JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Herlock Sholmes]

You will not be producing any examples from the history of warfare or violent crime of anyone ever having been propelled backwards by a shot from behind?

And will you not be answering my challenge, first made in # 999, and repeated in # 1003?

You’re another Fishy. You keep asking questions then ignore the answer when you can’t respond and just follow with another.

[Herlock Sholmes]

No.

I'm not suggesting that at all.

The point I am making is not MY insight.

It has been made by many others and it is that there is no historical record in the history of warfare or violent crime of anyone ever having been propelled backwards by a shot from behind.

As Professor Michael Kurtz pointed out, according to the Warren Commission's understanding of the laws of physics, when Martin Luther King Jnr was shot from in front, he should have been thrown off, or nearly off, the balcony.

He was not; he was thrown violently backwards.

My point is still unanswered and unrefuted.

Is your scientific knowledge greater than the author of the report enabling you to refute it? Is it better than Dr. Guinn and Dr. Petty? If it is you could provide evidence of that if you don’t mind.

Thanks, I’ll read your qualifications tomorrow. Then, I’ll pull apart your nonsense about Brewer and co.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

You’re another Fishy. You keep asking questions then ignore the answer when you can’t respond and just follow with another.

On the contrary.

You are the one who can't respond.

I asked you to produce historical evidence from the history of warfare or violent crime of anyone ever having been propelled backwards by a shot from behind.

You suggested I argue with the scientists who, you claim, have proved that it is possible.

I don't mind who answers the question - whether you or the scientists - but neither you nor any scientist can produce such evidence - because it does not exist.

That is why it was never cited in the Warren Commission Report.

And you have no answer to that.

[FISHY1118]

You’re another Fishy. You keep asking questions then ignore the answer when you can’t respond and just follow with another.

Theres really nothing to add Herlock, youve basically called everyone who was there and saw with their own eyes what happen to kennedys head a big fat liar .

When you admit to yourself that photo is a fake, i might answer some other questions you have . But i dont really give a toss of your opinion or wulfs for that matter , as this entire thread has shown countless proven contradictions of the WC garbage you and he both swallowed .

[cobalt]

I would imagine being struck by a bullet in the head is similar to being struck by a powerful boxer: the head movement will always be backwards. Some boxers buckle at the knees and fall face down when knocked out but I have never seen one whose head moves towards the source of the impact.

Regarding the cinema it seems that although around 24 tickets were sold that day only 8 customers were in the main area at the time of Oswald's arrest. And we know the names of three: John Gibson, Jack Davis and George Applin. Applin claimed in the late 1970s that Jack Ruby was there at the time but I don't think there is much to back this up. Ruby was at Parkland around 1.30 according to Seth Kantor, 20 minutes before the arrest. And as a well known figure locally surely some other person or police officer would have noticed Ruby.

[cobalt]

https://youtu.be/YiR5TEYn0AA

Donald Wayne House is presumably not connected to the assassination in any way but he was arrested in Fort Worth after a tip -off at 1.35pm, 15 minutes before the arrest of Oswald. Donald House had been in Dallas earlier and watched the motorcade, although he lived about 100 miles away. What seems striking is the facial resemblance between House and Oswald although clearly House is a fair bit shorter at 5’4. Judge for yourself. House was about the same age as Oswald and had spent three years in the military.

Oswald of course had connections to Fort Worth as a boy and I think is buried there. The tip -off allegedly came from a petrol station attendant who didn’t care for House’s attitude when he informed her about death of JFK. Others claim he had firearms visible in the car.

[Aethelwulf]

Yeah, game over Wulf.

Certainly is. Reaction to the Helyion article has been quite telling. Cobalt's reply in particular was full of insight 'once a boxer is hit they always go backwards'. It is possible to submit a 'comment' to a scientific journal if you disagree with the findings of an article. Perhaps Cobalt, Fishy, GB and IP2 should submit their combined theories as a reply and see how far it gets.

Physics allows for the movement of JFK and being shot from behind. A man who owned the the same rifle (not withstanding GB's rather embarrassing post about the serial numbers) was seen in the building at the right time; he had skills of sharpshooter and marksman; he had already tried to assassinate someone else. On the other hand - evidence for GB's three marksmen of the apocalypse: zero. Evidence for any other shooter: zero.

After a week of exposing the subjective nonsense on here, it's over an out from me on this topic. I'll leave IP2, GB, Fishy and Cobalt to cry fake and stamp on their Rusks.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Theres really nothing to add Herlock, youve basically called everyone who was there and saw with their own eyes what happen to kennedys head a big fat liar .

When you admit to yourself that photo is a fake, i might answer some other questions you have . But i dont really give a toss of your opinion or wulfs for that matter , as this entire thread has shown countless proven contradictions of the WC garbage you and he both swallowed .

Well this is staggeringly hypocritical even from you Fishy. You’ve accused 17 pathologists (including conspiracy theorist Cyril Wecht) of being liars. You accuse the Police who took the fingerprints of being liars. The police who took fibres from the rifle that match Oswald’s shirt of being liars. The people who took the autopsy photographs of being liars. The people who took the autopsy photographs of being liars. Witnesses like Howard Brennan, Bonnie Ray Williams, Harold Norman and Junior Jarman of being liars. Marina Oswald, Ruth Paine, Michael Paine, Buell Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle of being liars. The entire Warren Commission of being liars. Whoever supposedly faked the Zapruder film of being liars. The FBI or the CIA of lying about the Neely Street photos (and by definitions Marina Oswald and Michael Paine) and many more.

Your list of liars massively outdoes mine I’m afraid and here’s the big difference. The majority of the people on my list only stand accused by myself and others of simply being mistaken; especially when considering the circumstances (and we all know that witnesses can indeed be mistaken.) You and other conspiracists, in the absence of favourable evidence, are forced into repeated yells of ‘fake’ and ‘forgery.’ Every single piece of adverse evidence is dismissed in this way. It’s just too weak to justify responses.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Certainly is. Reaction to the Helyion article has been quite telling. Cobalt's reply in particular was full of insight 'once a boxer is hit they always go backwards'. It is possible to submit a 'comment' to a scientific journal if you disagree with the findings of an article. Perhaps Cobalt, Fishy, GB and IP2 should submit their combined theories as a reply and see how far it gets.

Physics allows for the movement of JFK and being shot from behind. A man who owned the the same rifle (not withstanding GB's rather embarrassing post about the serial numbers) was seen in the building at the right time; he had skills of sharpshooter and marksman; he had already tried to assassinate someone else. On the other hand - evidence for GB's three marksmen of the apocalypse: zero. Evidence for any other shooter: zero.

After a week of exposing the subjective nonsense on here, it's over an out from me on this topic. I'll leave IP2, GB, Fishy and Cobalt to cry fake and stamp on their Rusks.

This is why evidence often results in the Trump-like yells of ‘fake’ and ‘forgery,’ Wulf. It’s just smoke and mirrors. And as you’ve seen on this thread….I get bombarded with question after question after question which I’ve answered (but I get hysterical complaints if I miss one) and yet these posters either point blank refuse to respond to questions by ignoring them or they just reply with “it’s a forgery,” or “it was in the Warren Report so it must be a lie,” or “Vincent Bugliosi said it which means it must be a lie.” Not to mention of course the fact they hypocritically give themselves a free pass on insults, mockery, sarcasm and snide digs whilst bursting into tears at my alleged ‘vitriol.’ You really couldn’t make it up Wulf.

[Herlock Sholmes]

[QUOTE=PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1;

You will not be producing any examples from the history of warfare or violent crime of anyone ever having been propelled backwards by a shot from behind?

.[/QUOTE]

Strangely enough battlefield rarely have a bloke there with a video camera so I’m afraid I can’t produce footage of a soldier being shot on The Somme.

If you know of such a battlefield Steven Spielberg perhaps you can find the footage? And not from a movie by the way.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Ok……one point dealt with.

No scientific experts ever provided historical evidence that a shot from the back can cause a victim to be propelled backwards. (PI1)


.

Drs Guinn and Petty plus a 32 page scientific report listing experiments and with more equations that you can shake a stick at - I await your analysis and rebuttal.

[Herlock Sholmes]

A proper and fair assessment of Brennan.

Howard Brennan was a completely unbelievable witness, who could not even identify Oswald

.

Howard Brennan, a man with no reason to lie, was just 120 feet away from the TSBD sitting on a wall. He looked up and saw a man in the 6th floor window with a rifle. He’d seen this man a little earlier but without the rifle, so he was already aware that someone was there. He got a good view of him and it wasn’t for a split second. He actually saw him take aim and fire the final shot. He described the man as - a slender, white male about thirty years old, five feet ten inches. He also saw the men in the 5th floor window which showed that he was indeed looking at the building.

Within an hour of the shooting though he signed an affidavit at the Sheriff’s office saying that he believed that he could identify the man. At a police line up on the evening of the assassination he told the police: “He looks like him, but I cannot positively say,” telling the police that the reason for his caution was that he’d since seen Oswald on tv and that he was concerned that it might have influenced his ID. On December 18th he also told the FBI that he was sure that Oswald was the man that he’d seen in the window.

In front of the Warren Commission he said:” with all fairness, I could have positively identified the man,” but didn’t do so because:” If it got to be a known fact that I was an eyewitness, my family or I….might not be safe.” It’s sounds to me like Brennan was perhaps a little ashamed that he might have been perceived as a coward about not making a positive ID at the parade.

Conspiracy theorists have tried much to denigrate this man, like questioning his eyesight (which was nonsense, his eyes were fine at the time of the assassination) He was a normal guy just like Mr Newman on the Grassy Knoll. I think that Newman was simply mistaken on the location of the head wound under extreme circumstances and he, being an honest man, accepted the possibility of that, but CT’s pretty much resort to calling Brennan a liar without a shred of evidence. He gave a good description straight after the assassination which matched Oswald - he couldn’t have been influenced by any plotters because he wouldn’t positively ID him, so that particular fantasy can be eliminated. And even if he hadn’t seen Oswald it proves that there was a shooter in the 6th floor window and we have not a shred of evidence of anyone being in that building, let alone on that floor, at the time of the assassination.

[FrankO]

The article that you linked is interesting. I focus on the statements made the day after the assassination rather than those made before the WC or on August 7, as these would necessarily have been influenced by the reports of what happened. I find the relevant statement to be " he got hit in the side of his head, spinning it around. I was splattered with blood." "Then I felt something hit me. It could have been concrete or something, but I thought at first I might have been hit."
The side of the head, not the top. This is corroborated by Clint Hill as shown in the photo above. Then he says he was solidly hit (concrete), and then "hit", presumably meaning he thought with a bullet. This is how I read his statement but I accept that you may interpret in a different manner.

Hi George,

As to Hargis, I interpret that his first and instinctive reaction to what he heard, saw & felt was that he thought he might have been hit by a bullet or fragment of it, but that he only thought that for a moment and then, seeing that he was spattered with blood and such, realized it had been debris from president’s head shot, which had come up from the president’s head and then down over him.

Even if they didn’t say the top of the head, they both had it right enough, as far as I’m concerned. In his interview with Jim Garrison’s staffers in 1968 Hargis stated that he couldn’t actually see what part of the head got hit, but he was able to see that it wasn’t the rear part but a part on “the other side”. To me, the Zapruder film shows clear enough that the right side exploded, a part from the ear forward. It also clearly shows the back of the president’s head, behind the right ear, which remained intact.

Is it known with any certainty the direction and force of the wind that day? The enclosed nature of the plaza would have some effect I should think.

I’ve found a witness who mentioned that there was a north wind blowing: James Altgens. He stated in his deposition for the W.C.: “Mrs. Kennedy was looking at me at the time, just as I got ready to snap it the north wind got her hat and nearly blew it off, so she raised her left hand to hat and I did not get her looking into the camera, but I got the Governor and Mrs. Connally and the President with the President waving into the camera.”

At the time he was standing on the west side of Houston Street and the wind he was speaking of would have blown along Houston Street, from the TSBD in his direction. I’ve read here that the force was between 15 and 20 mph: Investigation of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: Acoustics ... - United States. Congress. House. Select Committee on Assassinations - Google Boeken.
It reads: “The weather bureau recorded winds in Dallas on November 22, 1963, as ranging only between 13 and 17 knots, which is roughly equal to 15 to 20 miles per hour.”

I don't profess to understand the acoustics, but I have no qualifications or experience in acoustics so I do not presume to dispute the experts on this topic. I do have some knowledge and experience in the editing of 8mm and Super 8 film, but not at an expert level. I have read that experts in that field have examined the ZF and judged that there have been alterations made to frame 313 and after.

Okay, so what was changed from frame 313 and after according to these experts? And what evidence did they produce to back up that conclusion?

As for the shots, the fatal shot entered the right temple and exited the right occipital as shown in the McClelland diagram.

I have to say that I don’t believe the McClelland diagram for 2 reasons. Number one is that he wrote on the diagram that he didn’t see 2 of the wounds and, more importantly, number two is that his view doesn’t correspond to the Zapruder film or Hargis’s statement made to Jim Garrison’s staff members, or Clint Hill – people we know for a fact to have seen the president’s head explode and Hill also got occasion to see the president’s head while he was shielding the president and his wife with his body right after the fatal shot.

The autopsy indicated a shot entering high on the rear of the skull and exiting high on the front of the skull. The fatal shot was explosive in nature, and on that basis alone was certainly not a military fully jacketed projectile, but a hollow point. The second head shot would have been a military fully jacketed round so the exit would be far smaller. I have seen the exit wounds created by both of these types of projectiles, so I am speaking from experience. The use of dum-dum projectiles in WW1 was a firing squad offence on both sides of the trenches. Sub-sonic hollow points were a favourite with assassins, and sounded different in retort to a standard military round, as was noted by several witnesses.

OK, you say the second head shot from the rear would have produced a far smaller exit wound, but you didn’t say where it’s supposed to have been and I’m quite sure the bullet must have exited some place and left a trace separate from the other shot. So, where was this exit wound, according to you?

All the best,
Frank

[Herlock Sholmes]

You’ve achieved something here. You did well to get so much wrong. I took your advice and re-read the testimonies of Brewer, Postal and Burroughs.

Butch Burroughs, the theater manager, said that Oswald entered the theater several minutes before Tippit was shot, and that Oswald bought popcorn from him at about the time that Tippit was shot.

Jack Davis confirmed that Oswald was in the theater at about that time and that he repeatedly changed his seat, each time sitting next to a different person.

No witness has ever been produced who saw Oswald enter the viewing area at a time after the alleged Oswald is alleged to have run into the cinema.


I suggest you read his statement.

.

Firstly, I didn’t say that the man ran into the theatre. Just because something incorrect is ‘oft-repeated’ doesn’t merit you mentioning it here as a distraction.

Let’s start with Brewer. (Directly from his testimony btw)

Johnny Brewer was manager of Harry’s Shoe Store (in case anyone isn’t familiar with him). On the afternoon of the 22nd, after he’d heard of the shooting of first Kennedy and then a police officer in the same neighbourhood as his store, he saw a man enter the lobby area of his store who with his back to the street. At that time, police cars were passing with sirens on heading in the direction of the Tippit shooting. As they passed, the man who Brewer calls Oswald in his statement, looked over his shoulder and then walked west toward the theatre. Brewer of course said that he didn’t know that this man was called Oswald at the time. He described him as: about 5 ft 9, about 150lbs. Brown hair, with a brown shirt on with the tail hanging out. No jacket and with a t-shirt (which Oswald had discarded in a car lot) but he couldn’t recall the colour of his trousers. Light complexion.

Brewer followed him, he thought that he’d been in his store before, but he looked like he’d been running and his hair was messed up but Brewer felt that he was behaving suspiciously (deliberately standing with his back to the passing police, messed up appearance etc) He saw Oswald walk into the Theatre. He asked Mrs Postal if she’d sold him a ticket and she said no, she was listening to events on the radio at the time. He asked Butch Burroughs if he’d seen the man enter but he hadn’t. He asked Burroughs to show him the exits on the suggestion of Postal because he thought the guy looked suspicious.

Brewer identified the man as Oswald. He clearly had no reason to lie and at the London Trial came across as an eminently sensible, intelligent man.

Now Julia Postal who was the woman in the ticket office.

Postal said that as sirens were still heard a around the time that police cars were passing her boss got into his car to see where they were going just as Oswald entered…she thought that they had passed each other but this can’t be confirmed so the probably just missed each other.. She then said:” This man, yes; he ducked into the box office and…I don’t know if you are familiar with the box office?”

Then: “Yes, and when the sirens went by he had a panicked look on his face and he ducked in.” She went to the front entrance because of the commotion and that’s when she saw Johnny Brewer. She suggested that Brewer and Butch get the exits which ties in exactly with Brewer asking Burroughs the location of the exits. She then called the police and gave a description.

When asked, she described the positioning of the concession stall where Burroughs worked and that the way Oswald entered (at the other end by the stairs) ask it explained why he hadn’t seen Oswald enter. Kids often sneaked in that way. Apparently they kidded Butch at the time about missing Oswald and he at first said that he’d seen him going in but then admitted that he’d only seen him as he went out. She described Burroughs as an excitable type.

Burroughs was just the usher who worked the confectionary counter, not the manager as you stated. The manager was John A. Callahan. And your statement about him saying that Oswald was in the theatre before the Tippit murder is nonsense. Take your own advice and read his testimony.

Butch Burroughs, usher not manager.

When Burroughs testified he admitted that he had jobs to do like counting stock candy and putting it in a case. He agreed that if Oswald had gone in up the stairs he wouldn’t have seen him. He also confirmed what Brewer and Postal said about them checking the exits.

So…..reality…

These were the three witnesses directly involved. All tie in with each other perfectly. Stop making things up and stick to the evidence.


Jack Davis

Jack Davis is another conspiracist fantasist who didn’t come forward until he was dug up by conspiracy theorist Jim Marrs in 1988. One of the ‘2 Oswald’s’ brigade. A problem in part caused by Dallas Police who failed a list of those in the theatre at the time. We can’t even be sure that he was there. We can only confirm that Callahan, Brewer, Postal and Burroughs were actually there and should take with a massive pinch of salt the words of people who crawl out of the woodwork 20+ years later.


A point to note for everyone……why is it that every single ‘witness’ who comes forward years later is without fail one that conspiracy theorists rely on?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Question for CT’s…..


If the Zapruder film was tampered with why did they leave in the evidence of the forward movement of the president’s head?