The "Missed Shot" Controversy
David Von Pein
ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
>>> "Some might think it was CE 399 {that went into JFK but never exited}." <<<
Not even remotely possible, of course (and Tony knows this full
well...he just wants to argue the obvious), because Kennedy's
stretcher was never even close to that corridor where CE399 was found
by Tomlinson. Why this major fact is totally ignored by many CTers can
only elicit a shoulder shrug from yours truly.
>>> "How about Posner's bullet which hits a tree branch which strips off the jacket entirely allowing the lead core to go on to hit the curb near Tague?" <<<
That's what I certainly believe happened--although, admittedly, it's
just a guess...but I think it's by far the best guess, and it's a
guess that solves two problems.
One, if the bullet hit the tree and separated the jacket from the lead
core....the lead can go on out to hit Main St. and then Tague; hence,
no copper tracing on the curb. Perfectly reasonable, IMO.
Two, with the bullet now split into two parts, the copper jacket can
strike Elm St., resulting in the "sparks" that some witnesses said
they saw near JFK's limo. While the other portion of the bullet can
separately go on out to meet Mr. Tague without having to perform any
hopping, skipping, or jumping from one curbstone to yet another.
I completely disagree with Vince Bugliosi's explanation re. the first-
shot miss and the Tague wounding...which, btw, Vince only briefly
mentions in his book. He gives the whole matter two short paragraphs
on pages 471 and 472.
Vince thinks that the first Oswald (missed) shot hit the Elm pavement
on the fly, and then the same bullet somehow finds its way (at grass
level all the way?) over to Main Street to hit the Main curb and cause
Tague's cheek injury.
I, myself, find that scenario hard to swallow, although I cannot
disprove it, of course; nor can anyone else. Since we're talking about
a shot that missed the limo occupants completely and was never
recovered, all we can do is guess. But I find Posner's "guess" to be
the best guess....in that it can explain multiple questions
surrounding the shooting -- e.g., the sparks on the Elm pavement and
the non-copper tracings on the Main curb and Tague's wounding.
I respect Vince Bugliosi's opinion re. the first shot at Z160...I just
don't agree with his complete scenario of the path that bullet
followed on November 22. (At least we agree about one thing about the
first shot though -- when it was fired by Oswald -- Z160. I agree with
VB on that 100%.)
As a footnote to the above discussion re. the Tague wounding --- I
must also point out that Mr. Bugliosi does mention in "Reclaiming
History" (in an endnote on the CD-ROM disc that comes with the book)
that Gerald Posner's tree-branch deflection theory "is possible" (VB;
footnote on page 315 of endnotes).
=========================================
MISSED-SHOT CONTROVERSY (CONTINUED)............
>>> "Which is also why he {LHO} would not have shot before the limo went under the oak tree. He would have to point the rifle down and track across his field of view, which is the most difficult kind of shot." <<<
Which is probably why he missed with shot #1. He either rushed the
shot or some other forever-unknown variable influenced Oswald's aim.
It's a guessing/parlor game, of course. I've admitted that. Nobody can
know these things for sure.
Vincent Bugliosi believes that Oswald just couldn't resist the sight
of JFK's head looming large just beneath the 6th-Floor window, so LHO
abandoned (temporarily) the use of the pre-arranged W/SW rifle-rest
boxes and aimed almost straight down at JFK, and missed.
Bugliosi says on page 471 of "Reclaiming History" -- "Apparently
Oswald couldn't resist a target so temptingly close."
With the rifle being a little more unstable for this first shot (since
LHO couldn't use the rifle-rest boxes at that point), Bugliosi
postulates that this "unstable" nature of the weapon was a possible
contributing factor in Oswald's first shot being a miss, with the shot
missing the oak tree and hitting Elm St. on the fly, then ricocheting
over to Main St. (per VB).
I, however, will stick with the scenario of the bullet striking the
oak tree first; because the very same bullet bouncing off of TWO curbs
just doesn't quite add up, IMO.
There's also a slight timing problem with VB's "temptingly close"
theory too (IMO). Because Vince believes, as do I, that the first shot
came at approximately Z160 on the Zapruder Film.
But Z160 doesn't put the car right AT the corner (with the corner
itself being the point where the car would be pretty close to being
directly below Oswald's perch, as illustrated below via these photos
taken from CE875).....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0452b.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0453a.htm
.....but Z160 has the limousine at a point on Elm that is well PAST
the actual Elm/Houston corner, as we all know.
The ultimate "I Just Can't Resist Shooting At JFK Now" time would have
been when JFK was right AT the corner of Elm and Houston, which, of
course, would have been a few seconds before Abe Zapruder even started
filming.
Another random thought (as this guessing game continues)......
Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, per the FBI's firearms expert
Robert Frazier, fired bullets "high and to the right" when using the
4x scope. If this was also the case when Oswald was shooting at JFK on
November 22, and Oswald for some reason forgot this quirk about his
scope when he squeezed off his first shot that day (if he used the
scope at all, which is also debatable, of course), that could be at
least a partial explanation as to why his first shot missed and struck
the nearby tree....a tree that would have been to Oswald's RIGHT if he
was aiming a little to the tree's LEFT through the scope just as JFK's
car was nearing it from LHO's POV.
www.amazon.com/review/R2R0RQ0Q9AZY0M
Anthony Marsh
> ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
>
You take my name in vain and then you quote someone else. Why don't you
cite who said these things?
>>>> "Some might think it was CE 399 {that went into JFK but never
exited}." <<<
>
> Not even remotely possible, of course (and Tony knows this full
> well...he just wants to argue the obvious), because Kennedy's
> stretcher was never even close to that corridor where CE399 was found
> by Tomlinson. Why this major fact is totally ignored by many CTers can
> only elicit a shoulder shrug from yours truly.
>
What point are you trying to make by misquoting?
>
>
>>>> "How about Posner's bullet which hits a tree branch which strips off the jacket entirely allowing the lead core to go on to hit the curb near Tague?" <<<
>
> That's what I certainly believe happened--although, admittedly, it's
> just a guess...but I think it's by far the best guess, and it's a
> guess that solves two problems.
So, you really believe Posner's Magic Twig Theory and you are going to
stick with that answer?
>
> One, if the bullet hit the tree and separated the jacket from the lead
> core....the lead can go on out to hit Main St. and then Tague; hence,
> no copper tracing on the curb. Perfectly reasonable, IMO.
>
Ridiculous.
> Two, with the bullet now split into two parts, the copper jacket can
> strike Elm St., resulting in the "sparks" that some witnesses said
Two parts? The WCC M-C does not neatly split into two parts, the jacket
and the lead core. Never has. Never will. Look at the two fragments they
found in the limo.
What you should be arguing as a nice little WC defender is that the lead
core squeezed out of the base left in the limo went on to hit the curb.
> they saw near JFK's limo. While the other portion of the bullet can
> separately go on out to meet Mr. Tague without having to perform any
> hopping, skipping, or jumping from one curbstone to yet another.
>
> I completely disagree with Vince Bugliosi's explanation re. the first-
> shot miss and the Tague wounding...which, btw, Vince only briefly
> mentions in his book. He gives the whole matter two short paragraphs
> on pages 471 and 472.
>
> Vince thinks that the first Oswald (missed) shot hit the Elm pavement
> on the fly, and then the same bullet somehow finds its way (at grass
> level all the way?) over to Main Street to hit the Main curb and cause
> Tague's cheek injury.
>
And then went on to injure Ronnie Fuller?
> I, myself, find that scenario hard to swallow, although I cannot
You find Bugliosi's scenario hard to swallow, but you buy the Magic Twig
Theory hook, line and sinker?
Why not guy Holland's Magic Light Pole theory instead?
> Vincent Bugliosi believes that Oswald just couldn't resist the sight
> of JFK's head looming large just beneath the 6th-Floor window, so LHO
> abandoned (temporarily) the use of the pre-arranged W/SW rifle-rest
> boxes and aimed almost straight down at JFK, and missed.
>
> Bugliosi says on page 471 of "Reclaiming History" -- "Apparently
> Oswald couldn't resist a target so temptingly close."
>
> With the rifle being a little more unstable for this first shot (since
> LHO couldn't use the rifle-rest boxes at that point), Bugliosi
> postulates that this "unstable" nature of the weapon was a possible
> contributing factor in Oswald's first shot being a miss, with the shot
> missing the oak tree and hitting Elm St. on the fly, then ricocheting
> over to Main St. (per VB).
>
> I, however, will stick with the scenario of the bullet striking the
> oak tree first; because the very same bullet bouncing off of TWO curbs
> just doesn't quite add up, IMO.
>
What two curbs?
John Fiorentino
undoubtedly cause it's own "controversy."
I haven't put it all down on paper yet......soon
John F
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1193996686.3...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
Huh? When? Where?
>>> "...and then you quote someone else." <<<
Huh? When? Where?
>>> "Why don't you cite who said these things?" <<<
Hat Trick --- HUH?
>>> "What point are you trying to make by misquoting?" <<<
Time to make it a Quad-Trick --- HUH?
I didn't misquote anybody. I haven't the foggiest of notions what you're
talking about (in any of this post thus far).
>>> "So, you really believe Posner's Magic Twig Theory and you are going
to stick with that answer?" <<<
If you would have put quotation marks around the word "stick", it would
have made for a better play on words.
But, yes, I'm "sticking" to the tree theory. Overall, it makes the most
sense to me.
If you don't like it, don't believe it. I don't care.
Two parts? The WCC M-C does not neatly split into two parts, the jacket
and the lead core. Never has. Never will. Look at the two fragments they
found in the limo.
>>> "What you should be arguing as a nice little WC defender is that the
lead core squeezed out of the base left in the limo went on to hit the
curb." <<<
I don't like that theory. I know some LNers do. But that head-shot bullet
was much spent by the time it exited Kennedy's head. It didn't even have
enough energy left to go through the breakable windshield after exiting
the head of the President.
And yet a fragment from that head shot is supposed to (per some people)
make it all the out to Main to reach Tague, chip the curb (slightly), and
send shards of either curbstone or bullet material up to meet Tague's face
with still enough force left to draw blood?
I'll go with the first (tree) shot hitting Tague, thank you.
Although having said that, I'll put my built-in asterisk around the above
statements by saying that the head-shot fragment scenario is still way
better than anything the CT crowd has invented to account for Tague's
wounding....mainly because we pretty much KNOW beyond all conceivable
doubt that only THREE shots were fired in Dealey Plaza.
And since we know that Tague was certainly not wounded by shot #2 (the SBT
bullet), that leaves only two choices (shots 1 or 3). I'll choose #1. But
if it wasn't #1, it was #3. ;)
>>> "And then went on to injure Ronnie Fuller?" <<<
Nah. Orson Welles, you dummy. ;)
Per some crackpots, Orson WAS in the Plaza with a large cache of weapons
on 11/22, you know. And he WAS a pretty large target too.
>>> "You find Bugliosi's scenario hard to swallow, but you buy the Magic
Twig Theory hook, line and sinker?" <<<
You bet. VB's first-shot/Tague scenario is just not believable (IMO). But
at least VB and I fully agree on almost everything else, including the
time of the first (Tague) gunshot -- Z160.
>>> "Why not Holland's Magic Light Pole theory instead?" <<<
Mainly because Max Holland has the first shot occurring way too soon
(IMO). Would John Connally have waited several seconds to turn his head to
the right (which occurs at about Z164 on the Zapruder Film) if he had
really heard the first shot way back when the car was in the Elm/Houston
intersection? I doubt it.
MORE ABOUT HOLLAND'S "11 SECONDS IN DALLAS":
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/df7ca678545b1bff
>>> "What two curbs?" <<<
Elm then Main.
What curbs did you think I was talking about when speaking of Bugliosi's
first-shot theory -- the Lemmon and Turtle Creek curbs perhaps? ;)
I will correct my previous post slightly (in the "two curbs" regard) --- I
should have said "pavement" instead of "two curbs".
To be perfectly technical, I should have said that the bullet (per VB's
proposed first-shot scenario) hit the "Elm St. pavement (somewhere in the
middle of the street behind JFK's limo) and then hit the Main St. curb".
claviger
witnesses who saw the errant shot hit the pavement and they claim it was
the first shot. Does it matter why? Could be the shot was deflected by
glancing off a tree limb. More likely LHO was struck with "buck fever" and
shaking like a leaf when he yanked the trigger. After that he simply
reacted with the automatic instinct to rechamber, aim, and fire,< bam>
rechamber, aim, and fire <bam>. Notice he got better with each shot. The
less he thought about it, the better he shot. Nothing unusual about this
kind of instinctive reaction.
There are two other possibilities. Oswald had taken a shot at General
Walker and left his rifle in some bushes. He came back later and retrieved
the rifle. In the stress and excitement of aiming at the President he may
have forgot to remove the empty case, so when he pulled the trigger all he
heard was the clink on the empty shell. He then panics and fires the first
live round too soon. After that he calms down and get's into his routine.
One other possibility which is even more likely. In the Marine Corp he
would learn to leave an empty shell in the chamber to practice with the
bolt action by dry firing. The empty shell protects the firing pin. Marina
testified he practiced the bolt action while sitting on the couch over and
over and over. The day he shot at a living target he forgot the shell was
in the chamber and heard the clink. Just like above he panics and fires
too quick. After that his instinctive routine takes over. Some hunters
call this "zen" shooting.
My guess it was buck fever that caused the miss.
David Von Pein
ADDENDUM TO MY LAST POST (I goofed and failed to properly
>>>"bracket"<<< off a Tony Marsh response, and then failed to provide
my answer to it; I should be shot with Ruby's .38!)......
Here's the missing part (and whether it's "copper" or "lead"...don't ask
me):
>>> "The WCC M-C does not neatly split into two parts, the jacket and the
lead core. Never has. Never will." <<<
And it probably wouldn't have really needed to split perfectly and
uniformly into two separate parts (one marked "copper", the other labeled
"lead").
Just because there was no trace of copper on the Main St. curb, why does
that HAVE to mean (beyond every SHRED of a doubt) that the fragment that
hit that curb couldn't have also had SOME copper elements sticking to it?
The copper part just didn't hit the curb, but the lead part did.
Why is that totally out of the realm of possibility or probability?
Brokedad
1. There was no "THE SHOT THAT MISSED"
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0068a.htm
2. As was easily determinable, the US Secret Service, on December 2,
3, & 4th, 1963, easily determined the impact location for each of the
three shots fired.
3. Of which, the Z313 impact is, was, and will continue to remain the
second shot fired in the shooting sequence.
4. And of which, the impact to the head of JFK which was observed
directly in front of James Altgens location (approximately 30-feet
past the Z313 impact location), is, was, and will continue to be the
impact location for the third/last/final shot fired in the shooting
sequence.
5. FMJ Carcano-type bullets seldom tear themselves apart merely as a
result of impact with a tree limb.
One could shoot 1,000 such bullets into tree limbs and be fortunate if
even one single bullet became deformed to the extent that it
compromised the copper jacket.
6. FMJ Carcano-type bullets which have a copper jacket as well as a
lead core, do not creat sparks, even were the bullet to impact
concrete and/or rocks. (watching too many movies does this to one)
http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/mpmain.html
Some insultingly stupid movie physics are so commonplace as to make it
inefficient for us to rail about individual instances. They have
become visual clich?s and do for movies what verbal clich?s do for
literature
Flashing Bullets
Typical handgun bullets are made of copper-clad lead or lead alloys.
They simply don't create bright flashes of light when they strike
objects, even if the objects are made of steel. In the chemical
industry it's commonplace to limit maintenance workers to copper-alloy
or lead hammers when they are working in areas where flammable fumes
may be present. Hammers made of these materials do not produce sparks
when they strike objects, while steel hammers can. If you've never
noticed this phenomenon with steel hammers, don't be surprised, the
sparks generally are barely visible even under ideal lighting
conditions.
The non-sparking tendencies of copper versus steel can be seen if the
metals are ground. Grinding a piece of steel will produce a copious
quantity of sparks even in bright lighting. Small hot particles of the
steel actually burn. If copper tubing is ground it may produce an
occasional spark due to a contaminate on the grinding wheel or copper,
but will be virtually spark free.
7. Even steel-jacketed bullets seldom if ever create sparks when
striking asphalt pavement, and the only circumstances in which such
event might occur would be if the bullet struck an agregate (rock)
which is within the asphalt.
Just in event no one actually noticed, the Warren Commission lied!
And, there was NO "THE SHOT THAT MISSED"!
Brokedad
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
That the weapon may have fired high and to the right for Frazier (to
include others) has absolutely no bearing on whether the weapon, in the
hands of LHO, may or may not have fired such a shot grouping pattern.
All of which demonstrates that you can "parrot" what others may claim, yet
apparantly can not research facts for yourself.
LHO, in the USMC, consistantly fired "low and to the left". Thus, his
failure at proper weapon sighting techniques was compensated for by
adjusting the sights in both vertical as well as horizontal windage. (High
& to the Right)
Thusly, anyone who, even knowing perfect sighting techniques, picked up a
rifle in which LHO had adjusted the sights to his specific sighting
alignment, and thereafter fired that weapon, would in all probability have
the bullet impact/shot grouping land HIGH & TO THE RIGHT!
All of which continues to demonstrate that yourself as well as Mr. Marsh
know little if anything about rifle marksmanship.
Not to mention LHO's specific shooting abilities.
Anthony Marsh
It's what the WC said and even the HSCA and almost all researchers agree.
Now, if you have a different theory, you need to show some evidence for
it, not just proclaim it.
> 2. As was easily determinable, the US Secret Service, on December 2,
> 3, & 4th, 1963, easily determined the impact location for each of the
> three shots fired.
No, they did not. The put forth their theory.
>
>
> 3. Of which, the Z313 impact is, was, and will continue to remain the
> second shot fired in the shooting sequence.
>
They never said that. Their third shot was the one which hit the head.
> 4. And of which, the impact to the head of JFK which was observed
> directly in front of James Altgens location (approximately 30-feet
> past the Z313 impact location), is, was, and will continue to be the
> impact location for the third/last/final shot fired in the shooting
> sequence.
>
Forget Altgens. You are misusing his testimony.
> 5. FMJ Carcano-type bullets seldom tear themselves apart merely as a
> result of impact with a tree limb.
> One could shoot 1,000 such bullets into tree limbs and be fortunate if
> even one single bullet became deformed to the extent that it
> compromised the copper jacket.
>
Compromised? That is not the Magic Twig Theory. They need the twig to
STRIP the jacket off entirely and allow the lead core to go on to hit the
curb near Tague.
> 6. FMJ Carcano-type bullets which have a copper jacket as well as a
> lead core, do not creat sparks, even were the bullet to impact
> concrete and/or rocks. (watching too many movies does this to one)
>
> http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/mpmain.html
>
> Some insultingly stupid movie physics are so commonplace as to make it
> inefficient for us to rail about individual instances. They have
> become visual clich?s and do for movies what verbal clich?s do for
> literature
>
> Flashing Bullets
>
> Typical handgun bullets are made of copper-clad lead or lead alloys.
> They simply don't create bright flashes of light when they strike
> objects, even if the objects are made of steel. In the chemical
> industry it's commonplace to limit maintenance workers to copper-alloy
> or lead hammers when they are working in areas where flammable fumes
> may be present. Hammers made of these materials do not produce sparks
> when they strike objects, while steel hammers can. If you've never
> noticed this phenomenon with steel hammers, don't be surprised, the
> sparks generally are barely visible even under ideal lighting
> conditions.
>
OK, then they posit that a steel jacketed bullet was used.
Or an explosive bullet.
> The non-sparking tendencies of copper versus steel can be seen if the
> metals are ground. Grinding a piece of steel will produce a copious
> quantity of sparks even in bright lighting. Small hot particles of the
> steel actually burn. If copper tubing is ground it may produce an
> occasional spark due to a contaminate on the grinding wheel or copper,
> but will be virtually spark free.
>
>
> 7. Even steel-jacketed bullets seldom if ever create sparks when
> striking asphalt pavement, and the only circumstances in which such
> event might occur would be if the bullet struck an agregate (rock)
> which is within the asphalt.
>
>
> Just in event no one actually noticed, the Warren Commission lied!
>
So what? That's hardly late breaking news.
> And, there was NO "THE SHOT THAT MISSED"!
>
Some shot missed.
Show which bullet caused Tague's injury and prove it with diagrams.
>
Anthony Marsh
Ridiculous. You know nothing about bullets. The bullet is spinning
rapidly. It can not just by luck hit on the lead core side and leave the
jacket side out. Look at the two large fragments found in the front seat.
The nose fragment has jacket still on the lead core with some areas
exposed to just the lead core. The base fragment is ONLY jacket, with all
the lead core missing. That lead core was never found. I submit that the
lead core went on to hit the curb. That is the ONLY way you are going to
have only lead core hit the curb.
Anthony Marsh
> What missed shot controversy? The first shot missed. There are several
> witnesses who saw the errant shot hit the pavement and they claim it was
> the first shot. Does it matter why? Could be the shot was deflected by
His point is that a lot of people assume that, but that no one can prove it.
> glancing off a tree limb. More likely LHO was struck with "buck fever" and
> shaking like a leaf when he yanked the trigger. After that he simply
> reacted with the automatic instinct to rechamber, aim, and fire,< bam>
> rechamber, aim, and fire <bam>. Notice he got better with each shot. The
> less he thought about it, the better he shot. Nothing unusual about this
> kind of instinctive reaction.
>
> There are two other possibilities. Oswald had taken a shot at General
> Walker and left his rifle in some bushes. He came back later and retrieved
In some bushes? Where is your proof for that? He said he buried it.
> the rifle. In the stress and excitement of aiming at the President he may
> have forgot to remove the empty case, so when he pulled the trigger all he
> heard was the clink on the empty shell. He then panics and fires the first
> live round too soon. After that he calms down and get's into his routine.
>
So, where is this fourth empty shell? Are you suggesting DPD tampering
with the evidence? Are you a conspiracy buff? You think everyone was
involved?
Anthony Marsh
I didn't say it was the head shot bullet. LNers do.
> And yet a fragment from that head shot is supposed to (per some people)
> make it all the out to Main to reach Tague, chip the curb (slightly), and
> send shards of either curbstone or bullet material up to meet Tague's face
> with still enough force left to draw blood?
>
Just as much force as a Magic Twig fragment would have. Stripping off
the jacket entirely would take a lot out of the force of the shot.
> I'll go with the first (tree) shot hitting Tague, thank you.
>
> Although having said that, I'll put my built-in asterisk around the above
> statements by saying that the head-shot fragment scenario is still way
> better than anything the CT crowd has invented to account for Tague's
> wounding....mainly because we pretty much KNOW beyond all conceivable
> doubt that only THREE shots were fired in Dealey Plaza.
>
> And since we know that Tague was certainly not wounded by shot #2 (the SBT
> bullet), that leaves only two choices (shots 1 or 3). I'll choose #1. But
> if it wasn't #1, it was #3. ;)
>
>
>
>>>> "And then went on to injure Ronnie Fuller?" <<<
>
>
> Nah. Orson Welles, you dummy. ;)
>
> Per some crackpots, Orson WAS in the Plaza with a large cache of weapons
> on 11/22, you know. And he WAS a pretty large target too.
>
>
>
>>>> "You find Bugliosi's scenario hard to swallow, but you buy the Magic
> Twig Theory hook, line and sinker?" <<<
>
>
> You bet. VB's first-shot/Tague scenario is just not believable (IMO). But
> at least VB and I fully agree on almost everything else, including the
> time of the first (Tague) gunshot -- Z160.
>
>
>
>
>>>> "Why not Holland's Magic Light Pole theory instead?" <<<
>
>
> Mainly because Max Holland has the first shot occurring way too soon
> (IMO). Would John Connally have waited several seconds to turn his head to
> the right (which occurs at about Z164 on the Zapruder Film) if he had
> really heard the first shot way back when the car was in the Elm/Houston
> intersection? I doubt it.
Yes, if he didn't hear that shot.
Many people did not hear the first shot.
>
> MORE ABOUT HOLLAND'S "11 SECONDS IN DALLAS":
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/df7ca678545b1bff
>
>
>
>>>> "What two curbs?" <<<
>
>
> Elm then Main.
>
Show me the mark on the Elm curb.
> What curbs did you think I was talking about when speaking of Bugliosi's
> first-shot theory -- the Lemmon and Turtle Creek curbs perhaps? ;)
>
> I will correct my previous post slightly (in the "two curbs" regard) --- I
> should have said "pavement" instead of "two curbs".
>
Of course. Which is why I am here to correct people.
You are entitled to your pavement theory even if there is no physical
evidence. It's fun to rely on kooks.
> To be perfectly technical, I should have said that the bullet (per VB's
> proposed first-shot scenario) hit the "Elm St. pavement (somewhere in the
> middle of the street behind JFK's limo) and then hit the Main St. curb".
>
Of course. But is it the same bullet? Remember that no copper was found
on the smear on the curb. NONE.
>
>
David Von Pein
Yeah...sure Tom.
Thanks for your expert opinion, though.
David Von Pein
lead core side and leave the jacket side out.
Why not?
It was a bullet FRAGMENT (at least the bullet was partially split open/
fragmented when it struck the Main St. curb, we pretty much can assume
that was the case)....so why couldn't JUST a portion of lead hit the curb,
while the copper/jacket portion clinging to the same mutilated fragment
simply did not strike the curb during its approx. 0.000001 second of time
that the fragment spent hitting that curbstone?
Has that been proven to be "impossible"? If so...how?
Brokedad
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0449a.htm
In event you are having difficulty in understanding this, perhaps
someone can explain to you, as well as to Mr. Marsh,
"impact of the third shot"
At no point does any part of this state anything such "we think this
is the impact point for the third shot".
The "Experts" (which included the US SS as well as the FBI) both,
separately concluded that the third/last/final shot struck at a point
which was some 30-feet past the impact point for the Z313 shot.
And, rest assured, since the witness testimonies also state as to
having observed the impact of this shot to the head of JFK, as well as
multiple other witnesses having stated that the Presidential Limo was
in this location at the time that the third/last/final shot was fired.
Then, I will stick with the true EXPERTS, and thus leave you and Mr.
VB to remain completely ignorant of these facts.
THERE WAS NO SHOT THAT MISSED!
And personally, I for one can not even imagine exactly why any
rational person would accept and/or believe such a completely
unsubstantiated hypothesis.
Especially when the WC could not even determine exactly which one of
the shots it was that supposedly missed.
And especially when witnesses clearly testified as to having observed
the impact of each of the three shots fired.
Boy has someone fallen for the ole "pig in a poke"!
Anthony Marsh
>>>> "The bullet is spinning rapidly. It can not just by luck hit on the
> lead core side and leave the jacket side out.
>
>
>
> Why not?
>
Because the moment it hits, the opposite side spins around to the point
of impact.
> It was a bullet FRAGMENT (at least the bullet was partially split open/
> fragmented when it struck the Main St. curb, we pretty much can assume
> that was the case)....so why couldn't JUST a portion of lead hit the curb,
Sure, but what you are postulating applies to the lead core missing from
the base fragment, not the nose portion.
> while the copper/jacket portion clinging to the same mutilated fragment
> simply did not strike the curb during its approx. 0.000001 second of time
> that the fragment spent hitting that curbstone?
>
> Has that been proven to be "impossible"? If so...how?
>
Because the bullet is spinning incredibly quickly.
>
Anthony Marsh
It is not dependent on who fires it. Bolt it down on a bench and fire it
remotely. At close range the bullet will always hit high and to the right.
> All of which demonstrates that you can "parrot" what others may claim, yet
> apparantly can not research facts for yourself.
>
I am the one who originally dug up the information.
> LHO, in the USMC, consistantly fired "low and to the left". Thus, his
Apples and oranges. The M-1 was not the same as the M-C.
> failure at proper weapon sighting techniques was compensated for by
> adjusting the sights in both vertical as well as horizontal windage. (High
> & to the Right)
>
They could not be adjusted on the M-C.
> Thusly, anyone who, even knowing perfect sighting techniques, picked up a
> rifle in which LHO had adjusted the sights to his specific sighting
> alignment, and thereafter fired that weapon, would in all probability have
> the bullet impact/shot grouping land HIGH & TO THE RIGHT!
>
You seem to have missed a vital clue. Oswald never adjusted the sights,
because they could not be adjusted.
> All of which continues to demonstrate that yourself as well as Mr. Marsh
> know little if anything about rifle marksmanship.
>
All your wild speculation proves that you have never had your hands on a
Mannlicher-Carcano.