BOOK REVIEW: "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" By Jim Bishop
David VP
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"THE DAY KENNEDY WAS SHOT" was written by Jim Bishop and provides some
fascinating insights into the last day of President John F. Kennedy's
life.
My copy of Mr. Bishop's ultra-detailed book is a 1983 hardcover
edition, 713 pages in length. The book is divided into four major
sections, chronicling the events of November 22, 1963, in practically
minute-by-minute fashion (beginning at 7:00 AM CST). The four sections
are labelled: "The Morning Hours", "The Afternoon Hours", "The Evening
Hours", and "The Midnight Hours".
Many bits and pieces of little-known trivia concerning JFK's last day
can be accessed through this compelling volume. Such as: Mr. Kennedy's
last breakfast consisted of the following fare .... Two eggs (boiled
for precisely five minutes), toast (with marmalade on the side), orange
juice, and a large pot of coffee.
Throughout the book, Mr. Bishop supports the Single-Bullet Theory (SBT)
and advocates the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin on
November 22nd, which is a point-of-view that I agree with
wholeheartedly. There are, however, a few portions of the book that I
disagree with and fail to understand (especially from a "Lone Assassin"
standpoint). Such as:
I find Mr. Bishop's account of the first (missed) rifle shot somewhat
curious, given what we can see JFK doing after this shot via the
Zapruder Film. Bishop has the first shot missing the car's occupants,
striking the concrete of Elm Street to the right rear of the
Presidential limousine; this bullet causes "dust" and "concrete chips"
to fly up off the street (noticed by at least one witness in Dealey
Plaza -- Mrs. Donald S. Baker). Bishop's book claims (on Page 172) that
Mrs. Baker "saw the spray and pulled back". Mrs. Baker's Warren
Commission testimony does confirm this.
However, this first missed shot, according to Bishop's book, is also
what causes President Kennedy to stop waving as the President
(supposedly) actually FEELS (per Bishop's text) the effects of this
missed shot, being peppered (similar to bystander James Tague on this
very SAME shot) in the face with debris. This "peppering" in the face
causes JFK to raise his arms up to his face in an automatic protective
motion.
Mr. Bishop does not "line up", or correspond, his version of events
with the Zapruder film frames (which is unfortunate here), so we can
only guess as to exactly WHEN on the Z-Film this first (missed) shot
occurs via Bishop's narrative.
But this version by Mr. Bishop (although very close to what I believe
occurred) is probably incorrect in a few respects. One of which is the
fact that (on the Z-Film) we can easily see that the President
continues to wave after such a "Jim Bishop first shot which peppered
JFK in the face" had to have occurred.
JFK is still waving and smiling to the crowd on his right as late as
Z188 (or so), which is just two seconds away from what is the "SBT
Frame" (Z224) -- obviously not enough time for Oswald to shoot twice
with his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.
Then there's Mr. Bishop's more detailed account on Page 173 of what
happened --- "The President of the United States, feeling the tiny
grains hit his face, began to lift both hands upward in fright. He,
perhaps better than anyone in the Plaza, understood the import: he had
felt the sandy grains on his skin and he had heard the sound he
feared."
If JFK had FELT "concrete spray" on his face well BEFORE Z188 (which he
would have HAD to in an "Oswald is the Lone Assassin" scenario), I have
a problem with seeing him still smiling and still waving as late as the
Z180s.
It's quite difficult to reconcile this account of the first shot in
another way too. That being -- how could a missed shot that chipped
concrete in the street to the REAR of the President's car send
shards/fragments of concrete up and into a location to where JFK's face
would be hit by them? Seems to me, in this scenario, Mr. Kennedy would
have been struck on the back of his head/body, and not his "face". (Of
course, in reality, the "JFK felt the concrete" account is all pure
conjecture and just a wild guess on Mr. Bishop's part; and to add in
these obviously-speculative remarks in his book -- when such a thing
cannot possibly be proven, even remotely so -- is a bit too MUCH
speculation regarding the matter, IMHO.)
And: I also have a problem with Mr. Bishop's first-shot account
(overall), in that he has this SAME shot that peppered the President in
the face also rocketing across the Plaza and nicking James Tague as
well. (In ADDITION, this same missile MUST have also done the damage to
the street curb that we've seen in photos, which shows a "fresh" bullet
mark on the curb by Tague.)
Could this SAME bullet have struck the street (to the RIGHT REAR of the
limo, per Bishop's account), and still have ricocheted in the correct
direction to strike Tague and leave the obvious "bullet" mark on the
curb?
For such a well-researched and highly-detailed account of events, I
find a few errors very odd and it's a bit hard to believe they sneaked
through into the final finished edition of the book. .....
Such as: Misspelling (badly) Charles Brehm's name. Bishop has him
represented as "Charles Brend" in his only reference to Brehm in the
volume. And he also has another mistake re. Brehm -- claiming that
Brehm was "holding his five-year-old boy up to see the President" as
the motorcade passed Brehm's position. This, of course, is wrong as
well. Brehm was clapping the whole time, and was not "holding up" his
son at all. Bishop also says Brehm was "on the sidewalk", which is also
incorrect. There was no sidewalk where Brehm was standing; only grass.
Small trivial errors, but noticeable nonetheless.
And then there's also a minor error in the book pertaining to when
Nellie Connally made her "You can't say Dallas doesn't love you"
statement to President Kennedy just before the shooting. The book
claims that this statement was made AFTER the Elm St. turn -- which is
inaccurate. Nellie said this just after the Main-to-Houston Street turn
(with photos even showing JFK leaning in towards Mrs. Connally on
Houston St. to accept her words more clearly).
"The Day Kennedy Was Shot" is riveting reading, however. I enjoyed it
greatly, except for a few minor mistakes. While reading Mr. Bishop's
text, you get the feeling of going back in time, back to *before* that
awful noon in Dealey Plaza, when the President was gunned down in the
middle of the street. If only the reader of this book could somehow
freeze the clock at 12:29 PM on November 22nd, and keep the horrible
event of one minute later from occurring. But, sadly, the simple act of
closing this book when you get to Page 177 (the head shot that killed
the President) won't stop the assassination from taking place. Too bad
such "magical" powers don't exist.
David Von Pein
February 2005
Ben Holmes
A piece of nonsense you posted over a year ago... what's wrong, don't have
anything new to post?
In article <1144970361.7...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, David VP
says...
--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
David VP
Tons. And tons more even.
But you're too stupid to see the logic behind any of it.
The re-posts were done for a personal filing reason, btw. (And I don't
think they were ever posted here on this Forum/NG before anyway. You're
probably thinking of Lancer with respect to Bishop's book review.
Please cite prior NG postings of DVP material if you can.)
But thanks for your constant attention. It means so much to me, you
see.
~wipes tear~
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>> A piece of nonsense you posted over a year ago... what's wrong, don't have
>> anything new to post?
>
>
>Tons. And tons more even.
And none of it defensible.
>But you're too stupid to see the logic behind any of it.
Oh, tis simple to see. A line from a movie comes to mind: "Your ego is writing
checks your intellect can't cash."
Your inability to defend your words shows just how weak your position is. Do
you *really* think Bugliosi is going to do better?
>The re-posts were done for a personal filing reason, btw.
Nonsense.
>But thanks for your constant attention. It means so much to me, you
>see.
Gutless, aren't you?
>~wipes tear~