JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Aethelwulf]

But the latest scientific analysis of the ZF synchronised with the audio file has raised an additional possibility.

As this is a potential source of error, how was it done? How was the sound file calibrated and matched to physical moving film? What are the processes and could there be errors? We're talking tenths of a second and there must have been other background noises - can they be accurately separated? e.g. noises and distortions associated with the actual (not hypothesized) shots being fired?

Once you start taking two separate files and processing them, errors can creep in. As the time difference is so tiny, I suspect it is just scatter associated with processing. Not to mention how that 0.7s would actually work in a real situation.

[GBinOz]

Was any one closer than Clint Hill -"it was just like an eruption, blood, brain matter, bone fragments".

[GBinOz]

As this is a potential source of error, how was it done? How was the sound file calibrated and matched to physical moving film? What are the processes and could there be errors? We're talking tenths of a second and there must have been other background noises - can they be accurately separated? e.g. noises and distortions associated with the actual (not hypothesized) shots being fired?

Once you start taking two separate files and processing them, errors can creep in. As the time difference is so tiny, I suspect it is just scatter associated with processing. Not to mention how that 0.7s would actually work in a real situation.

The analyses were conducted by respected leaders in their fields with decades of experience. Your implication is that, if provided with the full technical details, you would be able to understand them. Can you enlighten us as to your qualifications and expertise in these areas, or would you once again be relying on your self professed common sense and intelligence?

[Aethelwulf]

The analyses were conducted by respected leaders in their fields with decades of experience. Your implication is that, if provided with the full technical details, you would be able to understand them. Can you enlighten us as to your qualifications and expertise in these areas, or would you once again be relying on your self professed common sense and intelligence?

I have no experience in acoustics. I have a science background and when you carry out any experiment or piece of analysis, you need to spend some time outlining and and if possible quantifying the limitations of the methods being used and discussing how they could affect the results. So that is why I am interested, has this been done? As I said, the time difference is tiny, what are the other possible sources of noise and error. If they are experts in their field they will have done this.

You may not like it George, but all I am doing is thinking critically about what you are presenting without really thinking about - recall the serial numbers and 'different gun'. There are logical explanations or limitations with the source material that don't allow for solid conclusions to be drawn. As I said before, remove the conspiracy filter and actually think critically about what you are suggesting.

Back to your comment, it still stands that two separate files have been edited and matched up. There may be sources of error.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Fishy,

I was reading an interview with Bugliosi on his book (https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/41490)
when I had a feeling of deja vu. Then I realised it contained large slabs that someone had cut and pasted and posted on this thread. Does that help is determining the waffle source of the "why woulds"?

Cheers, George

Very grown up George, it sounds like sounds like a mom and dad falling out with the mom telling one of the kids “ask your dad if he wants a cup of tea,” when Dad is sitting across the table.

You have produced, by cutting and pasting, huge slabs of other people’s opinions which you haven’t been criticised for but as ever any work done by Bugliosi, after 20 years of research, is dismissed by you. A man who feels that it’s legitimate and fair to slate and denigrate a book and to insult its author without having the fair-mindedness to actually read it firsts.

Bugliosi has become the bogey man for conspiracy theorists who, in their effort to show how ‘serious’ they are, sit on the high horses (or more likely unicorns) yelling “fake photos, fake handwriting, fake x-rays, fake fingerprints,” fake everything that they don’t like.

But you’re right to make a point about ‘why would’ though because there’s no point in putting questions to you or Fishy because the lengths that you go to to avoid responding to them is embarrassing to say the least. It’s like debating with a couple of flat-earthier Donald Trumps.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Was any one closer than Clint Hill -"it was just like an eruption, blood, brain matter, bone fragments".

Firstly, yes there were. The 3 pathologists who analysed the wounds close-up (that you have to character assassinate to get past) and who weren’t distracted by gunfire or their duty to defend those in the car.

Hill is indicating the side of his head and not the back. The back where the entrance wound was. The back were there was no gaping wound. Oh yeah, “fake news, fake news!”

[Herlock Sholmes]

The analyses were conducted by respected leaders in their fields with decades of experience. Your implication is that, if provided with the full technical details, you would be able to understand them. Can you enlighten us as to your qualifications and expertise in these areas, or would you once again be relying on your self professed common sense and intelligence?

What are your qualifications in acoustics George? Until the recordings were produced the HSCA were going for a single gunman. Only later were they found to be worthless. It unsurprising the CT’s just can’t let go and still try to scramble around for anything they can use to bolster their case.

[GBinOz]

I have just re-read post #837 - the spectacle of Sir HS commenting on the claims of...well..Sir HS. We are informed that Bugliosi made a phone call to McClelland and the latter finally came clean and admitted he had made a mistake about the location of the exit wound.
Uncut Interview - JFK's Emergency Room Doctor : Dr. Robert McClelland Uncut

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ435lMaCng&ab_channel=CityofAllen-ACTV

The video was recorded in 2015, 4 years before his death. No mention of phone calls and changing his testimony.



Video vs uncorroborated phone call.
Is someone lying...or just mistaken?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I have no experience in acoustics. I have a science background and when you carry out any experiment or piece of analysis, you need to spend some time outlining and and if possible quantifying the limitations of the methods being used and discussing how they could affect the results. So that is why I am interested, has this been done? As I said, the time difference is tiny, what are the other possible sources of noise and error. If they are experts in their field they will have done this.

You may not like it George, but all I am doing is thinking critically about what you are presenting without really thinking about - recall the serial numbers and 'different gun'. There are logical explanations or limitations with the source material that don't allow for solid conclusions to be drawn. As I said before, remove the conspiracy filter and actually think critically about what you are suggesting.

Back to your comment, it still stands that two separate files have been edited and matched up. There may be sources of error.

No such thing as error to a conspiracy theorist Wulf. And they only believe experts when they say what they want to hear.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I have just re-read post #837 - the spectacle of Sir HS commenting on the claims of...well..Sir HS. We are informed that Bugliosi made a phone call to McClelland and the latter finally came clean and admitted he had made a mistake about the location of the exit wound.
Uncut Interview - JFK's Emergency Room Doctor : Dr. Robert McClelland Uncut
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ43...tyofAllen-ACTV

The video was recorded in 2015, 4 years before his death. No mention of phone calls and changing his testimony.



Video vs uncorroborated phone call.
Is someone lying...or just mistaken?

A man who appears to switch his story at will. Would Bugliosi make this up WHILE MCCLELLAND WAS STILL ALIVE? Whatever your opinion of Bugliosi (which is hardly free from bias) he was a top prosecutor. He wasn’t a drooling idiot. Come on George.

McClelland wrote in the Texas State Journal of Medicine in January 1964: “the cause of death was the massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the right side of the head.”


Why did Dr. McClelland write on a Parkland admission note at 4.45 pm on the day of the assassination; after he’d just seen the President, that Kennedy had died:”from a gunshot wound to the left temple.” All that he could say was:” Yes, that was a mistake.”

So he was wrong at the time but right later. Then wrong again when he spoke to Bugliosi, then right again in that interview.

I think we can file him away with your other star witnesses George, like Hoffman and Oliver.

[Aethelwulf]

No such thing as error to a conspiracy theorist Wulf. And they only believe experts when they say what they want to hear.

I know. I realise I said I wouldn't get drawn into this daft argument but it is too entertaining - poking holes in their arguments is like taking sweets from a baby (not that I would do that of course)

[caz]

Herlock,
I applaud your persistence, but we're encountering a barrier of confirmation bias from several posters, which is a psychological thing people may do, usually to support a deeply held conviction.I'm not sure we can knock down the barrier.

I was alive at the time of the JFK assassination, but only a young schoolgirl. My Catholic school sent us to church to pray "for the President", and later sent us all home. My family were Kennedy supporters, so naturally shocked by the event. I have a memory of being in the car with my parents and brother, heading home after church, and hearing news on the radio about Ruby's murder at the police station.
My dad bought books and read about the Warren Commission and so forth, including questions of conspiracy.

Much later, in high school, I saw the Zapruder Film presented in a classroom. That is an extraordinary event to witness, even at a remove in time and distance. I haven't read a lot of literature on the assassination, but have seen many tv documentaries on the subject, and have read a very interesting article on the psychology of conspiracy theorists.

I've been reading this thread, and it is entertaining, if nothing else. I don't think the CT's can agree on anything except that they are "smarter" than the rest of us.

Splendid post, Pat. Thank you for restoring a little much needed balance to this thread.

A conspiracy theory is like any other theory: when proof is provided it ceases to be a theory. We can never hope to prove there wasn't a conspiracy to the satisfaction of people who can always find a way to rubbish whatever evidence appears to point against it. An additional irony is that the lack of proof against the individuals supposedly involved is seen as evidence in its own right that a good job was done of covering their tracks. Without a scrap of self-awareness, the theorist will argue that they were smart enough to recognise all the signs of a conspiracy, which, by definition, was meant to have been cloaked in the utmost secrecy, but only succeeded in deceiving complete idiots, who would have believed anything.

Love,

Caz
X

[FrankO]

I watched a video interview with Hargis and he stated that the debris hit him with such force that he thought he had been shot. I will try to provide a link, but it may take some time to relocate it.

Hi George,

Yes, I’d like to see that video, so I hope you can find it, because I haven’t seen it. What I have read (before writing my earlier post) it this site: Bobby Hargis -- Motorcycle Cop Struck by JFK's Brain Matter (jfk-assassination.net), which is an interesting read. What I find particularly interesting with regards to the subject, is that, on more than one occasion, said he just “ran through” the debris coming from the president’s head and that it had just “come up and down.”, which fits exactly what we can see in the Zapruder film. So, nothing about hitting him with much force or at high speed. He also stated “right then it was kind of hard to say what run through your mind. You know you pick up these little things. You don't know why you do it. You don't know why you do 'em, you just do 'em. It's just kind of instinct.”, which, to me, fits well enough with his remark that he thought he might have been hit. After all, seeing someone’s head explode from a gunshot, certainly if that's at close range and that someone is the president, wasn’t anything he’d experienced until that day or ever after.

Martin received less of the debris field because he was partially screened by Hargis and the latter's motorcycle windscreen. The Harper skull fragment was found in the debris field some 50 feet away, as well as another fragment which was closer. I would submit that a slight wind would not produce this result.

Had an explosive projectile (not a military jacketed projectile) struck from the rear then, under your wind scenario, it could be expected that the debris field would also include the two motorcycle escorts on the right, but this was not the case.

Not necessarily. It would depend on the wind, its direction and force. If, for instance, it blew over in a more or less northern direction, i.e. from the right side of Elm Street to the left, then the motorcycle officers on the right side of the car would not be hit or covered by any debris. And I believe I’ve read somewhere that James Chaney, one of the 2 motorcycle officers to the right of the car, was hit by some debris.

But the latest scientific analysis of the ZF synchronised with the audio file has raised an additional possibility. After the kill shot from the front right there is indicated an additional shot (0.7 seconds later). Hill and Moorman testified that there was a shot after the fatal shot. The ZF shows that after the explosive round that forced Kennedy's head back and to the left, there is a slight front movement of the President's head that could have been created by a non explosive military round that would leave holes rather than fragments. This is explained by Josiah Thompson here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8i-...BC7NewsBayArea

Thanks for the link to the documentary, George. I’d already seen it, but it remains interesting. I have to say that I’m not much impressed by the audio file, simply because the sounds of gunshots are so vague that I can’t really distinguish them from the static. Furthermore, if we assume for a moment that the shot that made the president’s head explode came from behind the fence and that, right after that, he was hit for a second time in the head from the rear, then where was the exit wound for the ‘fence shot’ and where was the exit wound for the ‘rear shot’?

All the best,
Frank

[caz]

Hi Abby,

I'll include my reply to your #792 here. It is refreshing to see a poster with an open mind who checks the ballistics information that I post with others experienced in this field.

I'm guessing that you may have already watched Josiah Thompson's video, JFK Unsolved: The Real Conspiracies | Full Documentary here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8i-R3saBBs&ab_channel=ABC7NewsBayArea

He sets out a theory based on the latest HDZP/Acoustics information and concludes that there was a second head shot which came from the rear. This is consistent with the eye witness testimony of Hill and Moorman, who both said there was a shot after the kill shot from the grassy knoll. If the second head shot was a fully jacketed carcano projectile it would have produced a hole, but not the explosion that is seen in the first head shot. The Harper fragment and another large skull fragment were both found to the left of the vehicle, and Jackie retrieved another fragment from the lid of the trunk. It was the motorcycle escorts on the left that were spattered with bone and brain matter. The motorcycle escorts on the right had none on them.

The has been a mountain of classified documents released, with more to come, and it will take years for researchers to wade through. Already we know that Oswald was trained by the CIA. He did not defect but was sent to Russia on a mission, as were many other operatives. We also now know that evidence points to him being impersonated in Mexico. I think that as time passes, more and more "conspiracy theories" will be vindicated.

Cheers, George

Surely only one conspiracy theory at most could ever be 'vindicated', George, and if this mountain of classified documents once contained indisputable evidence of it, do you suppose the conspirators will have allowed it to survive the shredder? If nothing comes of it, I'm reasonably confident from reading this thread that it will be put down to yet more evidence of conspirators covering their tracks.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

A good example of CT thinking and how are quite happy to factor in gross stupidity to their claims is in regard to the 2 women on the stairs in the TSBD, Sandra Styles and Victoria Adams (Adams got a brief mention at the time but only came forward 40+ years later because, you guessed it - the favourite claim of dodgy witnesses, she was in fear of her life…..despite there being a huge conspiracy industry running for years.) They allegedly came down the same stairs that Oswald would have used after the shots were fired. They neither saw Oswald or heard anyone on the stairs. Notwithstanding the very obvious point of a potential difference of a few seconds in timing between them and Oswald it also neglects to explain how a mystery gunman could have escaped? How much more important would it have been for him to get out of there asap? Unlike Oswald he had no legitimate business for being in a building which, for all that he’d known, might have been swarming with police officers at any time.


This also raises an obvious point. Why would plotters have placed a man in such a position? On the 6th floor of a building where it would have been almost impossible to have escaped unseen.

Lucky for him and his fellow plotters, he didn't trip over the innocent Oswald's curtain rods while still carrying the rifle, and break his neck.

Whatever would they have done next to cover it all up?

Love,

Caz
X