This is not an argument, but sincere book recommendations: Oswald by Mailer, a great insight into the psychology of Oswald, which led to the shooting of the president, and of course Case Closed, regarding Ruby and a lot - well, almost all the things concerning the assassination you’d be interested in. Both are great books which I believe any reader with the slightest interest in the assassination would enjoy.
Okay, since this is your first time I’ll try to be gentle. (I am after all a compassionate conservative. ;))
Seriously though, thanks for taking the time to look up your cites and to post your response.
Most of what I know (or more accurately, believe) about Kennedy’s assassination is decades old, and given the volume of conflicting information floating around back then I’ve never really been perusaded one way or the other.
My operating theory, however, has been that Oswald fired the shot that hit Connally, a shooter firing from a window at street level across the street from Oswald and to his left likely fired the bullet that caused the neck wound, and that a third shooter from an unknown vantage point ahead of Kennedy and to his right fired the head shot.
Thanks to the information you posted I’m persuaded that Oswald could have fired the bullet that hit Kennedy in the neck. I just did a little experiment of my own by placing a pointer on my back at the approximate point where Kennedy was hit, and sure enough it is indeed higher than the exit wound. So, ignorance fought. Thank you.
I’m less convinced by the testimony of Drs. Spitz and Olivier. I admit to having a rather busy day today and to only skimming their testimony, but what I did read wasn’t all that persuasive. They testified that entry wounds don’t cause much damage, that small arms (pistols and rifles) don’t have knock-down power, that Kennedy’s movement was almost surely neuromuscular…and besides, it might have been caused by acceleration of the vehicle.
I think vehicle acceleration can be ruled out as Jackie’s body didn’t fly up and back in the same manner. Further, the car was moving slowly enough that Jackie could crawl up onto the trunk without difficulty. And the secret service agent could easily run up and climb onto it as well. All of this took place after the head shot.
Secondly, it’s been my experience that reflexive motion isn’t instantaneous…that a certain period of time (usually only a fraction of a second, but noticable nonetheless) occurs between the time the stimulus is delivered and the body reacts. Yet Kennedy’s head instantly and violently changed direction at the very instant he was hit, where he went from slowly moving downward to his left and toward Jackie’s lap to up and back with his shoulder cresting the convertible’s boot.
Further, his body’s movement itself doesn’t seem consistent with what one would expect from a reflexive stiffening that would move his body in that direction. It appears from the Zapruder film that his body follows his head rather than his head being propelled by body movement. In other words, it looks like his head pulled his body along with it. I would think that a reflexive stiffening of the body in an upward and to the left manner like that would result in a momentary sinking of the shoulders into the body and the limp head likely flopping to one side or the other as the body was propelled up toward it.
And with regard to the way his head exploded, it seems to me that a glancing blow, just hitting Kennedy on the right side of his head, would cause much more explosive damage on entry than a straight-on shot and that this could account for the fact that his head exploded as it did had the bullet came from the front. (And of course, this brings up the question of where the shooter was located…a question for which I have no answer. :D)
Now all of this is just supposition based on observation on my part, and I’m not irrevocably wedded to any of it. Frankly, I would be happier knowing that Oswald acted alone and that the guy who killed Kennedy got what was coming to him.
It’s just that to me these aspects of the shooting have never seemed to add up, and my primary purpose in posting to this thread was to point out that a person can reasonably and justifiably question how Kennedy was killed without it automatically making him a wacko conspiracy theorist.
So thanks again for your post, Shodan (and yours too, Little Nemo. I wasn’t aware of some of the witnesses you mention, though I have always felt that Oswald was at least one of the shooters). You’ve given me food for thought and I appreciate that.
If you look above the statement you posted it mentioned that nobody made 2 shots on the first go. I agree it’s certainly possible but it’s not as easy as you think. I don’t know if the gun can be aimed without using the scope (while the scope is still attached) which would make it easier. He also had a tree blocking his shot so that compresses the time between the 2nd and 3rd shot. It might explain why the first shot was wild (trying to make the shot before the target would be obscured). The first shot should have been the most accurate of the 3 given that a round was already chambered and he was able to track his target for the greatest amount of time. The fact that his first shot was so off the mark adds to the premise that it was not an easy task.
I hate to talk about this because I get sucked into it. The head shot doesn’t line up to the angle of the building like the 2nd shot does and the heavy jacketed bullet should have passed through his head relatively intact.
Hah! What the heck is PBS doing with a photo like that?!
That’s not how stuff works around here. You’re not the one who’s “open for exceptions”. You’re the one who’s challenging the results of an in-depth investigation and subsequent generations of close scrutiny.
You. Are. Wrong. The first shooter got two orange on his first go. Orange was a hit. He also got two orange on his second go.
Thanks. Was it good for you? 
Agreed.
My opinions on the matter are based partially on my own experience.
Kennedy had a bad back. So do I. Occasionally, when I injure it, it goes into spasm. The disc in my back that usually goes out is weaker on one side than the other, thus I tend to stiffen up more in one direction (the right) than the other. And the reaction is very nearly instant - my back goes 'ping!" and it snaps into spasm and I arch up (and begin whimpering like a little girly-man).
So it seems perfectly natural to me that if I were subjected to a sudden shot in the neck, my back would go into spasm and I would lurch suddenly over and arch back just as Kennedy seems to have done. Sometimes I wish someone would shoot me in the head when it happens - it is quite painful.
If keendy were shot in the neck, as is the case, I am not surprised that his neck went first into spasm and then his back. Thus the movement of his head would lead, and the rest of his body would follow.
Given the observed nature of the head wound (cite), it seems pretty clear where and how Kennedy was hit. There is a very useful disccusion of the X-rays on the MacAdams site.
Always good to talk with you.
That is, again, a total falsehood. Please refer to E-Sabbath’s quote, which also does not eliminate the possibility that some of the other shooters accomplished the same thing.
Perhaps it’s harder than I think; the shot looks and sounds very easy, but I may be underestimating the effect of the tree. Nonetheless, it was quite doable, and your characterization of the results of the CBS test was totally false. You first claimed that “10 out of 11 couldn’t make the shot,” and that is false. You now claimed nobody made it on their first try, and THAT is false.
Furthermore, the CBS test assumed the smallest estimate of Oswald’s timing (five to six seconds) which may itself be incorrect; current estimates run up to eight seconds. If so, that would make the shot quite a bit easier.
It would require Oswald getting off 3 very fast and accurate shots with a crappy rifle. It could happen.
I think this is the essence of the conspiracy theories. I used to be a believer in some conspiracy theory or other until I read Posner. He didn’t have to explain anything really just point out that what the theorists said was rubbish. When I read the book I was continually thinking, “yeah, explain this point.” But all he would do was show that the theorists “evidence” was a distortion or lie about what had really happened or been said.
They just state that the sun rises in the west and then ignore all the refutations.
Given that he missed once, it would seem to require only two accurate shots.
Pretty safe bet considering that it did happen.
Yes, the iron sights could be used even with the scope attached.
It was the first shot that was interfered with by the tree. The second and third shots were in the open.
Except for that tree.
If you look at the layout of the route the tree is not in the way of the first shot. The car has to slow down to make the left turn onto Commerce street giving Oswald a nice shot. He would have been able to track Kennedy all the way down Houston. The tree is offset from the intersection because of the way Commerce splits off of Elm Street so it’s really a factor in reaquiring the next 2 shots. Essentially, the first shot went wild given the downward trajectory. He should have at least hit the car.
None of this explains the final head shot. With Kennedy’s head position Oswald’s line of sight would have created a bullet path exiting out the lower left side of Kennedy. And the bullet he was firing would have remained intact.
Oh, great, now I have the George of the Jungle song running through my head.
*Lee, Lee, Lee Harvey Oswald,
shot at Kennedy.
(Ahhhhaahh)
Except for that tree.
Lee, Lee, Lee Harvey Oswald,
watch out for that
(BANG, ooh)
tree.*
Too soon?
Posner speculates that the first shot missed the car entirely, because it might have been deflected off a tree limb. That could happen as the limo was heading from the open area, to where the tree would interfere. The second shot had a clear view, but you’re right that some of the lead-up time to it would have been obscured. On the other hand, it’s a live oak tree which doesn’t do a good job of blocking all the light.
Yes, I’m familiar with the layout - I rode my bicycle over the X in the street where the fatal shot struck him, just a couple of weeks ago when I had to be downtown for jury duty. But the tree would not be a factor at all for the third shot, because the whole time from frame 224 to frame 313, the car was in the clear.
Any golfer will tell you, a tree is 90 % air. Unless your bet relies on that shot.
Arguing with yourself now?
Are you saying that a Secret Service agent armed with an AR-15 sitting a car behind the President’s shot the President in a motorcade being watched by thousands of people and nobody in the crowd of spectators and none of his fellow agents noticed him taking aim and firing??!?
I believe he’s getting it from the book Mortal Error which argues that the fatal head shot was fired by a guard riding in/on a car behind the president’s, but that the shot was accidental. That makes it simultaneously more plausible and less plausible than your scenario - he didn’t have to take aim and fire, but on the other hand, his firearm just happened to go off, and just happened to hit Kennedy right in the head?!?!? That’s just a staggering hypothesis, and completely unnecessary to explain what happened.