Oswald was too poor and cheap to waste money on firing ranges. He probably just went somewhere secluded and fired away. Marina testified that Lee had taken the rifle out for target practice on several occasions, in addition to practcing with the bolt action for hours at a time.
Oswald’s service records, by the way, show him to be an above-average shot for a Marine, which makes him a pretty good marksman. Not that you had to be a marksman to make that shot–it’s really fairly easy.
I saw a biography on Oswald on PBS that showed the same computer animated re-creation of the film, and it showed a cone leading back to the window and not a single line, so I think that was perhaps edited for clarity for the Jennings special.
The PBS show also mentioned Oswald target practicing several times before the assassination, including at a range. They showed a shot-up target that was supposed to be his, using the same rifle he used to kill JFK. I was also struck by the interview they gave with his brother - he was convinced Oswald acted alone even though he didn’t want it to be true.
I have never seen Stone’s movie and I am too young to have experienced this day, so this anniversary gave me lots of information I had never seen laid out before. I had seen the film but no real analysis of it, and I had never seen the footage of Oswald being shot. I thought the special was very informative and convincing. Along with the PBS specials (I also saw the biography on Jackie and the anniversary one) I learned a lot about that day last week. I found it all really fascinating, I can only imagine what that day must have been like experienced firsthand.
None of the specials mentioned what happened to Jack Ruby - did he go to prison forever? Is he still alive? I am ignorant of this subject, none of my history classes seemed to go into any detail other than to say JFK was killed on this day by this man.
Jack Ruby was tried and convicted in a Dallas courtroom in February and March of 1964 for the murder of Lee Oswald. The jury sentenced him to death. He then testified before the Warren Commission in June 1964.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Ruby’s conviction on procedural grounds in October 1966. Ruby was awaiting a new trial when he died in January 1967. Although doctors had diagnosed in December that Ruby had inoperable lung cancer, he actually died of a pulmonary embolism: a blood clot had formed in a leg, passed through his heart and lodged in his lung.
Ruby’s mental state, already considered shaky by many of his associates before he shot Oswald, deteriorated to psychosis while in prison. He alleged among other things that Jews were being exterminated not far from his prison cell. You can read a letter he wrote to his brother shortly before his death.
Jack Ruby died in prison, (of syphillus?) he got progressively loonier as the years wore on. Poor bastard.
Oops, I gave you the wrong link. Here is the page with Jack Ruby’s letter.
BTW, Velma, if you do see the movie JFK, read this first:
The JFK 100: One Hundred Errors of Fact and Judgment in Oliver Stone’s JFK.
Thanks for the links. Wow, he really did go nuts didn’t he? I swear this whole event is one of history’s most fascinating, no wonder there is so much speculation.
I’ve always been interested in the Kennedys and the crazy things that happen to / around their whole family. If you believe in curses, man, this family has one.
Yes. I saw the special, and taped it as well. I taped it on account of I knew that either I’d find a lot to like about it and then would wish to save it, or, as it happened, a lot to hate about it and wanted to tape it so I could pick it apart later. I still think it was a ‘puff piece’, an example of revisionist history. By the way, if a head would always move TOWARDS the source of the shot then how come the ‘suspected Viet Cong’ in that famous bit of film where he was summarily executed on the streets of Saigon by the Chief of police, moves rapidly AWAY from the pistol and he drops down onto the street bleeding out from a massive head wound? Care to explain that little discrepancy? By the way, as far as the ‘magic bullet’ is concerned: They test fired bullets through corpses posed in the same positions as JFK and Gov. Connally and guess what? The bullet looked like it had been THROUGH A MEAT GRINDER!!! Wake up! We were lied to, we are being lied to and we will continue to be lied to on a regular basis! What’s next man? “Nixon was framed”?!! Don’t tell me, “it’s all the damn liberal media’s fault”!?
Slight difference in being shot by a rifle from 90 yards away and being blasted by a pistol from a foot away, no? If there was any head movement there, I think that would’ve taken care of it. By the way, that’s a film? I’ve only seen the one famous photo, which reveals nothing either way.
Do you just ignore posts that contradict you? People have already talked about this. Also, if you’re suggesting a shooter on the knoll, you’ll have to explain why almost nobody who was in Dealey Plaza agrees with you, and also explain why that shot seems to defy the laws of physics.
What has the liberal media, if it exists, got to do with anything? The best evidence suggests Nixon did it, the best evidence implicates Oswald. Pretty simple.
" By the way, that’s a film? I’ve only seen the one famous photo, which reveals nothing either way."
Here’s a link to the general’s obituary. While it contains a still photo, the event was also filmed by a film crew.
Sorry, forgot the link.
Well, actually the famous execution photo was lifted from a short news reel film (yes, they actually used 16mm film back then) the famous still was a frame taken from the newsreel. Of course it’s different from point blank range. I knew that. The 'watermelon test that was alluded to is misleading on account of the density of a human head and an unripe (or ripe if it comes to that) watermelon is different. If you look at the Zapruder film (at least the one I saw) you will see JFK’s head stop it’s forward motion and then get pushed back violently. It sure sounds like a head shot from the front to me. We’ll also never know for sure as the entrance/exit wound(s) were permanently compromised due to one of the most hideously botched autopsies in the history of modern medicine. A drunken intern horse doctor could have done a better job.
No, I don’t ignore posts that disagree with me. I read them and respond. What do you think is going on here? I’m responding, aren’t I? Additionally, the grassy knoll thing has been discounted by just about everyone except the gang that maintains it WAS from the ‘grassy knoll’ and the shot was fired by ALIENS! Ha, ha, just kidding. I simply maintain that there’s a lot of unexplored avenues and a lot of evidence that we’ll never get to explore on account of it’s been convieniently ‘lost’ over the years, or it’s been ‘accidentally compromised’.
Frankly, ANYTHING the government tells me, I take with a grain of salt, so to speak. Basically, if some clown from Washington told me the sky was blue I’D DO A QUICK HEADS UP CHECK!
Kinda makes it hard to do much of anything if everything the governmant says can’t be trusted.
As I asked a conspiracy-minded friend of mine once;
“Can you name anyone, who was famous for political reasons, who died in the last ten years of natural causes?”
My friend could not come up with a single name.
If everything is a conspiracy then you must be part of it.
Wrong. There were three photographers present: Eddie Adams of the Assocaited Press, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his 35mm still photograph of the execution; Vo Suu, working for NBC News (16mm); and another Vietnamese cameraman (16mm) working for ABC News. The last did not film the actual execution because he was afraid of the Vietnamese general.
There was a bullet hole on the back of Kennedy’s head, that bevelled inward. The bullet hole is visible in photographs (warning: actual autopsy photograph), and the inward bevelling is visible in X-rays. There were no wounds on the front of Kennedy’s head. Nor were there any wounds on the left side of Kennedy’s head (warning: actual autopsy photograph).
If Kennedy was hit by a rifle shot from the front, there would have been a large, blowout exit wound on the back of the head. If Kennedy was hit by a rifle shot from the right side (i.e., from the grassy knoll, to which he was abreast at the moment of the fatal head wound), there would have been a large, blowout exit wound on the left side of the head.
Such as . . . ?
I still don’t buy it. They lie, they lie all the time. Additionally, I’ve seen the film of the execution of the Viet Cong suspect with my own eyes. He dropped right to the ground following the shot. Just like that. He collapsed like a house of cards and a huge pool of blood formed under his head, spreading outward. Rather ugly to be sure, but also very convincing. And why would they WANT to ‘fake it’. If I was the Chief of Police in Saigon I think I’d WANT the VC to see this sort of stuff. It would serve as a graphic reminder of ‘what will happen to you if you try to infiltrate MY CITY…’. You know, that sort of 'psychological warfare sort of thing. The VC did it too. Graphically executing someone in a village that they suspected of aiding either the South Vietnamese or the US.
Whoa… da bear’s not going to be a party favourite around these parts…
I keep rereading this post. What in the hell does it have to do with what Walloon posted?
–Patch
