Any witnesses testify that a car was sitting there trunk open with the engine running (that then presumably drove away)?

Name the witnesses and cite their testimony?

Indeed.

A "plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket" doesn't seem sufficient to hide a rifle, and is certainly not a "long coat".

Also, seems Mr. Bowers statement contradicts the "Badgeman shooter" theory? Bowers does not see someone in the area where the "Badgeman" would have been shooting.

Bowers says they are down by the overpass. Badgeman is over by the pergola.

~~~

Again, consider the GK area from the parking lot side of the fence.

There is no cover at all.

You know guns can be broken down, right? Also, I don't believe in badgeman, and yes the backside was open. So what? Full frontal cover is the key here. Mr. Bowers was the only other person in the area and he ended up having a fatal accident some years later.

I always have very much enjoyed that quote.

"Through the scope, it would appear that JFK were < 10ft away."

This is from James Files, right?

The guy who claims to have used a Remington Fireball to shoot the president?

Remington Fireball, which is known to have an above average report due to it's use of a rifle cartridge in a pistol length barrel.

It's about the loudest possible gun he could have used.

Literally no one would have had any trouble pinpointing exactly his location had he used a Fireball.

Assembly and disassembly of a weapon takes time. The time starts to add up and leads to an increased risk of discovery.

Cover is crucial for a sniper. That there is none from the parking lot side is a big problem.

Good that you admit that Badgeman is nonsense.

It seems to me that Occam's Razor supports the single shooter theory. More than one shooter coordinating shots from different directions at the exact same time is very difficult to do, and would require high competence and exceptional planning.

No witness saw a shooter at the grassy knoll. In contrast, physical evidence links a gun Oswald possessed to the bullet jackets found in the limo and at Parkland.

No. It would not. While multiple witnesses said they *heard* shots from the direction of the grassy knoll, no witness *saw* a gunman there. And the witnesses included a number of police officers who looked in that direction, specifically to see if they could spot a gunman, and didn't see one. And there were spectators only a few feet away from the hypothetical position behind the picket fence, and they didn't see a gunman there either. And you'd tend to notice a little thing like that: a man firing a high-powered rifle at the President of the United States, within a few paces of you.

William of Ockham's principle was intellectual parsimony: when advancing any argument, propositions should not be multiplied needlessly. Witnesses heard shots from that direction, but saw no gunman, even though they must have seen him had he been there. So he wasn't there, or else you have to make up silly stories (that is, multiply propositions needlessly).

Neither President Kennedy nor Governor Connally was hit by a shot on a trajectory from the grassy knoll. They were both hit from above and behind, on a trajectory consistent with the window where Lee Oswald's rifle was found. None of the recovered ammunition was consistent with any weapon but the Carcano rifle owned by Lee Oswald. A hypothetical conspiracy could not involve a second gunman because his ammunition, if recovered by investigators, would betray his presence, the lands on the bullets not being consistent with Oswald's rifle and even the metallurgical characteristics of any fragments not being consistent with Oswald's box of bullets.

The parsimonious explanation is that witnesses saw no gunman on the grassy knoll because there was no gunman on the grassy knoll, and that witnesses heard shots from there because the pergola structure is an echo-reflecting surface.

It would be very easy if several shooters agreed to shoot someone who was on a certain short stretch of road traveling very slowly.

We still have the witnesses near this position whom Lapidator has said would know with 100% certainty that location was where the shot they heard came from.

Plus the audio evidence which not only confirms these witnesses, but matches the Zapruder film.

As I have pointed out, a shooter at the Grassy Knoll position does not contradict any findings about a shooter behind as well.

It would be a classic military ambush to have fire coming from several directions once the prey was in the kill zone.

It's quite easy, as I have already demonstrated.

Interestingly, police and witnesses rushed to the Grassy Knoll in pursuit of the shooter.

Dallas County Sheriff Bill Decker is known to have ordered police to the area.

Of course, it would have to be the simplest explanation which accounts for the facts.

Among these facts are the witnesses who heard a shot coming from that direction, the audiotape which records a shot coming from that location, and the Zapruder film which shows JFK knocked back from a bullet coming from the front.

It would appear Kennedy was struck by at least one bullet from the front, as shown in film footage of the event.

You're the one making up silly stories.

Lapidator has stated unequivocally that witnesses who heard shots would know with 100% certainty the location of the shooter.

What I actually said was that witnesses 30yds or so, and closer, from a gun shot would be highly certain of the location of the shot. Probably 100% certain.

In reality, the majority of witnesses were unsure as to the location of the shots they heard.

There is considerable disagreement of witnesses close to and on the GK as to the location of shots heard.

This really is all one needs to know about the possibility of GK shooter(s).

I'm sure they were people rushing all over the place.

The film showed no such thing.

How do we know from the recording the direction that the sound is coming from?

Is the recording made using a directional mic? Do we know the heading of the directional mic?

Is the recording made using an array of mics which can be used to "beam form" and deduce direction?

You mean the same Sheriff Decker who is accused of having sent his officers to the Railyard/GK area as an effort to delay the securing of the TSBD building, and there by allowing the "hit team" at the TSBD building to escape clean?

Did Sheriff Decker's officers in the Railyard/GK area find ..... any ..... evidence in that area?

Sheriff Decker ever explain why he appears to have ignored reports of shooter(s) in the TSBD building?

You seem to be intentionally misleading here. But since there is a small chance you are not being intentionally misleading, and you are simply unclear, let me continue...

The limo is clearly driving almost directly away from the location of LHO's "sniper's nest".

There is a small amount of lateral movement. But at this range (70-80yards), the motion is very small when translated back to the required amount of lateral movement required to keep the rifle targeted on JFK's head.

For kicks, let's say the range is 75 yards on average. The maximum lateral deviation for the limo staying in the lane is about 4yards.

To keep the rifle targeted upon the limo (JFK's head), the rifle would have to swing just + and - 1.5 degrees in the horizontal plane.

(Use arctan(2/75) and express the result in degrees. Also, at 100 yards, 1 MOA or Minute of Angle, is about 1". This means 60 MOAs is 1 degree or about 5ft. 1.5 degrees is a bit more then 2 yards.)

Not the least bit - the limo is moving both left to right and from the bottom of the frame to the top.

You are quite correct, the limo is not driving directly away in a straight line, nor is it simply moving left to right - it is both driving away and from left to right - a more complex movement.

We might also have to consider that Elm is sloping downwards, adding yet more interesting things to make shooting from this position a little more difficult.

All the same this is a moving target - not only needing to be tracked left to right, but also moving away from the 'sniper's nest' making this even more complicated.

Had this been Oswald at that location, recall he had never been trained to shoot at moving targets, nor had he been trained to shoot from an elevation.

It's all in the report from BBN and Queens College - if you are sincerely interested

The scientists concluded with 95% certainty that the fatal shot came from the GK.

Yes... I know. Its something isn't it.

Wait...

So the HSCA didn't like the answer so they said, "try again."

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/odell/

So the first team says, "flip a coin, and if the result is heads, the shot came from the GK, if the result is tails, it came from somewhere else."

The second team, says, "hold my beer..."

I'm starting to doubt that there's anything to this Grassy Knoll Shooter theory.

Just checking in to see if you guys have solved this yet.

You can file it right next to doubting the theory of evolution, and doubting climate change.

Maybe I wasn't clear. You've confused a left handed bolt gun (bolt on the left side) with shooting a right hand bolt gun left handed. All MC's were right hand bold guns. (bolt on the right side)

Ah... you are conceding defeat. OK. Nice discussion with you.

On the off chance you're not being deceptive, I simply mean rejecting acoustic science is on par with rejecting biology and climatology.

On the notion that having the bolt worked by your 'off' hand improves one's performance - does that imply that right-handed people would perform better using rifles where the bolt is on the left-hand side?

This would indicate gun manufacturers have been wildly wrong-headed for more than a hundred years!

Name the witnesses who were patrolling the parking lot and cite their testimony?

It was my understanding people's attention were drawn to the Presidential motorcade.