# The case against Lee H. Oswald **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 24, 2023, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643 "2023-11-24T18:35:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/261 "2023-11-29T18:43:32Z")
> [@Ulysses](#): > > Audio and/or video recording are now standard practices but that’s a fairly recent development, in fact more recent than most would expect, as @Stranger_On_A_Train noted. Cassette tapes were first released for sale in August 1963. Tapes before that were reel-to-reel. Those were much larger and more fiddly. I don’t know what the state of microphone technology was then, but I remember in that a couple of years earlier, the inbuilt mic on a home reel-to-reel wouldn’t pick up my voice unless I spoke directly into it. (I was a quiet child.) I’m not surprised that most police departments had not invested the money and space necessary to tape interrogations. ---
**Author:** ![Common\_Tater](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/common_tater/32/13846_2.png) [@Common\_Tater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Common_Tater)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/262 "2023-11-29T19:19:38Z")
On Dragnet they interrogated a suspect without taking notes, but when the perp cracked and confessed, then they would go get a stenographer to make it all official. If you can’t trust Joe Friday, just who can you trust?! ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/263 "2023-11-29T19:31:54Z")
Did I say I believed in a conspiracy, or any particular conspiracy? No, I maintain that there are enough errors in the WC Report, or the one lone nut theory, to make me doubt the integrity and the thoroughness of the Report and the theory. I want these discrepancies clarified, worked out, explained, and nailed down, as opposed to hand-waved away. People are demanding that I produce an alternate (and completely satisfactory) version of the WC Report, and then boasting that since I haven’t done that, and refuse to try, I should shut up and go away, which is declaring victory in a war that was never fought. ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/264 "2023-11-29T19:34:20Z")
> [@Kent\_Clark](#): > > We might have a winner here. You might. My idea about Kennedy committing suicide while he was behind the sign for two seconds also might be correct. ---
**Author:** ![Dropo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ce7236/32.png) [@Dropo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dropo)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/265 "2023-11-29T20:21:36Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Right, right…and that’s why the mob decided to kill Bobb - wait, what’s this theory of yours again? That elements of the mob wanted RFK and the pressure he was placing on their operations to go away. Clipping RFK would have left the mob as a prime suspect. It also would have left JFK po’ed about a murdered family member and ripe for revenge with all the powers of the presidency at his command and the country united behind his efforts to find the killers. > [@Moriarty](#): > > Are you saying that the mob did it, or are you saying we can’t rule it out? The latter. > [@Moriarty](#): > > Oh, and I think some witnesses said they saw Oswald with a guy who flew planes for the mob. I doubt I could assess the reliability of those witnesses even if I knew who they were. Nor do I feel confident in concluding that Fed surveillance of the period would necessarily have revealed any contacts between Oswald and mob go-betweens. As such, I have a reasonable doubt about whether Oswald was or was not in contact with them. > [@Moriarty](#): > > But no evidence of meetings between Oswald and mobsters, no evidence of letters or phone calls between Oswald and mobsters, no evidence of material support like weapons, money or a getaway car. As I’ve already mentioned, I don’t believe Oswald was aware he was being used by the mob, and plotters took care to insulate themselves from any connection to him. As such and by design, there is no direct evidence to support the connection. There are precedents which establish the mob successfully used this same strategy for other hits. Let us take a moment to ponder the underworld perspective. The mob is an organization devoted to operating outside public and gov’t perception, with vast experience at evading (a lot of) surveillance and with a long, enforced tradition of keeping secrets over decades (seen Mr. Hoffa lately? I hear he’s not looking so good). In the case of the JFK hit, all the pieces were in place for them to have carried off the operation while leaving no trail that could be legally tied back to the plotters. In the absence of coordination and presence of many suggestions of mob involvement, we must assume all this was coincidental. I have trouble digesting that in the face of what I know about mob history. I want to believe Oswald acted alone. I really do. As you and others have pointed out, it’s the simplest theory and the one that best fits the established facts. Nevertheless, I am unable to commit to it on the basis of doubts, reasonable and otherwise. Like the SCR, I am left believing the mob could have gotten away with it; and with no way of proving or disproving that, I cannot preclude it as a possibility in this case. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/266 "2023-11-29T20:24:27Z")
> [@slicedalone](#): > > I want these discrepancies clarified, worked out, explained, and nailed down, as opposed to hand-waved away. There are people here (Moriarty, bless him) who clarified, worked out, explained and nailed down the bullet chain of custody discrepancy for you. Did all the leg work, found photos of the various documents, and it all boils down to one person noting the incorrect time on a document months after the assassination. You then handwaved that explanation away as though “wrote down the wrong time” is simply too ridiculous to fathom. ---
**Author:** ![slicedalone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slicedalone/32/12515_2.png) [@slicedalone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slicedalone)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/267 "2023-11-29T20:34:50Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > it all boils down to one person noting the incorrect time on a document months after the assassination. This is mere handwaving, as well as highly inaccurate. The documents in question recorded the incorrect times on the 22nd and 23rd of November. But even if it were weeks or months afterwards, which it wasn’t, this wasn’t a casual event among thousands of casual events which might explain why someone would make an error of recording the time incorrectly–this was the assassination of the sitting President, which federal employees highly trained in recording precisely the details of their work, FBI agents and Secret Service personnel and the like, were noting details that they understood would be a part of history. I find it highly improbable that any one of them goofed, and absurd that so many errors would crop up and go unquestioned by the WC Report. In any case, it’s silly for us to adjudicate these matters here. As blessed as Moriarty may be, I doubt he is remotely qualified to argue the WC’s virtues, and I’m certainly totally unqualified to make the countercase–either demands that trained experts in ballistics, the law, and a few dozen other fields take up this discussion, which I assume you think unnecessary because it’s all (to your mind) been studied exhaustively already and your conclusion is the one that Earl Warren (according to Senator Russell’s notes) had reached by the first meeting of the Commission: Oswald is guilty, so let’s wrap up this mess right now. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/268 "2023-11-29T20:59:06Z")
Closed on November 29, 2023, 8:59pm UTC ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2023, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/269 "2023-11-29T21:04:56Z")
Moderating: > [@slicedalone](#): > > Sure, whatever you say. > [@slicedalone](#): > > What, you think people were lax because no one thought at the time that this case might be some sort of big deal, historically? > [@slicedalone](#): > > “Captain, I want to confess to murdering the president.” > > “Yeah, well, ya jus’ did. We can do all the writin’ up and cipherin’ later, I guess. Now it’s another beating for you–evabuddy gets four, you’re no one special, Oswald. Whataya think, we got stenographers and writin’ paper up the yin-ying around here or somethin’?–we gonna treat ya like we do everyone, just accusations, a little cussin’ and them four beatings.” > [@slicedalone](#): > > Kinda strange that these notes just went missing on their own, innit? > [@slicedalone](#): > > I think it might be interesting if people like me would concede the strongest non-conspiracy explanations of the JFK murder and if the “one lone nut” nuts would concede the more dubious assertions of that thesis. This way, you just have both sides displaying more unbridled contempt for each other than is warranted on either side. > [@slicedalone](#): > > If you need something more tangible (the Stone documentary is on HBO all week–watching it wouldn’t kill you. A flesh wound, maybe.) > [@slicedalone](#): > > Just trying to show what can happen when you don’t record what people are saying, and rely on your own after-the-fact “transcriptions.” Kinda results in self-serving people just making things up. > [@slicedalone](#): > > Phrased slightly differently, “notes were taken, but some of them contradict what we wanted them to say, so we wrote what they should have said, and tossed the originals into the flames.” > [@slicedalone](#): > > It’s quite unfair to imply that they were all completely illiterate. Please reconsider the extremity of your post. > [@slicedalone](#): > > Has anyone answered the matter of the screwed-up times in the chain of custody, for example? If so, who? Is there an explanation, or does this apparent impossibility just get filed under “Oh, well, who knows? And who cares—it’s just a bullet, anyway”? > [@slicedalone](#): > > Oh, you found it unconvincing–wow, well, that certainly makes a powerful case. You’ve completely blown me out of the water with that argument. Kudos to you! I certainly can never dare to refer to it as a documentary after reading that. Thanks! > [@slicedalone](#): > > But I am grateful for your pledge not to go further in this discussion. You seem to have nothing to contribute other than your opinion, which I will take for what it’s worth. > [@slicedalone](#): > > Yeah, because it wasn’t important or anything, just your routine chain of custody in a presidential assassination that happened earlier today. Happens to me all the time. > [@slicedalone](#): > > If that’s your best strategy going forward, why should I supply this entire string for you? You can just dismiss all of them unseen in advance–save us all a lot of time. > > P.S. You missed your first move, which is to challenge me to produce the actual document, and then to challenge its authenticity. Stick to the playbook, please. > [@slicedalone](#): > > As opposed to what? The droolings of a rabid raccoon? > [@slicedalone](#): > > So the more nonsense I point out in the WC Report, the more unassailable their case gets? That’s really excellent work there, first-class logic. > [@slicedalone](#): > > The important thing is the facts all add up to one simple narrative, amirite, fellas? > [@slicedalone](#): > > Uh, I don’t work for you. Not sure where you got the idea that I’ll jump when you say “Frog.” > [@slicedalone](#): > > “Nah nah, na na, NAH na” is not a great debate. > [@slicedalone](#): > > The crucial difference being that I have very few worshipers declaring my writing to be reliable, and certainly none in this thread, while the WC Report seems to have a surfeit of admirers, worshipers, and fanboys attesting to its truthfulness and reliability. > [@slicedalone](#): > > Only if you ask nicely. > [@slicedalone](#): > > Those few of the faithful who will admit to any errors seem to insist that the WC’s errors are evidence of their humanity, their authenticity, their non-North Korean bona fides. > [@slicedalone](#): > > Or maybe you’re a patsy who doesn’t know that he’s being used by people who know the records won’t be checked for months and months if ever and that apologists will come along to insist that these errors in the record are mere typos, absent-mindedness, or inexplicable problems that don’t really matter much? > [@slicedalone](#): > > If there were a plausible way for the WC to explain the assassination as JFK deciding in mid-parade to shoot himself in the head and back, they would have gone for that, and some of you defenders would be insisting that we really couldn’t see what happened in those seconds JFK was hidden from sight behind that street sign, now, could we? > [@slicedalone](#): > > I am not responsible for explaining every discrepancy in the Warren Commission Report. I am a consumer of the WC Report, and I am dissatisfied with the shoddy product. You are your daddy’s Customer Service department and your job is to discredit my complaints, as you see it, but to my mind, your job is to check out how the plastic got inside the chicken and why you sold me a chicken that was rotten. The customer is always right. > [@slicedalone](#): > > Talk about your straw man!!! > [@slicedalone](#): > > You might. My idea about Kennedy committing suicide while he was behind the sign for two seconds also might be correct. @slicedalone, your posts continue to drip sarcasm, snark and a perennially insulting tone. This is not what we strive for in Great Debates. You have been warned and suspended for this behavior several times. Yet it continues. You seem unwilling to learn the lesson. Further, if you are not prepared to offer citations and evidence for the positions you take, you have no place in the discussion. If what is being discussed is and can only be speculative in nature, accept that, acknowledge it and demonstrate a modicum of civility in the discussion, because you have no better argument than anyone else in the debate. This thread is closed until I can discuss further sanctions with moderation staff. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2023, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/270 "2023-11-30T00:30:09Z")
Reopened. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2023, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/271 "2023-11-30T00:30:15Z")
Opened on November 30, 2023, 12:30am UTC ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2023, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/272 "2023-11-30T20:37:34Z")
Moderating: After discussion in the mod loop, this is a formal warning for the above-referenced conduct outlined in this post: > [@The case against Lee H. Oswald](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/269): > > Moderating: @slicedalone, your posts continue to drip sarcasm, snark and a perennially insulting tone. This is not what we strive for in Great Debates. You have been warned and suspended for this behavior several times. Yet it continues. You seem unwilling to learn the lesson. Further, if you are not prepared to offer citations and evidence for the positions you take, you have no place in the discussion. If what is being discussed is and can only be speculative … ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/273 "2023-12-02T18:20:28Z")
Split this topic on December 2, 2023, 6:20pm UTC 6 posts were split to a new topic: [Megburns Troll posts](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/megburns-troll-posts/994020) ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/274 "2023-12-02T11:46:41Z")
> [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/1): > > I find the ‘lone gunman’ theory absolutely absurd. It’s contraindicated by a mass of evidence. Such as? > [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/1): > > One person who had clear motive to kill the President was LBJ, who was never going to be president unless the incumbent were gotten out of the way before the 1964 convention. Now this is absurd. In 1960, the GOP candidate for President was the sitting Vice President. And before that, the last Democratic president had entered the job having been Vice President. So the clearest path to that job was serving as Vice President; which is what LBJ was doing. Being Veep gave him a clear path to the presidency. And at the time of JFK’s death, he has just reaffirmed that he was keeping Johnson on the ticket. Moreover, he had double downed on that decision by bringing Johnson with him to Texas (Johnson’s home state) to campaign. There was no realistic reason to believe that Johnson was going to be dropped from the ticket. But, according to your theorizing, LBJ was _too impatient_ to wait 4 years, so he has the president of the United States _killed_ instead. As I said, that’s absurd. > [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/1): > > Jackie Kennedy believed Lyndon Johnson killed her husband. Who ya gonna believe, her or Arlen Specter? As I’ve said upthread, I don’t believe the Warren Commission because of who helped prepare it. I accept it due to the evidence. Please re-read my OP. Count how many times I cite the “Warren Report”. If you want to debate this topic, spare me your criticism of the Report. I’m discussing the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![nicky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f0a364/32.png) [@nicky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nicky)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/275 "2023-12-02T11:57:28Z")
So - its wrong to call the theory that a veteran establishment politician conspired with the CIA to kill the president out of sheer ambition a _conspiracy theory_. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/276 "2023-12-02T13:17:35Z")
> [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/1): > > Referring to doubts about the Warren Report as “conspiracy theories” is just following the lead of the CIA which assiduously branded doubts about the Report as just that, “conspiracy theories.” And so the phrase entered the lexicon. [Karl Popper](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#The_%22conspiracy_theory_of_society%22) would like to have a word with you. > Popper criticized what he termed the “conspiracy theory of society”, the view that powerful people or groups, godlike in their efficacy, are responsible for purposely bringing about all the ills of society. This view cannot be right, Popper argued, because “nothing ever comes off exactly as intended.” [Full article: Conspiracy theory as heresy (tandfonline.com)](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00131857.2021.1917364) > Ever since the term ‘conspiracy theory’ was first popularised by the philosopher Sir Karl Popper in the 1950s, conspiracy theories have had a bad reputation. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/277 "2023-12-02T13:47:21Z")
As long as we’re seeking historical accuracy… > [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/1): > > Jackie Kennedy believed Lyndon Johnson killed her husband. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/278 "2023-12-02T16:33:46Z")
I need a cite to that too @megburns, a search showed to me that it is likely originated from a report from the [Daily ~~Fail~~ Mail](https://www.politico.com/blogs/click/2011/08/did-jackie-o-blame-lbj-038190), around 2011 declaring that ABC was going to reveal that allegation, and more, from Jackie. [Only for ABC to come with the report](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Jacqueline_Kennedy/jacqueline-kennedy-reveals-jfk-feared-lbj-presidency/story?id=14477930) that she overheard JFK not wanting Johnson to run for the presidency and that she did not trust him for other reasons. Not that he killed Kennedy. Of course, the Daly Mail and others that cut and pasted the allegations from the tabloid did not do much to correct the record. So who was your source **megburns**? ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/280 "2023-12-02T17:33:36Z")
> [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/2): > > whether it was even possible to fire those shots from that rifle. So it’s your contention that the official story is a crock of shit because Oswald could not have completed the feat? Is that correct? Is it because Oswald didn’t have the ability to do so, because the rifle wasn’t capable, or because the ballistics or wounds didn’t match? Or am I missing some other reason for this fact free statement. I love a genuine debate. But your opaque dismissal is lacking detail. > [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/2): > > But thanks for your predictable response. You did not disappoint. Oh, I’m going to enjoy this. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2023, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643/281 "2023-12-02T17:41:22Z")
> [@On another topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/994020/2): > > begging the question of whether it was relevant and whether it was even possible to fire those shots from that rifle. It’s not only possible, but also not even remotely remarkable. Three shots in six seconds starts from when he pulled the trigger the first time, meaning he only needed to work the bolt and pull the trigger two more times in six seconds. That’s remarkably average firing speed for a bolt action rifle. The British Army expected and trained it soldiers to fire at least 20 aimed shots a minute with bolt action rifles prior to WWI. That includes not only working the bolt, taking proper aim and firing, but reloading the 10-round magazine of the [Lee-Enfield](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee%E2%80%93Enfield) with 5-round stripper clips. Note the rate of fire listed: > 20–30 aimed shots per minute That’s what was both expected and required by average, rank and file infantrymen. Actual record holding speed and accuracy with a bolt action rifle is substantially faster. [Mad minute](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_minute): > The term ‘Mad Minute’ was also used to describe a regular demonstration, by instructors at the [School of Musketry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_Musketry) at [Hythe, Kent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hythe,_Kent) that was intended to show officer trainees the maximum rate of accurate fire that could be achieved by an expert with a service rifle. > > The first Mad Minute record was set by [Sergeant Major](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_Major) [Jesse Wallingford](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Wallingford) in 1908, scoring 36 hits on a 48-inch target at 300 yards (4.5 mils/ 15.3 moa). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-case-against-lee-h-oswald/993643.md?page=15)