JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Herlock Sholmes]

That may well be the case in other instances , but in this case there is certainty and corroborative witnesses that make it doubtful his was in error.

There’s nothing like ‘certainty’ Fishy. Ask any police officer who makes the best witnesses and I’ll guarantee you that not one will say “someone that’s just been shot.” Even today, using all of the tech available people still argue over the points in time where they were both hit. What we do know is that there was a minute fraction of a second between the visible reaction of the two men. So, if they were struck by different bullets the shots would have been so close together to have been difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish separately. Especially under those circumstances which was describes as ‘an echo chamber.’ I would be surprised (maybe) if any CT book even pushed the point that you are making too strongly. No court would have accepted Connally as being reliable on this particular aspect of the case.

We know that there were 3 shots fired because of the fact that there were 3 cartridges on the 6th floor. In any court of law this would have been considered conclusive proof. The 100% genuine autopsy (because there is no such thing as a fake autopsy [apart from the Roswell alien one] and because such a thing would be impossible to arrange under the circumstances) tells us that the shots came from behind. The fingerprints tell us that Oswald fired the gun and the conclusive evidence of Frazer categorically proves that Oswald too his own rifle to work and common sense tells us that he wasn’t intending to shoot mice. Then the totally genuine Warren Commission gave its verdict. Oswald alone. All else isn’t worth talking about.

[Herlock Sholmes]

How is it that every single witness and person of interest at the time of the assassination, that ever pointed out the contradictions and inconsistencies and anomalies of the W.C, was either dead wrong , completely mistaken , totally stupid , or just plain never existed !!!!.

Because we know what happened; therefore any alleged ‘evidence’ to the contrary must be by necessity be wrong.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There is no MAGIC bullet.

There were 3 shots.

One missed.

One hit Kennedy and Connally.

One hit Kennedy’s in the head.

End of subject. No further discussion required.

[cobalt]

We know that there were 3 shots fired because of the fact that there were 3 cartridges on the 6th floor. In any court of law this would have been considered conclusive proof.

In a kangaroo court of law perhaps. If the gunman had picked up all the cartridge cases and left with them that would not mean no shots were fired. And if the gunman had dropped six cartridge cases that would not mean six shots had been fired either; he could have been carrying some from a practice shot the day earlier. That's not many people's idea of the word 'conclusive.'

The fingerprints tell us that Oswald fired the gun

I think it was a palmprint on the rifle which was matched with Oswald. The chain of evidence relating to this has been discussed before, but if we accept the palmprint it does not tell us that Oswald fired the gun on that day. It tells us that Oswald had handled the gun which is not the same thing.

[QUOTE]and the conclusive evidence of Frazer categorically proves that Oswald took his own rifle to work [QUOTE]

Again the word 'conclusive' is being misused. Neither Buell Frazier nor his sister believed that Oswald was carrying a rifle to his work that day. Since they were the only two witnesses who remembered seeing Oswald carrying a package there is therefore no witness who claims that Oswald was carrying a package containing a rifle. That notion comes from pure speculation on the part of the authorities who had to totally accept the Fraziers' evidence whilst, paradoxically, discounting it.

[FISHY1118]

Because we know what happened; therefore any alleged ‘evidence’ to the contrary must be by necessity be wrong.

The evidence suggests otherwise . , Only a fool would believe all those who were there on the day could all be wrong with what they seen and heard .

[FISHY1118]

There is no MAGIC bullet.

There were 3 shots.

One missed.

One hit Kennedy and Connally.

One hit Kennedy’s in the head.

End of subject. No further discussion required.

Which shot caused James Tague wound ?

Mr and Mrs Connally are liars according to you .? Can I QUOTE you on that Herlock?

.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The evidence suggests otherwise . , Only a fool would believe all those who were there on the day could all be wrong with what they seen and heard .

So i’m a fool. Duly noted Fishy.

So what about those that didn’t agree?

What about when Connally said 3 shots….surely he couldn’t have been wrong…he was there after all.
What about when Connally said that all of the shots came from behind….surely he couldn’t have been wrong…he was there after all.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Which shot caused James Tague wound ?

Mr and Mrs Connally are liars according to you .? Can I QUOTE you on that Herlock?

.

Why are you obsessed with Tague? He was hit by a bit of debris. Unimportant.

As for the Mr and Mrs Connally question….are you familiar with the difference between being accused of lying and of being mistaken Fishy?

[Herlock Sholmes]

[QUOTE=cobalt;n849301]

In a kangaroo court of law perhaps. If the gunman had picked up all the cartridge cases and left with them that would not mean no shots were fired. And if the gunman had dropped six cartridge cases that would not mean six shots had been fired either; he could have been carrying some from a practice shot the day earlier. That's not many people's idea of the word 'conclusive.'



I think it was a palmprint on the rifle which was matched with Oswald. The chain of evidence relating to this has been discussed before, but if we accept the palmprint it does not tell us that Oswald fired the gun on that day. It tells us that Oswald had handled the gun which is not the same thing.

[QUOTE]and the conclusive evidence of Frazer categorically proves that Oswald took his own rifle to work

Again the word 'conclusive' is being misused. Neither Buell Frazier nor his sister believed that Oswald was carrying a rifle to his work that day. Since they were the only two witnesses who remembered seeing Oswald carrying a package there is therefore no witness who claims that Oswald was carrying a package containing a rifle. That notion comes from pure speculation on the part of the authorities who had to totally accept the Fraziers' evidence whilst, paradoxically, discounting it.

Semantics.

He was carrying a long package. It can have been nothing except a rifle because Oswald never denied carrying it. In fact he invented the curtain rods story.

So Oswald was provably sneaking a rifle into work.

Everything falls. Oswald is guilty. 100%. Not even the minutest shadow of a doubt.

[FISHY1118]

Why are you obsessed with Tague? He was hit by a bit of debris. Unimportant.

As for the Mr and Mrs Connally question….are you familiar with the difference between being accused of lying and of being mistaken Fishy?

Yer which bullet herlock ,cmon spit it out.

Ahh so its mistaken now is it ,? As they all were hey,

Everyone's mistaken case closed .

The evidence and eyewitness testimony suggest otherwise.

[FISHY1118]

So i’m a fool. Duly noted Fishy.

So what about those that didn’t agree?

What about when Connally said 3 shots….surely he couldn’t have been wrong…he was there after all.
What about when Connally said that all of the shots came from behind….surely he couldn’t have been wrong…he was there after all.

Covered that already herlock ,if you were paying attention you would not needed to ask .

[FISHY1118]

Why are you obsessed with Tague? He was hit by a bit of debris. Unimportant.

As for the Mr and Mrs Connally question….are you familiar with the difference between being accused of lying and of being mistaken Fishy?

Simply because Tague and Connally contradict the phony Warren commission report. That's just a fact 100 %

[Fiver]

That doesn't exclude the fact Tague believed it was the second shot.

Like Connally , your relying on them being completely wrong with no real evidence to prove otherwise.

That's a rather ironic statement for you to make.

* Connally thought the first bullet hit JFK. I disagree. You think he's right.
* Connally thought there were three shots. I agree. You think he's wrong.
* Connally thought all shots came from the Book Depository. I agree. You think he's wrong.
* Connally thought Oswald fired all three shots. I agree. You think he's wrong.
* Connally thought there was no Conspiracy. I agree. You think he's wrong.

* Tague thought he was struck by the second bullet. I disagree. You think he's right.
* Tague thought there were three shots. I agree. You think he's wrong.
* Tague thought all shots came from the Book Depository. I agree. You think he's wrong.

I disagree with the witnesses on 2 points. You disagree with the witnesses on 6 points.

I think we've established who is relying on the witnesses being completely wrong.

[cobalt]

Semantics.

Pretty much what Lee J. Cobb said in Twelve Angry Men.

What you are presenting as 'conclusive evidence' is no more than indicative evidence. If you can't distinguish between these two concepts then you bound to become very frustrated with those can.

[Fiver]

My previous posts gave reasons to the three shots from the tsbd, and why the 4th shot most people thought was simultaneously fired at the same as the 3rd .

There were dozens of witnesses that made this claim.

That is incorrect.

2% of the witnesses heard 1 shot.
12% of the witnesses heard 2 shots.
80% of the witnesses heard 3 shots.
5% of the witnesses heard 4 or more shots.

A more detailed tabulation on number of shots shows that out of 178 witnesses:
* 6 thought there were 4 shots.
* 1 thought there were 4 or 5 shots.
* 1 thought there were 5 shots.
* 1 thought there were 6 shots.
* 1 thought there were 8 shots.

That's not even a dozen, let alone dozens that thought they heard 4 or more shots.