JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[FrankO]

The reason for a bullet to not go into a body any further than a few centimetres is a reduction in the effective powder charge. This could be attributed to old powder not igniting fully, a hand loaded cartridge using a reduced powder load, or a bullet being shot through a larger calibre rifle using a sabot which allows gas to escape down the sides of the smaller diameter projectile. The latter would preserve the barrel markings of a projectile fired through a lesser calibre rifle into cotton wading before being fired again using a hand loaded round and a sabot in a larger calibre rifle.

Thanks for info, George!

The defective powder would explain a failure of an attempt to kill, but a reduced hand load and a sabot would indicate a deliberate attempt to leave evidence in the form of a nearly undamaged projectile.

Thanks for the possible explanations, although I don't know if I find especially the latter convincing.

Cheers,
Frank

[GBinOz]

Well that photo doesn’t help much does it George. But from Brennan’s position across the road I can easily see how he might have seen a man from his belt up.

George, do you really believe that Brennan was lying when he said that he’d seen a man in that 6th floor window?

You mean from this perspective?:



Not lying......mistaken.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Part of Brennan's statement to the police on the day:
I was looking at the man in this window at the time of the last explosion. Then this man let the gun down to his side and stepped down out of sight. He did not seem to be in any hurry. I could see this man from about his belt up.

Part of Brennan's report to the FBI on the day:
The man he observed in the window had what appeared to be a "heavy" rifle in his hands. He could not tell whether or not this rifle had a telescopic sight, as the rifle was protruding only about half its length outside the window. He was positive that after he had observed this man in the window, he saw this person take "deliberate aim" and fire a shot. He then observed this person take the rifle from his shoulder and hold it by the barrel of the rifle, as if he were resting the but of the rifle on the floor. He said this individual observed the scene on the street below, momentarily, and then stepped back from the window.

This is a photo taken just before the shooting.



The window on the sixth floor is at a lower position than those of the fifth floor. Can you estimate the height and weight of the two men at the windows? Brennan estimate the man on the sixth floor was 5'10" and 165-170 lbs - Oswald's military records designated him at 5'8" and 135 lbs.

Can you seriously describe to me how Brennan could have seen a man "from his belt up" shooting through that gap in the sixth floor window?

Well that photo doesn’t help much does it George. But from Brennan’s position across the road I can easily see how he might have seen a man from his belt up.

George, do you really believe that Brennan was lying when he said that he’d seen a man in that 6th floor window?

[GBinOz]

He couldnt see the lower part of his body though George. He just made an assumption that he was standing. How many people would have guessed that someone seen at a window, leaning on the sill, wasn’t standing? He didn’t see Oswald’s legs. This doesn’t detract from his statement one iota.

Part of Brennan's statement to the police on the day:
I was looking at the man in this window at the time of the last explosion. Then this man let the gun down to his side and stepped down out of sight. He did not seem to be in any hurry. I could see this man from about his belt up.

Part of Brennan's report to the FBI on the day:
The man he observed in the window had what appeared to be a "heavy" rifle in his hands. He could not tell whether or not this rifle had a telescopic sight, as the rifle was protruding only about half its length outside the window. He was positive that after he had observed this man in the window, he saw this person take "deliberate aim" and fire a shot. He then observed this person take the rifle from his shoulder and hold it by the barrel of the rifle, as if he were resting the but of the rifle on the floor. He said this individual observed the scene on the street below, momentarily, and then stepped back from the window.

This is a photo taken just before the shooting.



The window on the sixth floor is at a lower position than those of the fifth floor. Can you estimate the height and weight of the two men at the windows? Brennan estimate the man on the sixth floor was 5'10" and 165-170 lbs - Oswald's military records designated him at 5'8" and 135 lbs.

Can you seriously describe to me how Brennan could have seen a man "from his belt up" shooting through that gap in the sixth floor window?

[GBinOz]

What I do know, is that, if we assume it entered at about the level of T3, then it would have gone right through the right lung. If we’d assume it never went through the body, but only went in a couple of centimetres, then my questions would be:
- Is it possible for a bullet to not go into a body any further than a few centimetres? Would that be something normal to expect?
- Why would someone trying to kill somebody use a bullet that possibly wouldn’t even go through a body?


Yes, from at least frame 230 Connally is to be seen holding his hat with his right hand until about frame 279 when it disappears out of view and then again between frames 320 and 330. So, he either held on to his hat even though his wrist was already hit or he was hit in the wrist after frame 330.

Hi Frank,

The reason for a bullet to not go into a body any further than a few centimetres is a reduction in the effective powder charge. This could be attributed to old powder not igniting fully, a hand loaded cartridge using a reduced powder load, or a bullet being shot through a larger calibre rifle using a sabot which allows gas to escape down the sides of the smaller diameter projectile. The latter would preserve the barrel markings of a projectile fired through a lesser calibre rifle into cotton wading before being fired again using a hand loaded round and a sabot in a larger calibre rifle.

The defective powder would explain a failure of an attempt to kill, but a reduced hand load and a sabot would indicate a deliberate attempt to leave evidence in the form of a nearly undamaged projectile.

While Connally's hat does reappear at frame 320, it is not clear in the film that he is still holding it.

Regards, George

[Patrick Differ]

Frank you can't be serious.

[FrankO]

https://knottlab.com/wp-content/uplo...Shift-Z225.jpg

If you are going to dispute Knott Labs at least use their correct representation

I'd have expected all the representations correct, Patrick. Isn't the one I used also seen in their video?

[FrankO]

If Kennedy were hit by a high velocity bullet than why in the frames you show is Connally not reacting?

Because he starts reacting at frame 224.

I guess it depends on what you are paying attention too..Frank.

It would appear so, Patrick.

Also why did the 2 FBI Agents present and only 2 feet away from Kennedys body at the autopsy in Bethesda say that the back wound, that Humes did not trace, was below the right shoulder blade?

On a minor note, I don’t think they ever said the back wound was below the right shoulder blade. If that were true, then it would have entered at the level of vertebrae T8, at least some 10 centimetres/4 inches lower than where dr. Burkley put it (at about the level of T3). And I don’t know why Sibert & O’Neill say it was where they said it was.
What I do know, is that, if we assume it entered at about the level of T3, then it would have gone right through the right lung. If we’d assume it never went through the body, but only went in a couple of centimetres, then my questions would be:
- Is it possible for a bullet to not go into a body any further than a few centimetres? Would that be something normal to expect?
- Why would someone trying to kill somebody use a bullet that possibly wouldn’t even go through a body?

Was Connally still holding his hat in Frame 272 when his wrist was supposedly shattered?

Yes, from at least frame 230 Connally is to be seen holding his hat with his right hand until about frame 279 when it disappears out of view and then again between frames 320 and 330. So, he either held on to his hat even though his wrist was already hit or he was hit in the wrist after frame 330.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You’re missing the point here my friend. It is impossible to shoot through that open window while standing.... unless you are only two feet tall. The fact that Brennan claims he saw a standing man shoot through the open window either renders his testimony unbelievable or indicates that the standing man that he saw shooting was in another location..

He couldnt see the lower part of his body though George. He just made an assumption that he was standing. How many people would have guessed that someone seen at a window, leaning on the sill, wasn’t standing? He didn’t see Oswald’s legs. This doesn’t detract from his statement one iota.

[GBinOz]

Indeed, he doesn't, Fiver.

This is Knott Lab's representation of frame 225:



This is frame 225 of the Zapruder film:



This are frames 222 & 223:



It's clear that Kennedy was hit before frame 225 and that Connally was more turned to his right in frames 222 & 223 than in 225. Who's to say that the two men weren't aligned in those frames? Who's to say that Connally hadn't been sitting like that for a number of frames until frame 224? Knott Lab doesn't answer this question.

Hi Frank,

Please forgive me if I am mis-understanding, but you appear to be saying that since no one can see what is happening behind the sign, it can't be known that they weren't aligned at that time - so Knott Lab is wrong and the SBT is right?

You have previously cited Connally's lapel eversion at frame 224 as evidence of the SBT, but this occurred after the point that you are now saying Kennedy may have been hit, and the hole in the front of Connally's suit is nowhere near the lapel. Have you noticed that just after that frame Connally appear to "swat" at something on his left side with his hat?

Connally said he turned to the right and was hit as he turned back to the left and was almost facing forward. As I understand your theory, you are saying that at frame 225 he has already completed the described procedure, having turned right and back to the left without it being seen because he was behind the sign. But I then see him repeat this procedure without showing the distress of having been shot through the chest, the wrist and the thigh apart from a slight grimace as he commences the turn. People are often caught with unusual facial expressions in single frames. I see the slight drop in his shoulder as part of the turning process.

When Connally viewed the Zapruder film I believe, from memory, that he identified around frame 234 as when he was hit - not a win for either of our theories but a contradiction of the SBT.

Regards, George

[GBinOz]

Yes, he described him as standing up but that’s entirely understandable. How could he have know the distance between the floor and the bottom of the window. In other buildings a man leaning on the window would have been standing. Brennan couldn’t see his lower half.

Brennan is a strong witness by anyone’s standards. Perhaps not so much on description became we know witnesses can be mistaken but picking the right window.

Your missing the point here my friend. It is impossible to shoot through that open window while standing.... unless you are only two feet tall. The fact that Brennan claims he saw a standing man shoot through the open window either renders his testimony unbelievable or indicates that the standing man that he saw shooting was in another location..

[GBinOz]

Then you haven't been paying attention. I have repeatedly posted links.

Here's another one.

What a load of rubbish masquerading as forensics. To their credit they had the entry wound in Kennedy in the back, not the neck. But it can be clearly seen the the exit wound doesn't exit his throat, although they carefully avoided showing that exit, so the test becomes nonsense from there onwards. Their bullet hit two ribs and did not have the energy to smash the wrist, and this is why it was deformed??, while the magic bullet smashed one rib and the wrist and was almost pristine. The reason why the bullet that actually hit Connally smashed his wrist was that it hadn't shed energy passing through Kennedy. This is the type of video that is designed to "look" knowledgeable but which is actually deceptive in its conclusions and would persuade only those completely devoid of firearms experience.

[GBinOz]

That is incorrect. The ammo clip dropped out of the Carcano when the last round was fired.

Your post goes beyond deceptive into the area of lying. The presenter at the two minute mark says "once you chamber the last round, the clip is supposed to fall free". At around the 2:50 minute mark he chambers the last round and the clip falls out , as he (and I) said. Do you hope that no one will check your links, or do you just not know the difference between chambering and firing?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Brennan was a 44 year old grandfather so calling him 'young' is a bit of a stretch. Which means the issue of his eyesight might be called into question. After all he said the gunman was standing up, an impossibility if firing through the open window. He also said the gunman was wearing light coloured clothing although it's accepted Oswald was wearing a dark coloured shirt in the TSBD. However Brennan, according to his own account published in 1987, had always enjoyed exceptional eyesight. He describes this in terms of religious revelation:



Brennan also offered up a couple of interesting observations. Regarding the line up, he was asked by a Dallas officer, 'Does the guy standing second from the left look the the man you saw?' Not much quality control in evidence there. Perversely, although he claims to have immediately recognised Oswald, Brennan refused to commit himself at that time. Workmates have confirmed that Brennan was a frightened man in the days that followed, and fear of being identified as a key witness is the reason Brennan gave for delaying his ID of Oswald.
The other interesting detail is that a JFK look-alike entered his house that evening in the company of the FBI. Apparently this man was a body double for the President and chatted about a few occasions when he had been used in this capacity. It's a strange tale and what purpose could be served by inviting him along to the Brennan household is hard to discern.

For some reason I had it in my mind that he was 34 and not 44.

Why should we question his eyesight just because he was 44? My brother is 50 and doesn’t wear glasses. He was farsighted. Oswald was wearing a dark coloured shirt but a light t-shirt. What would have stood out in a darkened window, a dark over shirt or a light t-shirt? Yes, he described him as standing up but that’s entirely understandable. How could he have know the distance between the floor and the bottom of the window. In other buildings a man leaning on the window would have been standing. Brennan couldn’t see his lower half.

Ive never heard that body double story so I can’t comment. The main point is surely that immediately the shots were fired Brennan went straight to an officer and pointed out the 6th floor and gave a reasonable description of Oswald. Psychic, part of a conspiracy or he genuinely saw someone that resembled Oswald in that window. Brennan is a strong witness by anyone’s standards. Perhaps not so much on description became we know witnesses can be mistaken but picking the right window.

[Herlock Sholmes]

And Humes, Boswell and Finck were men of impeccable reputation and patriotism and yet you have no issue trashing their reputations by calling them traitors. My apologies Patrick but I’ll take no lessons on how to show respect when you and others have systematically trashed and smeared the reputations of an untold number of men and women. Pathologists, scientists, military personnel, secret service agents, Warren Commissioners, Warren counsels and various investigators, those on the HSCA, Dallas Police officers etc. All casually tossed aside as traitors whilst an actual traitor and actual murderer gets treated like a poor victim. Perhaps you might spare even a fraction of the sympathy that you show scum like Oswald and show it to the families of those whose reputations you casually trash. And then there’s the 60 years of sticking the boot in to the Kennedy family. Sowing false seeds of doubt to fuel a cottage industry based on self-interest.