do you explain why a frontal shot to his throat
would not exit the other side of the body when it didn't strike any bone
to slow it down enough not to exit.
Next paragraph:
"The third shot strikes Governor Connally. It is from the Texas School
Book Depository shooter. It enters his back and exits his chest. The
bullet lodges itself in JBC's thigh at approximately Zapruder frame
number 228-229. It is lost at Parkland Hospital during the efforts to
save JBC's life. JBC thought the bullet was found by a nurse in Trauma
Room no.2. The shot occurs as JFK is in full reaction to his wounds.
Connally's wife, Nellie says she turned upon hearing noise and saw the
President with his hands up towards his throat, then her husband John
was hit. JBC reacts visibly at Zapruder frame number 237 to 238 with his
cheeks puffing out with air from his pierced collapsing lung. Oswald's
rifle scope was misaligned to shoot high and to the right."
Interesting that you make no mention that Connally begins to jerk
violently at almost exactly the same frame you give above for the
beginning of JFK's visible reaction. Really it's Z226 rather than Z225
for both men, but that's trivial. But I'm not going to believe you or
anyone else who says they "don't see" the flip of Connally's hat that
clearly begins no later than Z226.
Now let's get into the next paragraph:
"The fourth shot hits JFK in the head at Zapruder frame number 312-313.
It is from the grassy knoll. It deflects upon entry towards JFK's right.
Its fragments are mostly lost to the left rear of the limousine causing
reports of a bullet striking the street."
Wrong. Obviously. Not nearly all reports of a bullet striking the
street were associated with that shot. Virgie Rachley Baker, for
example, said she saw something strike the street with the *first* shot.
And the bullet deflected upon entry to JFK's right? You mean right back
toward the shooter? Yet you say the fragments mostly went to the left
rear? You are contradicting yourself.
Three sentences later:
"All witnesses to the head wound said there was a large opening in the
rear of JFK's head."
No, they did not "all" say that, but the majority of them did. However,
most of them also said it was in the *right* rear of his head. What on
earth is a shot from the *right* front doing exiting the *right* rear of
his head. Wouldn't it exit the *left* rear of his head?
Of course that hole in the right rear of his head wasn't caused by a
bullet exiting anyway, as I have explained many times.
Oh, and I love the first sentence in the next paragraph:
"The final shot is from the TSBD at approximately Zapruder frame number
322-323 and it strikes JBC in the wrist."
Sorry, I don't remember Connally ever saying that he felt a separate
strike to his wrist. Also by Z322 Nellie has pulled him down in the
seat. Strange that you make no mention of how a trajectory from the
TSBD to his wrist would work at this point. Wouldn't his wrist be too
low in the car by then to be hit by a shot from there?
Let's keep going:
"The grassy knoll shooter is shown in Mary Moorman's photo and named
"Badge Man" but is really much closer in my opinion than behind the
stockade fence."
Objection. The grassy knoll shooter is *allegedly* shown in that photo.
It has never come anywhere even remotely close to being conclusively
proven that there is really a person there. You also fail to mention
how none of the witnesses in that area ever said that any single shot
sounded much louder and closer than the other shots.
"He is positioned in "Black Dog Man's" location behind the low concrete
wall. BM is BDM. He used a hunter's 'over and under' rifle (a .22
caliber barrel and a .3xx type caliber barrel) in my opinion."
You even claim to know what type of rifle he probably used? This is
some of the wildest speculation I've ever seen in
...
read more »
