Debating The John F. Kennedy Assassination (Part 57)
David Von Pein
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From March 2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- Nellie Connally's shot numbering and
description totally blows apart the WC findings -- but you knew that,
right? She unmistakably says all three {shots} hit, and both she and
JBC flatly deny the SBT.
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Oh, indeed, I'm quite aware of Nellie's
testimony and the way CTers prop her up as proof that the SBT could
never have happened. (Plus the ultra-silly claim by those same CTers
when they suggest that JOHN Connally's eyewitness testimony is useful
in the slightest way to aid their SBT bashfests.)
Of course, in reality, John Connally's EYEwitness testimony is totally
worthless (for the purpose of determining WHEN John Kennedy was hit
with a bullet).
Why?
Because of these words spoken by John Connally himself:
"This almost sounds incredible, I am sure, since we were in the car
with them. .... I turned to my right, which was away from both of
them, of course, and looked out and could see neither, and then as I
was turning to look into the back seat where I would have seen both of
them, I was hit, so I never completed the turn at all, and I never saw
either one of them after the firing started. .... I could not see into
the back seat, so I didn't see either one of them." -- John B.
Connally; WC Testimony
Given the above comments by Mr. Connally himself, how in the world the
CTers can prop up JBC as a good "Anti-SBT" witness is beyond me.
And Nellie is actually a pretty fair "LN" witness too. And JBC is an
excellent pro-SBT witness, even though he never favored the theory.
But JBC's timeline for the shooting is letter-perfect in a "SBT"
manner. John Connally always said these things (which all "line up"
with the SBT and the general "Lone Assassin Firing From Behind"
scenario):
"I was definitely not hit by the first shot. I had time to think; I
had time to react {to the sound of the first shot}."
"Then I WAS hit."
"The third shot definitely did not hit me."
"All the shots came from over my right shoulder."
By the way, John Connally is on film saying that the SBT is, indeed,
"possible". That statement was made during the 1967 CBS-TV four-part
documentary "The Warren Report". More on that below....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
Regarding Nellie Connally's adamant anti-SBT stance -- That's
explainable in a lone-assassin light too, in my opinion. And in a very
believable "human nature" type of fashion.
In short -- Nellie just flat-out didn't see the INITIAL INVOLUNTARY
REACTIONS made by her husband just after Bullet CE399 tore through
JBC's body at frame #224 of the Zapruder Film.
In fact, if you watch this stabilized version of the Z-Film....
http://jfkmurdersolved.com/film/Zapruderstable.mov
....it's quite obvious that Nellie wasn't even looking at either JFK
or JBC until about Z235 or so, when her head turns sharply and
abruptly to the right. This, of course, is well after both men have
been struck by a bullet.
Just watch Nellie closely and then try to determine whether or not she
could possibly have noticed anything going on with either JFK's or
JBC's initial reactions to external (bullet) stimulus until about
Z235?
Nellie first notices her husband's distress as a result of JBC
screaming "Oh, no, no, no!"; but there's no way she saw JBC's "dropped
shoulder" at Z224; the open mouth and pained look on JBC's face at
Z225; or the quick up-and-down arm/hat flip beginning at Z226.
All of that stuff occurs in the blink of an eye, plus it's occurring
when Nellie isn't even looking in her husband's direction.
So it's not surprising to me that Nellie thought the men were struck
by separate bullets. I'm just disappointed that nobody thought to take
Nellie into a room someplace, sit her down, and have her watch (frame-
by-frame) a good, clear digital copy of the stabilized Zapruder Film
(like the linked copy above), in order for her to see for herself the
"JBC Initial Reactions" to a bullet striking him at Z-Frames 224 to
approximately 235.*
* = As far as I know, Nellie never engaged in such a Z-Film-watching
session prior to her death on August 31, 2006. But I could be wrong
about that assumption I suppose.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Can/do you accept the acoustic evidence?
DVP -- Absolutely not (regardless of Mr. Thomas' work). That Dictabelt
recording was NEVER determined to have even been recorded in DEALEY
PLAZA! It's just as likely (or more so) that the open microphone was
located miles away at the Trade Mart (attached to a three-wheeler
bike).
That huge question mark ALONE casts a reasonable doubt on the veracity
of any of the acoustical evidence.
I'm also pretty well convinced that the recording wasn't even made at
the time of the assassination (based on Sheriff Decker's "Hold
everything secure" comment that appears on the tape...a statement made
by Decker about a minute AFTER the last gunshot was fired).
So there are multiple reasons to scoff at the Dictabelt evidence.
Another being H.B. McLain's insistence that it WASN'T his bike with
the stuck microphone...even though the HSCA insisted it was McLain's.
Plus, there's Dale Myers' recent work on the acoustics as well. Myers
has synched all the films showing McLain, and has proven that no
motorcycle was in the position that the HSCA needed a bike to be in at
12:30 in order for the "impulse patterns" to be gunshots.
So....as can be seen, there are several reasons for discounting the
Dictabelt stuff. And there's also the fact that NO GUNSHOTS can be
heard on the damn tape! These loud "cracks" are only "impulse
patterns" (per the acoustics experts). Sounds goofy as hell to me. If
four loud rifle shots had occurred, I would think there would be at
least a HINT of those shots audible through the static-filled tape
recording...not just "impulses". The whole thing reeks, IMO. YMMV.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/acoustic.htm
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- {Portions of the Zapruder Film were faked/manipulated}
presumably, in part, to eliminate the slowing down to a near stop {of
the President's limousine}, reported by dozens of people standing real
close, of which there is no trace whatever in the Z-Film.
DVP -- This is simply untrue. I can detect the limo "slowdown" in the
Zapruder Film. Granted, it's not as easy to detect in the Z-Film as it
is in the Nix Film (because of the background, and the fact that the
limo takes up the whole film frame, from left to right, in Zapruder's
movie).
But the slowdown is definitely discernible. Just watch the stabilized
version of the Z-Film a few more times. The "slowdown" just prior to
the head shot is even more noticeable in this version of the Z-Film
(linked below), which has the image visible through the sprocket
holes.
Take note of the police motorcycle on the south side of the
President's car that begins to overtake the limo. So, either that
cycle sped up suddenly just before the fatal shot struck JFK....or the
limousine slowed down. The Nix Film shows the latter option to be the
true one. .....
http://jfkmurdersolved.com/film/Zapruderstable.mov
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Greer's non-reaction...
DVP -- You must also consider the very real possibility that driver
Bill Greer hit the brakes because he might have suspected that one or
more shooters could have been located on top of the railroad bridge he
was driving straight toward.
Plus: Greer might have also slowed the car in order to allow Clint
Hill to more easily catch up to the limousine.
Yes, a large grain of salt should be taken along with my pure
speculation regarding Greer's motives for slowing the car when he did
on 11/22/63, because there's nothing in Greer's official statements
that back up my above guesswork at all. It's just a surmise on my
part, I'll readily admit. (But, heck, LNers can "guess" once in a
while too, can't they? After all, conspiracy theorists have made a
living out of doing just that for decades.) ~wink~
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The chain of evidence {for Bullet CE399} is just laughable!
You believe it if you wish -- it could never even have been admitted
at trial!
DVP -- The chain of possession (or "chain of custody") is just fine
for Bullet CE399 (and for all the other Oswald-implicating evidence in
the JFK case). You surely don't think that just because civilians
touched some of the evidence before the cops got ahold of it, that
makes it worthless and inadmissible in court, do you?
CE399 has a clear chain of possession -- From Tomlinson, to Wright, to
Johnsen, to Todd, to Frazier.
A prosecutor (such as my favorite lawyer/author Vincent Bugliosi), at
the trial (had there been one), would have simply called the above-
referenced individuals to the witness stand in order to establish the
"chain" (which certainly would have been established without a shred
of a doubt).
Mr. Bugliosi, at the Oswald "TV Docu-Trial" in 1986 (which did adhere
to REAL rules of evidence and court procedures, even though it wasn't
an actual trial), in fact did (in essence) establish the admissibility
of Stretcher Bullet CE399 in a courtroom setting, which occurred
during the questioning of witness Vincent Guinn, when Bugliosi listed
the official pieces of evidence that Dr. Guinn examined for the HSCA,
including CE399 and one of the two large bullet fragments found in the
front seat of the limousine.
Later in Guinn's Mock Trial testimony, we have this exchange:
BUGLIOSI -- "What you're saying is that from your Neutron Activation
Analysis, there may have been fifty people firing at President Kennedy
that day....but if there were, they all missed....ONLY bullets fired
from Oswald's Carcano rifle hit the President. Is that correct?"
GUINN -- "That's a correct statement; yes."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3a8181c73cfa095
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- {JFK's murder} was Mafia-inspired.
DVP -- With respect to your theory of "Mafia" involvement, I shall
take this additional opportunity to promote the wise words of Vince
Bugliosi once more (VB words that make total sense to me)....
"It is a well-known fact that throughout the years organized crime has
consistently and religiously avoided killing public officials -- if
for no other reason, that they have enough heat on them already,
without significantly INCREASING that heat by going after a public
figure. They don't do it. Going after the President of the United
States, of all people, would be a suicidal act on their part...an act
guaranteed to bring a heat upon them not too much less than the
surface of the sun. When the Mob came to this country, they didn't
leave their brains behind in Palermo. .... The whole notion of
sophisticated groups -- like organized crime, U.S. Intelligence --
getting Jack Ruby, of all people, to accomplish a job which, if he
talked, would prove fatal to their existence is just downright
laughable. .... Not only is the whole idea absurd, but there's just no
evidence to support it." -- Vincent Bugliosi
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- If you still contend LHO fired the first shot (through the oak
tree), could you explain why?
DVP -- Anything I might say about Oswald's first shot would be just a
guess on my part (obviously), since that bullet missed everyone in the
limousine and was a bullet that was never recovered. But I think it's
quite possible that Oswald "jumped the gun", or got too anxious, and
fired prematurely. We can never know for certain.
But one thing that is known for certain (certainly beyond all of MY
own reasonable doubt) is that Lee Harvey Oswald was inside that
Sniper's Nest on the 6th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository at
12:30 PM on November the 22nd, 1963, firing a series of rifle bullets
at President Kennedy.
The evidence supporting the above LHO scenario is too overpowering to
ignore. And the majority of the evidence does indicate that THREE
shots were fired....and we have THREE bullet shells littering the
floor of the Sniper's Nest.
The evidence also indicates that only TWO bullets hit anyone in that
car on Elm Street....and ballistics tests proved that both of those
bullets came out of the barrel of CE139 (Rifle #C2766, which happened
to be owned by a man named Lee Harvey Oswald).
One shooter. Three shots. Two hits. One miss. Done deal. IMO.
And if Oswald was merely a "patsy"....
"....This otherwise independent and defiant would-be revolutionary,
who disliked taking orders from anyone, turned out to be the most
willing and cooperative frame-ee in the history of mankind!! Because
the evidence of his guilt is so monumental, that he could have just as
well gone around with a large sign on his back declaring in bold
letters 'I Just Murdered President John F. Kennedy'!!!"
Anyone...ANYONE who would believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent,
would believe someone who told them that they heard a cow speaking the
Spanish language!" -- Vincent Bugliosi
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4a6b3390021d657c
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/909b5b194cab1cbe
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/182cecc7c4e37bb2
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/65a7881bc7866c7f