There is no evidence that the bullet came anywhere but from the Book Depository. Every shred of evidence has been examined in excruciating detail. Lee Harvey Oswald shooting JFK from the Book Depository is the only theory that is consistent with the evidence. If anything else happened, there is no evidence to support it.
There’s evidence for Oswald’s guilt? Like what?
Let’s look at the witness testimony. There’s an eyewitness to a gun barrel sticking out the TSBD window, but no identification of Oswald. The police rushing up the TSBD after the shooting saw Oswald calmly sat on the second floor having his lunch, having allegedly just murdered someone, wiped his prints, gathered the shell casings together, stashed the gun and sprinted down from the sixth floor.
On the physical evidence front, a nitrate test showed no evidence for him having fired a gun. His hand print was only found on the gun after he was dead, and his prints weren’t found on the trigger or the handle or in a position which may support the barrel. The evidence linking him to the gun comes through the false identity which was linked to him by his CIA landlady, Ruth Paine. Even that only links him to the Mannlichter-Carcano, whereas witnesses who saw the gun brought from the building said they were told it was a Mauser, a policeman who was there when it was found on the sixth floor of the TSBD said it was a Mauser and the news at the time said it was “confirmed” by the police to be a Mauser.
And the Tippett killing, also, can’t be conclusively linked to Oswald as the four eye witnesses provide contradictory descriptions, none of which bare an obvious similarity to Oswald, who none of them could positively identify. A bulletin went out over the police radio with Oswald’s description, but no reason has ever been presented as to why they were seeking him or how they came to think he was their suspect.
We don’t even know why the police were after
Evidence for a shooter on the Grassy Knoll is easy enough, there were eye witnesses to shooting there and the crowd rushed off towards it because that’s where the shooting seemed to come from. Evidence for other potential suspects in the TSBD, like Malcolm Wallace’s fingerprint found in the putative sniper’s nest, can also be found.
So here’s what we have: a trained shooter who is known to have tried to assassinate another anti-Communist figure shortly before JFK was killed and works in the building the shots came from, he orders a gun before the shooting that matches the one the shots were fired from, he’s noted bringing a gun-approximate package to work the day of the shooting, he flees the building right after the shooting, he kills a police officer shortly after the shooting, he gets caught trying to flee the police, and his handprints are found on the gun … and he couldn’t possibly have done it.
Clarification request: were they eyewitnesses who claimed to have seen a shooter, or earwitnesses who claimed to have heard a shooter. That the geography of the plaza might produce weird echos doesn’t surprise me. What would, though, is someone pointing and firing a rifle and not being seen by the dozens of people on or near the knoll. Heck, the bullet would have streaked past Zapruder himself.
Anyway, is this an argument that the shooter was on the knoll, or that a second shooter (in addition to one in the depository) was on the knoll? Those represent quite different scenarios, though the evidence for either is lacking.
I suppose a Marine counts as a trained shooter, but there’s no conclusive evidence that he tried to kill Walker, or Tippett.
Yes, he brought a long parcel to work with him and worked in the building where a gun was found.
Then his hasty, pell-mell flight during which he was caught by the police took the form of him sitting in a cinema watching a film.
There was at least one eyewitness, the one I was thinking of was the deaf man stood on the bridge almost behind the fence the gunmen were allegedly behind. He didn’t hear anything, but claimed to have seen men with rifles at least one of whom fired.
ETA: Obviously, the majority of the crowd was looking at the president, in the opposite direction from the grassy knoll from the POV of the bulk of the crowd, but Ed Hoffman was able to see both.
It’s an argument only that there was at least one shot from the direction of the knoll, there could well have been a shooter in the TSBD, who could have been Oswald or could have been someone else.
Since that includes marksmanship training, it certainly does.
It consisted of him arousing suspicion on the street because it looked like he was trying to find a place to hide, and finally sneaking into a movie theater.
Do some research. Oswald reached the status of “marksman” within the Marines. he was better than a trained shooter.
There a very atmospheric documentary on Google videos, here, which contains, at the 25 minute mark, an audio interview with a woman claiming she saw a man standing next to the shooter on the sixth floor. It also contains at 28:30-32:00 a copper talking about the alleged sniper’s nest, including the discovery of the rifle, a 7.65 Mauser, followed by the TV news accounts of the Mauser. The programme is a compilation of archive footage, largely from the day itself, so it’s an interesting watch.
He was a sharpshooter, which is higher than marksman, at one time. But we’re still talking about something other than being a sniper.
There is a lot wrong with this.
-
There was actually at least one witness who saw Oswald in the window. Several other people heard the shots or saw the rifle barrel.
-
Oswald had plenty of time to stash the rifle and make his way down to where the cop saw him. He wasn’t eating his lunch, he was just standing in the lunch room
-
He didn’t wipe down any prints. His palm print was found on the rifle. He didn’t gather any shell casings either. The photos on this page show they are where you would expect them to be: McAdams's Kennedy Assassination Home Page Index
Nitrate tests on the cheek are pretty much useless. The test was designed for handgun usage, not rifle usage. The print was found well before he was dead - that’s a Jim Marrs lie where he claims that the dead can sweat.
Whoa! Poison the well much?
The guns are similar, and more people would have been familiar with a Mauser. Its not a hard error to make.
Oh, please. The evidence in the Tippet case is overwhelming.
You know…except for the police gathering all the Book Depository employees and noticing he was missing.
Yes we do.
Really? Because other folks on or near the Knoll say otherwise.
Really? Because most people who went their said they were either a) trying to get away from the shooter or b) thought the shooter might be trying to escape in that direction. Officer Harkness was painfully clear on that issue. Beyond that it was a crowd reaction.
Ah yes, the magic unidentified palm print that turned into a fingerprint. That was a good one. (Read Reclaiming history pages 922-923).
I didn’t say he was a sniper. I was saying he had more shooting expertise than the average person.
That’s assuming that the person they saw was Oswald,
Drinking.
That could be the case, I’ve never fired a gun and really don’t know anything about the mechanism through which a blot-action rifle ejects spent rounds.
Fair enough.
I refer you to the policeman in the documentary I linked on the last page, he says he was no more than eight inches from the gun and clearly saw “mauser” imprinted on the barrel, and that the man who found it had run a gun shop and immediately on seeing it said it looked like a Mauser, so this isn’t just some beat-cop seeing a rifle and thinking of a well-known brand name.
Yeah…
They say there weren’t any eye witnesses? Well, they’re demonstrably wrong.
Take it up with the science of forensics.
And? The shots Oswald took were anything but difficult. Anyone with basic training in the use of a rifle could have made his shots. The shots are often described as being difficult and Oswald as a sub-par shot in CT theories to ‘prove’ Oswald couldn’t have been the shooter or the only shooter. It’s simply untrue, it didn’t require a trained sniper to make Oswald’s shots; they were very easy shots to make.
You’re going to have to help me out here: tell me why this is a significant mistake. Does it mean the gun in the book depository didn’t fire the shots, or that the gun got swapped out for another gun, or… what?
Blindboyard, you initially said that Oswald was found eating his lunch. Now you say he was drinking.
I assume you mean the bottle of Coke he bought. Your version of events seem pretty dynamic.
And yet all of the photo and film evidence shows a Carcano. One blowhard cop doesn’t eliminate the huge pile of photo & film evidence showing the rifle (and there is quite a bit)
No. They say that the shots did not come from there.
I don’t have to. A palm print does not magically become a fingerprint. The guy who did the tests (Nathan Darby) was alleged to have been furnished with the only unidentified print on a cardboard box in the sniper’s nest. Somehow he matches that palm print to a finger print. You can’t do that.
It turns out Darby was fooled - he was given two fingerprints blind (and only heard Wallace’s name much later). The fingerprint was obviously not the palmprint they found. Another example of fake evidence from the buff crowd.
Uh, no.
Did you see the big crowd near the corner of Houston and Elm in the photos and films? What about all the people on the infield area of Dealey Plaza? The grassy knoll would have been just immediately beyond the limo, by just 20 yards or so, from their POV. A shooter there would have been obvious to hundreds of people (and would have been mere feet to Zapruder’s right).
Wow, thank you for that (And for having it queued up); that was a great vid.
So now it’s multiple men, with rifles, as seen by a single witness? How did multiple men with rifles not be noticed by people standing 20 or 30 feet away? How did the sound of at least one rifle round not attract the immediate attention of everyone (or nearly everyone) on or around the knoll, including Zapruder himself and his receptionist, Marilyn Sitzman?
And that’s generously ignoring for the moment the witnesses who say there weren’t shooters near or behind the fence.
Pick one. So far, the main theory and evidence point to three shots fired from the TSBD. If you can describe a hypothetical sequence of events that has all shots or at least one of the shots coming from the knoll, describe the sequence of events after the limo makes the turn onto Elm Street. What bullets caused what injuries to the limo occupants and (roughly) when?