I don't think so. I've gone to the TSBD and looked down to the street from where Oswald was, and it's surprisingly close. I'm no expert with a rifle, but I'm very comfortable that I could hit a human target in a slow-moving car from that distance and do so easily. So the difficulty is not an issue. I know subsequent tests with a manlicher-carcano showed that it could be reloaded and shot twice in less than eight seconds, so the timing isn't an issue. Can I cetegorically exclude another shooter? Logically, that's trying to show that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence -- so, no, I can't categorically exclude it. But the existing evidence is entirely consistent with Oswald shooting three shots from the sixth floor.

I think I've answered your question fairly.

On the McClain dictabelt sound point, proud, you're correct that BBN is a serious and competent institution.

Interestingly, my father started to draft a book rebutting this whole dictabelt sound business on which the HSCA based their conclusion that Oswald wasn't alone. He did so in either 1979 or 1980. He got distracted by other things and never finished it, but we talked about it a fair amount. As I remember it, the conclusions from BBN were entirely inconsistent with McClain's testimony about what motorcycle he was riding and where he was.

Does the Zapruder film look odd to you? Like, doesn't it seem like a shot comes from the front?

I'm not picking an argument here, I just don't know nearly as much about this as I thought I did. Or at least, I can't remember everything I read when I was younger.

It does look odd, yes. But I think the actual physical mechanics of a human getting hit by a bullet are counterintuitive -- I don't remember he exact analysis on this point but I know I was convinced by Bugliosi and others.

I'm one of the sheeple, I know.

In real life people don't react to being hit by bullets the same way they do in movies.

Of course it is. I will say that my father is about the last person in the world to have been involved with a coverup or a conspiracy. There is literally zero chance of it.

To be current I'd like to know the answer to the Mandela effect mystery. Was it the Berenstein bears or Berenstain bears?

It used to be spelled Berenstein. Now its Berenstain.

You're correct. It's not even an argument.

You might as well say Newtonian physics is the bunk because he also cast horoscopes.

Fair enough. Like I said, I'm not arguing against you, just curious. My thought has always been there was some kind of mafia connection (Trafficante/Marcello), but I have never really bought the extensive cover up. I guess I was just wondering what you thought of the idea of there being more to the shooting and the motive, not necessarily the cover up aspect.

Reading about JFK when I was a kid led me in to a deep interest in the mafia. It's just fascinating reading.

That'd be an interesting addition to the literature had that book ever been completed.

According to what I have read of the acoustical studies, they didn't need anyone's testimony about where they thought they were at the relevant points - they only had to match the acoustical evidence to the photographic evidence.

Proud, i believe your statement above about prints is not correct. The FBI did indeed find a palm print on the barrel of the rifle, but it was underneath the fore grip and could not have been wiped off without disassembling the rifle. It was not a fingerprint, but it absolutely was Oswald's palm print.

There was, however, some snafu on the evidentiary chain on the rifle. This is from memory, but I think it was found by the Dallas PD in the TSBD, sent to D.C., then for some reason sent back to Dallas. I think conspiracy theorists make much of what is likely a simple ****up.

My father definitely told me that the folks he know on the commission were definitely surprised by the scope and enduring nature of the conspiracy theories.

As much as someone might want to think it's an easy shot, it seems professional marksmen of great skill have had a hard time duplicating the feat (and Oswald was no crack shot).

Could someone have gotten lucky shooting from that position? Sure.

But an easy shot? The evidence says no.

I'm fairly certain that the photographic evidence did NOT place McClain's motorcycle anywhere near where it would have had to have been for BBN to have been correct.

I'm right now reading my dad's comments on a draft of the Oswald section of the warren report. It's interesting stuff: he's quite critical of what he sees as drafting that is somewhat overreaching on the record. That of course in no way suggests he disclaimed the conclusions of the report; he was convinced the report was broadly correct.

But by way of example, he criticizes the drafters for saying the palm print demonstrates that Oswald owned the rifle. He argues that no, it merely shows that Oswald had possession of the rifle at some point. It is the sum of tiny overreaches like this that make the report less credible than it otherwise would be.

That was simply my impression from having been there and no more. When I went, I'd read some of the analysis saying how it was impossible for Oswald to have made the shot, and I was very very surprised at how close the street looked from that window.

IIRC it was a fellow from the Dallas Police who claimed to have gotten a print from the underside of the barrel.

It was Sebastian Latona who processed the rifle for the FBI and found no useful prints as of November 23rd.

But it's certainly fair to say one print isn't 'all over' anything.

But even if that print was lifted from the rifle, how surprising would it be to have your fingerprint on something you supposedly owned?

It's true the FBI took the evidence the DPD collected for examination. That is why the FBI ran the gun for prints and didn't find any - or evidence the gun was tested for prints.

I have no reason to doubt that many people who served were doing the best they knew how. However, if they are fed bad information their conclusions might not be safe. GIGO.

As there were more than a few motorcycles in the motorcade, the evidence doesn't stand or fall on whether it was McClain's bike or another officer's bike whose microphone captured the audio preserved on the dictabelt.

It is certainly a disservice to stretch such points to try and make one's case appear stronger than it is, whichever side of the debate one might be.

"All over" is indeed an exaggeration. But regardless of the evidentiary snafu, there exists evidence that oswald's palm print was on the rifle. Whether that's one print or ten or whether it's from the DPD or the FBI are, it seems to me, relatively trivial points.

It would be a relatively trivial point if his fingerprints were found on something he owned, wouldn't it?

NOVA: Cold Case JFK

It's on netflix guys

Conspiracies are way harder to pull off than most people appreciate.

Yep. Seen it.

They do a good job showing the 'Magic Bullet' theory is flat out wrong:



The Warren Commission thinks that a bullet entered high on the back on a downward trajectory and exited the throat and went on to strike Connolly sitting in front of Kennedy.

As you can see a bullet on that path would have exited the chest.

I am 100% certain that you didn't watch.

It's like 4 years old.