JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Fiver]

In his testimony to the Warren Commission, Roy Kellerman related that he turned round and saw Kennedy holding both hands up to his throat.

He then turned round, facing the front, and said to the driver, Let’s get out of here; we are hit, grabbed the mike and said, Lawson, this is Kellerman. We are hit; get us to the hospital immediately.

Now, in the seconds [which he estimated as 4-5 seconds] that I talked just now, a flurry of shells [Kellerman's alternative name for what he called a double bang] come into the car. I then looked back and this time Mr. Hill, who was riding on the left front bumper of our follow-up car, was on the back trunk of that car; the President was sideways down into the back seat.

But anyone viewing the Zapruder film can see that what happened was very different.

Kellerman does not come fully into view for a while after Kennedy has been shot, but when he does he is looking at Kennedy almost the whole time until just after Kennedy's head explodes.

He claimed that he was on the radio, facing forwards when he heard the double shot, but the film shows him watching Kennedy.

Even more damningly, at a time which, according to Kellerman, was after he had told Greer, Let’s get out of here; we are hit, both he and Greer can be seen looking back at Kennedy.

The only conclusion is that, contrary to Kellerman's claim that he and Greer were doing everything they could to get Kennedy to safety, they were in fact waiting for him to be fatally wounded.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqk3sdfXFkc

The Zaparuder film proves you wrong.

* Kellerman is fully in view, facing forward, at the time JFK is shot in the throat.
* Kellerman starts to turn his head to the left to look back around Frame 257.
* Though his head is partially obscured, Kellerman starts to turn his head to the front around Frame 297,
* Also at Frame 297, Greer is facing forward.
* Greer is clearly facing forward at Frame 308.
* As Kellerman come back into view, it is clear that he is facing forward in Frame 310.
* JFK was shot in the head at Frame 313.

[Fiver]

If you look at all the evidence of Tippit's movements and actions that day, the account given by Andrews is plausible.

Tippit was obviously looking for something or someone.

In 1997 Bill Drenas claimed that Bill Putle claimed that Greg Lowrey claimed that James A Andrews claimed that his car was stopped by Tippet shortly after 1 PM.

That's so tenuous a connection it doesn't even count as hearsay. It isn't enough to prove James A Andrews existed, let alone ever met Tippet. So it might have happened, but we don't know that Tippet stopped Andrews at 1:03. Even if he did, we don't know how accurate Andrews memory was, let alone how accurately his statements passed from Andrews to Lowrey to Pulte to Drenas.

There's no indication that Tippet was looking for anyone before he stopped the man who murdered him.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Here's a video of the jacket that Marina Oswald identified as belonging to he husband,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOdfe-X5ngs

It looks light gray when near the very white garment the woman is wearing.

It looks light tan when near the gray tabletop.

It could easily look white in different lighting or when near darker colors.

This is called the contrast effect.

Here's an example.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Checker_shadow_illusion.svg

Squares A and B are the same shade of gray.

You have uploaded the same recording that I uploaded here previously!

The jacket is obviously grey and I cannot see how it could be described as tan.

This is the jacket allegedly worn by the murderer who, according to some witnesses, wore a dark jacket and also, according to some witnesses, wore a sport jacket.

According to Barbara Jeanette Davis, the murderer wore a dark sport jacket.

Does that seem like the discarded jacket?

[Fiver]

It certainly is not!

You can see here a woman wearing a white garment while holding the jacket in question and it appears to be grey, not white:

Here's a video of the jacket that Marina Oswald identified as belonging to he husband,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOdfe-X5ngs

It looks light gray when near the very white garment the woman is wearing.

It looks light tan when near the gray tabletop.

It could easily look white in different lighting or when near darker colors.

This is called the contrast effect.

Here's an example.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Checker_shadow_illusion.svg

Squares A and B are the same shade of gray.

[Pcdunn]

I'm watching an episode from Oct. 10, 2021 of "The Osbournes Want to Believe" and have discovered that the JFK Assassination conspiracy theorists have some celebrity belivers.

In response to the viewer question read by a producer: "Do you believe the JFK assassination was a single shooter or more complicated?"-- both Ozzy Osbourne and his son Jack answered "it's complicated." Jack expressed doubt that a moving target could be hit with the rifle Oswald had.

So there we have it.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Connally could not have been hit until about half a second later than Kennedy, but it could be a full second.

(PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS 1 # 2321)



The fact that both Connally and his wife were definite that he was shot by a separate bullet, that according to his own account and a viewing of the Zapruder film he could not have been hit less than half a second after the 'Single' bullet was fired, and his own impression that there were multiple gunmen - remarkably similar to Kellerman's testimony - should settle the matter.

(PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS 1 # 2338)



I think there was more than half a second between the shots.

I think there was probably almost close to two seconds, between the time President Kennedy was hit with the first shot and the time I was hit.

(Governor Connally at press conference, 23 November 1966)



https://www.google.com/search?q=connally+press+conference&rlz=1C1GCEA_enB G841BG841&sxsrf=APwXEdf4vZvkrSc4rzJZ-2UeK6Zkqjis2Q:1681584183869&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa =X&ved=2ahUKEwiCzsGfxaz-AhVJSPEDHXrsDDcQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=1059&bih=498&dp r=1.21#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:a5fbca5f,vid:uvUaJLrdoS s


2:27-2:41

[GBinOz]

I don’t know if it would be true, but I’ve read that they would then also be reduced in accuracy.

From behind an overpass pillar isn’t likely at all in my view. It certainly couldn’t have been the ones on either side of Elm Street or Main Street, as the vehicles ahead of the presidential limousine would be or were passing there and Tague was standing one pillar further south, the one between Main & Commerce Streets, with John Doland standing some 15 yards east from him. Furthermore, there were many cars in Commerce Street at the time of the shooting, either standing still or moving slowly, as can be seen in the Zapruder film, so I’m very sure there was nobody shooting from behind the pillars on either side of Commerce Street either.

Hi Frank,

I would anticipate that the rifle using a sabot to adapt a different calibre would have a reduced accuracy. My experience with the French Unique .22 rifle, which had a reputation for accuracy, was that the silencer had no effect on its accuracy.

With regard to the pillars, I did not explain properly. There were pillars on the top of the overpass:



This pillar is at the southern end of the overpass and provides a solid rifle rest out of the view of those watching the parade in the centre of the overpass. It provides this view of Elm St:



Just three feet from this position is a pathway leading down to the carpark behind the Post Office:


From this location a gunman could track the Limousine in Main St and be in position as the vehicle turned into Elm Street. Using a suppressed rifle he would be neither seen nor heard and could quickly escape down the leafy pathway. As you say, this position would line up with the tie and the shirt, and the hole in the windscreen.

Best regards, George

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my reply below.

Oswald owned a light grayish tan jacket., which could easily be mistaken for white.


I would remind you that witnesses claimed that Tippit's killer wore a dark jacket.

That could not be mistaken for a white jacket.

[Fiver]

Oswald did not even own a white jacket - and his shirt could not have been mistaken for a jacket as both a shirt and jacket were mentioned.

Moreover, Oswald did not have black hair.

This is the same Oswald who you have claimed had hair that was so light in colour that it could have been described by witnesses in Mexico as blond.

Oswald owned a light grayish tan jacket., which could easily be mistaken for white.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOdfe-X5ngs

As to Oswald's hair color, different people perceived it differently.

"The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." Officer Baker, describing Oswald.

"He had a light colored hair. It looked like he had blond, kind of blond browny, maybe it had a red tint to it." - Buell Frazier, describing Oswald

Different lighting and different colors being nearby can make the exact same color be perceived differently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checker_shadow_illusion#/media/File:Checker_shadow_illusion.svg

For example witness William Smith.

"William Arthur Smith was about a block east of 10th and Patton when he heard shots. He looked west on 10th and saw a man running to the west and a policeman falling to the ground. Smith failed to make himself known to the police on November 22. Several days later he reported what he had seen and was questioned by FBI agents. Smith subsequently told a Commission staff member that he saw Oswald on television the night of the murder and thought that Oswald was the man he had seen running away from the shooting. On television Oswald's hair looked blond, whereas Smith remembered that the man who ran away had hair that was brown or brownish black. Later, the FBI showed Smith a picture of Oswald. In the picture the hair was brown. According to his testimony, Smith told the FBI, "It looked more like him than it did on television." He stated further that from "What I saw of him" the man looked like the man in the picture."

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I stand corrected then, PI. Could you point me to the occasion (testimony/interview/press conference) where he said that? I'd appreciate it.

I have been trying to find it online.

I believe it was at a press conference.

I saw it years ago.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

I have quote from the WC transcript where she denied telling Lane or anyone else that Tippet's killer had bushy hair.


I have quoted from the WC transcript where she agrees that Tippit's killer had slightly bushy hair.



We have the description given by Officer Walker of Tippet's killer - "He's a white male, about thirty, five eight, black hair, slender, wearing white jacket, a white shirt and dark slacks."

...

That's a very close match for descriptions of a stranger seen for only a few moments.


A description of someone wearing a white shirt and a white jacket is not a match for Oswald at all.



You almost got this one right.

Mr. BELIN. You say he is my size, my weight, and my color hair?
Mr. BENAVIDES. He kind of looks like---well, his hair was a little bit curlier.


And whose hair did Oswald's hair look curlier than?


The transcript also shows that Benavides is not very good at describing the person he saw.


But Markham is, even though she could not recognise her own voice on a tape recording and described someone who looked different from Oswald?



No, she didn't. You ignoring the facts doesn't make them go away.


She did.

It is a fact.

Anyone can see her saying so in a filmed interview on YouTube.

[FrankO]

He did say that.

He said that since the bullet travelled at a speed greater than the speed of sound, Kennedy must have been hit before he actually heard that shot and that he - Connally - had not yet been hit.

I stand corrected then, PI. Could you point me to the occasion (testimony/interview/press conference) where he said that? I'd appreciate it.

[Fiver]

Mark Lane was not lying about what Helen Markham said.

I quoted from the Warren Commission's own transcript.

It was not something made up.

I have quote from the WC transcript where she denied telling Lane or anyone else that Tippet's killer had bushy hair.

As for Roy W. Walker's forwarded description of Tippit's murderer, it agrees with William Smith's description of the killer having dark hair.

Walker's description was a close match of the Dispatcher's description and Baker's description.

"The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." Officer Baker, describing Oswald.

Note how Baker mistakes Oswald's shirt for a jacket. And estimates his age at 30. And his weight at 165 pounds. And says he has dark hair.

We have the description of JFK's killer given by the police dispatcher - "White male, approximately thirty, slender build, height five ten, weighs one sixty-five, is all the information."

We have the description given by Officer Walker of Tippet's killer - "He's a white male, about thirty, five eight, black hair, slender, wearing white jacket, a white shirt and dark slacks."

Both descriptions are second hand, but they are similar to each other and to Baker's description of Oswald.

All three estimate his age as about 30.
Two mention slender build. One does not mention build.
Height estimates vary from 5'8" to 5'10".
Two estimate weight as 165lb. One does not mention weight.
One says dark hair. One says black hair. One does not mention hair color.

That's a very close match for descriptions of a stranger seen for only a few moments.

Benavides said he had curly hair.

You almost got this one right.

Mr. BELIN. You say he is my size, my weight, and my color hair?
Mr. BENAVIDES. He kind of looks like---well, his hair was a little bit curlier.

The transcript also shows that Benavides is not very good at describing the person he saw.

And here's a picture of Belin.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/354669653384

Aquila Clemons said during an interview that his hair was bushy.

No, she didn't. You ignoring the facts doesn't make them go away.

MARTIN: And did you notice his hair as all? Was it thick hair?

CLEMONS: No. I didn’t pay his hair any attention. I was getting out of his way.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I like George's response better, PI. More straight-forward and sticking to the testimony.

I've heard and read how Governor Connally told his story on various occasions, but I've never heard or read that he said he only heard the shot that hit the president AFTER he had actually been hit. What I did hear him say, was that he only heard the first and third shot, not the one that hit him.

He did say that.

He said that since the bullet travelled at a speed greater than the speed of sound, Kennedy must have been hit before he actually heard that shot and that he - Connally - had not yet been hit.

[FrankO]

While your post was directed to PI, I'd like to take the liberty of adding some comments.

That’s fine, George, especially since PI didn’t go into any of my questions.

I would suggest that you should give some consideration to the high possibility that suppressed (silenced) weapons were also being used, and that co-ordinated fire was being employed (yellow paint on kerb, signals from umbrella man and/or his friend with the radio, a spotter with a stop watch).

I have given this consideration, mostly in the sense that I would have thought that conspiracist supporters would offer this as a solution to why no other shots were heard than those from the TSBD and/or grassy knoll. And probably to a large extent it would be a solution, of course.

There were .30 calibre cases found on the rooves of the Records building and the Dal-Tex in the years after the assassination.

Although interesting, it’s a pity that they weren’t found right after that fatal day in 1963, because they would have been losing evidential force with every passing week. I’ve read stories about this and about how some city workers were asked if they ever found anything interesting in the ground when working and digging around Dealey Plaza. Their answer was that they’d found lots of shells and bullets around there and the grassy knoll. It seems that people like to plant things like that in and around the Plaza. Of course, this doesn’t mean the shell(s) on the roof(s) were planted, but it does tell me to be quite cautious when it comes to such evidence surfacing years after the event.

The M1 .30 calibre carbine and the Springfield 30.06 both featured factory produced silenced models. Projectiles could be fired through a different calibre rifle, such as the Carcano 6.5, into wadding and then reloaded and fired through the silenced .30 calibre using a sabot. The projectile would retain the rifling characteristics of the original rifle, and appear to have been fired only through the original rifle. If loaded below 1100fps they would be silent, but reduced in power.

I don’t know if it would be true, but I’ve read that they would then also be reduced in accuracy.

As previously discussed, I believe Humes would have been measuring from Kennedy's back rather than try to estimate the trajectory of the projectile. I think this shot was a loaded down low velocity shot from the Dal-Tex or the Records Building.

Then he was still talking about a bullet that entered his back at an angle of 30 to 45 degrees. A shot from the roof of the TSBD would not even be 30 degrees. The Dal-Tex Building was some 6 meters taller, but my guess would be that a shot from there would be somewhat further away and, so, the angle would have been close to 30 degrees, but not exceeding it by much, if anything at all. The Records Building was about as high as the TSBD, but a little further away from where Kennedy was hit in the back, so the angle would be somewhat less than 30 degrees as well.

A shot from the south end of the overpass would line up with the hole in the windscreen. This could have been a silenced sub-sonic .22 rimfire which would not have been heard by anyone. The shot could have been made from behind an overpass pillar or from the top of the knoll and an escape made through the car park behind the Post Office.

From behind an overpass pillar isn’t likely at all in my view. It certainly couldn’t have been the ones on either side of Elm Street or Main Street, as the vehicles ahead of the presidential limousine would be or were passing there and Tague was standing one pillar further south, the one between Main & Commerce Streets, with John Doland standing some 15 yards east from him. Furthermore, there were many cars in Commerce Street at the time of the shooting, either standing still or moving slowly, as can be seen in the Zapruder film, so I’m very sure there was nobody shooting from behind the pillars on either side of Commerce Street either.

Alternatively, if the two witnesses and the Ford manager who said the hole in the wind screen was an outside to inside bullet hole are to be ignored, this shot could also have been made from the "Black Dog" position, or from the picket fence, as shown in this Willis photograph. As can be seen, Kennedy is about to emerge from behind the sign (in relation to Zapruder), and there is a clear shot available.

The problem I see with this is the president’s tie was nicked at the left side, while the bullet had passed just below the button and button hole of his shirt. I doubt whether a shot from the president’s right front side would nick the tie on its left side (or right side as seen from the picket fence) and then enter the shirt in the middle line just below the button. If there was a shot from the front, the holes in the shirt and nick to the tie rather suggest a shot the president’s left front side, so, from the south knoll rather than the north knoll.

As always, Just My Opinion at this time, and subject to future alteration in the light of new evidence.

Likewise, George.

Cheers,
Frank