JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thanks for that scott, Indeed ,and just like Connally they were victims ,they were there , they lived through the whole thing , yet some posters think 62 years later they know better . Staggering.

What about the people that were there who don’t agree with your opinion and who don’t support conspiracy? I can’t see the point of you taking that kind of moral high ground as if you are being sensitive to the feelings of those around at the time. You are simply cherrypicking the ones that you feel support your point and then finding excuses to dismiss or ignore the inconvenient.

Ill ask again…and I’m guessing that this will be a perfect illustration of a conspiracy theorist avoiding and question - you consider Connally trustworthy on the issue of whether he was or wasn’t struck by the same bullet as Kennedy. Therefore do you allow him equal trustworthiness when he stated as a fact that there were only 3 shots and that they all came from behind?

[Herlock Sholmes]

In a 4 part CBS series from June 1967 called The Warren Report Connally said this:

"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both."

In the same programme he also said:

All I can say, with any finality, if the Single-Bullet Theory IS correct, then it had to be the second bullet that hit President Kennedy and me."


Hardly conclusive here is he Fishy?

[Herlock Sholmes]

So why didn't the headshot just go thru and thru, like the SBT, and come out pristine - these were two bullets, from the same lot, from the same rifle...

ACTING as if they were not....

So show me the /any evidence the fragments of JFKs head shot bullet were fired from the rifle that was found in the tsbd . ?



?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?

That the bullet was pristine is a myth. The evidence of the bullets has been provided so I really can’t see why you are asking for it.

A grassy knoll gunman who fled quicker than Usain Bolt and left zero trace of his existence still, apparently, had time to look around, find, and pick up the casing. Do you think that makes ‘sense’?

[Herlock Sholmes]

From the DVP website. On the alleged ‘pristine’ bullet Professor McAdams said:

"When a bullet just like Commission Exhibit 399 is fired through a human wrist bone at 2,000 [feet] per second, it is almost certain to be badly mangled. But when CE 399 hit Connally's wrist it had been slowed by transiting Kennedy's torso and tumbling through Connally's chest. When it finally hit the hard radius bone, it was traveling about 1,000 feet per second. Dr. Martin Fackler, President of the International Wound Ballistics Association, fired a round identical to Oswald's bullet through a human wrist at 1,100 feet per second.”

The test bullet was less damaged than 399.

Then in a 2004 documentary the same type of bullet was fired through several feet of log before being prised out. The bullet looked as if it had t been fired. A man called Dr. John Lattimer also fired the same type of bullet through wood with similar results.

Before anyone says but what about the head shot bullet disintegrating? Dr. Alfred Olivier (the Army’s wound ballistics expert) did a skull test for the WC then Dr. Lattimer did independent skull tests in the 1970’s. The results were ‘strikingly similar’ to the bullet fragments found at the scene.

[Doctored Whatsit]

In a 4 part CBS series from June 1967 called The Warren Report Connally said this:

"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both."

In the same programme he also said:

All I can say, with any finality, if the Single-Bullet Theory IS correct, then it had to be the second bullet that hit President Kennedy and me."


Hardly conclusive here is he Fishy?

To be fair to Connally, he always said that there were definitely just three shots fired, all from the direction of the TSBD, and that it was the second shot that hit him. At the moment the first shot was fired, he had his back to JFK, so logically he assumed that it was the first shot that must have hit the President, because he couldn't have seen it happen. It must have seemed to have been the most likely consequence. However, if the first shot missed, then if he is correct that it was the second shot hit him, then the second shot hit both of them. They were aligned in a direction that such would have been inevitable.

So if Connally was wrong, it was merely his assumption that was wrong, and not his knowledge.

[Herlock Sholmes]

To be fair to Connally, he always said that there were definitely just three shots fired, all from the direction of the TSBD, and that it was the second shot that hit him. At the moment the first shot was fired, he had his back to JFK, so logically he assumed that it was the first shot that must have hit the President, because he couldn't have seen it happen. It must have seemed to have been the most likely consequence. However, if the first shot missed, then if he is correct that it was the second shot hit him, then the second shot hit both of them. They were aligned in a direction that such would have been inevitable.

So if Connally was wrong, it was merely his assumption that was wrong, and not his knowledge.

Exactly Doc. He was assuming that the missed shot struck Kennedy.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What kind of conspiracy would be reliant on ensuring that they can collect every bullet fragment? What if a bystander had picked up half a bullet and only revealed it at a later date proving that there must have been a fourth shot? It makes no sense. No group of conspirators would have left themselves so open to disaster. Then they have to fake an entire autopsy including x-rays? Then they have to rely on no witnesses capturing a GK on camera or film. These are the questions that conspiracy supporters never want to confront for very obvious reasons. No conspirators would have undertaken the kind of conspiracy that is being suggested.

Note too that when the concept of ‘crossfire’ being the best or even an accepted method of assassination was questioned, not one example of a crossfire assassination could be given. A conspiracy wanting an efficient kill, the least chance of being discovered, and the fewest people involved in an ‘on the inside’ position would have used a single highly skilled gunman, one shot, from a position where there was no chance of being disturbed, method of escape provided.