My uncle's wife's father's brother's brother-in-law was a SS agent who knew one of the guys on the JFK detail and he always said it was an inside job.

liar

What? You don't think this is as believable as 'me and my buddies reconstructed an exact replica of Dealey Plaza in my Dad's backyard so we could try out our Mannlicher-Carcano collection'?

JFK conspiracy theorist invoking Occam's Razor itt.

Applied correctly, it does a good job keeping the Coincidence Theorists in check.

In a modern courtroom, I do not think the acoustic evidence given to the HSCA gets to a jury. The witness would not testify that the impulses actually referred to shots, and he assumed a location for the microphone. It is seriously not close to being competent evidence, unless of course the case is before Lance Itoh.

I can break it down but do not want to take the time because proudfootz will never ever be convinced of anything.

Do you think clay shaw and David ferries were part of a conspiracy, proud?

I will still read one of di eugenio's books but you need to tell me which one articulates a theory you actually believe in.

In a modern courtroom, most likely Oswald would be acquitted. The case against him is made of nothing but weak links.

Maybe in a place as crooked as Dallas in the 1960s a SOB like Henry Wade could convict him, though. But they've cleaned things up since then, and many of his cases have been overturned.

I'd break it down for you, but you will never ever let reason convince you of anything.

In that respect, you're saying I'm much like yourself.

They are certainly intriguing people with intelligence contacts whom our 'public servants' tried to cover for. I'd be doubtful either of them were in any decision-making capacity.

The books aren't about theories, but about matters of fact. Your whole approach is wrong-headed.

Howard, if you're serious about doing some reading pm me.

I think G Robert Blakey, chief counsel to the HSCA, despite being a conspiracist who co-authored a conspiracist book on the case, later said that the findings of subsequent panels had reduced his confidence in the acoustic evidence. (He can say that again. The whole thing was patently made up.)

He also said this, to PBS in 1993:-

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/ar...robert-blakey/

It's possibly of some interest that, during the HSCA's inquiries, Blakey fired two shots from Oswald's rifle in 1.2 seconds. His assistant counsel Cornwell managed two shots in 1.5 seconds. Both missed the bull with the second shot, but not by much.

I'd also put in a word for Mailer's 1995 book on Oswald (Oswald's Tale: An American Tragedy), which I had to review for one of the London papers when it came out. Mailer, a conspiracist till then, had the benefit of access to the briefly-opened Soviet archives, among other sources. (So for instance he's got transcripts of Lee and Marina having marital tiffs in their flat in Minsk, courtesy of the KGB listeners, and sometimes they're obviously playing up to microphones that they know are there.)

Mailer found, as many do, that, the more you look at Oswald, the more you realise that the crime was probably his own work, and his alone.

Literally the most credible argument for an inside job that has been presented so far.

Not that many, since belief in the Lone Nut theory is only held by a few people on the fringe of society.

It seems as though proud is ducking my essential question, which is "what is his theory of the assassination?"

I may be missing something, so I'll just ask it again: proud, where can I read what you contend actually happened?

The case against Oswald is not a difficult one. Getting a conviction on the state of this record would not be all that difficult.

It's clear the evidence indicates that Kennedy was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy.

It's not like I've been coy about it.

It is simple. Sadly, it is a case built on weak evidence and yet does not account for significant evidence which cannot be accounted for by the 'Lone Nut' theory.

Oswald is the only person known to be in the vicinity of Dealey Plaza who was proven not to have fired a rifle that day.

Had Oswald been allowed to live, he would be able to present his alibi and explain what he actually did instead of being smeared after his own murder while in police custody.

The whole case of weak links that comprises the 'Oswald-done-did-it' mantra goes straight into the dumpster, unless jury is composed of morons.

This is quite problematic. There are issues with the audio data that have come to light since the initial analysis in the 70s and 80s. Its troubling that you immediately resort to an accusation of "rejecting biology and climatology" when someone questions the usefulness of analysis that may have been done incorrectly, coming to inaccurate results.

Its quite telling when someone questions data and results, the defense is to immediately attack the questioner. This is usually only necessary when the data and/or results are suspect.

It appears you are willfully misrepresenting the data.

~~~

The original BRSW and Weiss and Aschkenasy analysis was performed on the Ch1 and Ch2 recordings which were incorrectly synchronized. More recent analysis, using what is believed to be more accurate synchronization and timing of the recordings indicates that the "shots" in the recording, happened much too late for them to have actually been part of the assassination, if they were even "shots" at all.

Further analysis has shown that voice patterns could also have been the source of the "match" that BRSW/WA used to determine the echo patterns. Specifically, there are voice patterns in the recordings, e.g. 'k' sounds, that have strong matches to the characteristics of the test shots made by WA.

What is the nature of the conspiracy? Who was involved and what evidence supports that involvement?

Just saying "conspiracy" is not sufficient

This is quite ironic in a thread where people who doubt the dubious case presented by LBJ's Warren Commission are routinely referred to as 'lunatics' et ****ing cetera.

That is a claim which remains to become an established fact.

Does that mean you are willfully misrepresenting your case?

Believed, perhaps, by some to be more accurate...

But then, some think the Holy Bible is a more accurate account of how the flora and fauna we see around us came to be.

So the idea here is that these spoken plosive sounds such as the hard 'K' not only created the initial impulses but also 'somehow' created echoes that exactly mimicked the acoustical signature of Dealey Plaza?

Well, that would be an amazing set of coincidences - especially since the order of the recorded impulses also matched the Zapruder film's record of the woundings of the two victims as well as matched the analysis of the jiggles in the film as the guy holding the camera reacted to the sound of gunfire in real time.

It sounds far-fetched that by sheer accident the random sounds which you say 'could have' produced the signals would conform to a very specific timing and acoustical signature by mere chance.

You misunderstand why bolt-action rifles were and are designed in the way they are.

For RH shooters, its is generally more convenient to hold the rifle on the forward end of the stock with the LH, while using the RH to manipulate the bolt.

This allows the shooter to hold the rifle close to the center of mass with their LH, whilst standing and without a rest platform to place the rifle, in a manner such that he can observe the feeding and ejection of the cartridge.

If a LH shooter can put the rifle on a bench style rest (or even a tripod for prone shooting), he can use his RH to manipulate the bolt very quickly and easily. Using a rest is critical here, as its difficult to hold the rifle solely by the grip at the trigger, since this is far from the center of mass.

Its generally easier for RH people to manipulate mechanisms with their RH, just as it would be for LH shooters to do so with their LH. But the world is not fair, and most rifles (like 99%) are setup for RH shooters -- so LH shooters frequently learn to shoot "off hand". In fact, most LH shooters (who shot left handed) are comfortable shooting from a bench rest in this way. At least because most bolt rifles are setup for RH shooters anyway. LH shooters frequently learn to shot "off hand" simply because of the prevalence of rifles setup for RH shooters.

LH persons learn to do many things with their "off hand" simply as a result of living in a world where things are setup for RH people.

Two or more shooters requires a conspiracy.

It is just too much of a 'coincidence' that two people would choose this particular place and time to shoot the President.

Yes.

In fact, what WA found is that there's a 5% chance that random noise itself would also result in a sufficient match.

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

I don't believe that either BRSW or WA even tried to find a match to other sounds except their test shots.

This phenomena is called a "false detection". Its a very common problem in signal processing.

Left handers run in my family, so I am aware of some of the hurdles.

However, it seems to me that while using a rest would be great for a stationary target, but tracking a moving target might make reliance on resting the rifle on a cardboard box a problem.

So, in a case where it's 95% the gunshots are real versus 5% they are 'random noise' do you think anyone will bet on the longshot that it's just noise?

What loud noises, echoing around Dealey Plaza, were reported?

AFAICT people were rather preoccupied with the gunfire there on that day.

But only one did.

I know right? Isn't that the point exactly?

Bowers did not testify of any such car being there engine running and trunk open waiting to go. He did not claim there was a car that drove out of the parking lot at about that time.

But ok... maybe he wasn't paying that close attention.

So this means there is no evidence of a car being there. Do you understand what this means? No Evidence? Right? It doesn't mean it couldn't have happened... it just means there's no evidence that it happened.

So you're saying, "a car could have been there, engine running, and trunk open and waiting".

The rest of the world is saying, "ok... maybe, but there's no evidence of it."

But when we look at the body of evidence that we do have, it looks extremely unlikely that there was a car there, engine running and trunk open waiting.

There's no evidence of this being a fact. Please cite witness testimony.

Given that ~90% of the world population is right handed, its really impossible to expect that your family would have any left handed persons.