Oswald attended classes in Russian in the CIA. He worked a top secret position in Japan with flight paths of the U2. Later after the USSR, he comes back and then shoots Kennedy.
The first shot hit a light signal pole and hit the curb. The second shot went through Kennedy and connally. They were in line for the shot. The third shot hit the rear of his head and exited the right front.
The CIA has been behind the entire conspiracy ideas to deflect from their role with Oswald. THIS was the reason this has been a problem for so long.
I’ve studied this for years, and there is NO real hard evidence for another shooter.
Nope. I talked to the officer over the dispatch office at the time. He wrote a book on it. The HSCA WANTED to show conspiracy and relied on acoustics evidence, which was an incorrect assumption on their part. The motorcycle patrolman in question was at the trade mart and then proceeded to the hospital as the motorcade sped by.
An analysis by the committee of the statements of witnesses in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, moreover, showed that about 44 percent were not able to form an opinion about-the origin of the shots,(173) attesting to the ambiguity showed in the August 1978 experiment. Seventy percent of the witnesses in 1963 who had an opinion as to origin said it was either the book depository or the grassy knoll.21(174) Those witnesses who thought the shots originated from the grassy knoll represented 30 percent of those who chose between the knoll and the book depository and 21 percent of those who made a decision as to origin. Since most of the shots fired on November 22, 1963 (three out of four, the committee determined) came from the book depository, the fact that so many witnesses thought they heard shots from the knoll lent additional weight to a conclusion that a shot came from there.
Hard evidence…Oswald’s prints on the rifle found. Three spent rifle shells found. Leaves wedding ring behind for wife. Paper bag found by window where he shot from. Two fellows below him got dust in their head from him shooting right above them, and heard the click click of the bolt action. He fired his revolver at the arresting officer who managed to get his hand at the hammer in time for a misfire. His fingerprints were on boxes in the sixth floor window.
Hard evidence….sorry to keep bringing this up. But it does not go away with time.
Acoustic evidence is hard evidence. People’s perceptions of events fluctuates from what they experience. One person hears three shot another person hears four…HSCA experts gave a 95% chance of a fourth shot. Like DNA results, the acoustic is near absolute
Some would argue that it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter, because there wasn't enough time from the shooting until he was found in the lunch room, must moments afterwards.
So, if it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter ...
Oswald attended classes in Russian in the CIA. He worked a top secret position in Japan with flight paths of the U2. Later after the USSR, he comes back and then shoots Kennedy.
The first shot hit a light signal pole and hit the curb. The second shot went through Kennedy and connally. They were in line for the shot. The third shot hit the rear of his head and exited the right front.
The CIA has been behind the entire conspiracy ideas to deflect from their role with Oswald. THIS was the reason this has been a problem for so long.
I’ve studied this for years, and there is NO real hard evidence for another shooter.
The US Congress, in their SECOND investigation into the murder of JKF, concluded otherwise:
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1b.html#summary
In addition, there is no HARD evidence that Oswald was a shooter at all -- lone, or otherwise.
What about the soft evidence?
Immediately leaves work. Only person to do so. Takes a cab, a bus, goes home changes clothes, gets his pistol, shoots a cop.
Nope. I talked to the officer over the dispatch office at the time. He wrote a book on it. The HSCA WANTED to show conspiracy and relied on acoustics evidence, which was an incorrect assumption on their part. The motorcycle patrolman in question was at the trade mart and then proceeded to the hospital as the motorcade sped by.
An analysis by the committee of the statements of witnesses in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, moreover, showed that about 44 percent were not able to form an opinion about-the origin of the shots,(173) attesting to the ambiguity showed in the August 1978 experiment. Seventy percent of the witnesses in 1963 who had an opinion as to origin said it was either the book depository or the grassy knoll.21(174) Those witnesses who thought the shots originated from the grassy knoll represented 30 percent of those who chose between the knoll and the book depository and 21 percent of those who made a decision as to origin. Since most of the shots fired on November 22, 1963 (three out of four, the committee determined) came from the book depository, the fact that so many witnesses thought they heard shots from the knoll lent additional weight to a conclusion that a shot came from there.
Hard evidence…Oswald’s prints on the rifle found. Three spent rifle shells found. Leaves wedding ring behind for wife. Paper bag found by window where he shot from. Two fellows below him got dust in their head from him shooting right above them, and heard the click click of the bolt action. He fired his revolver at the arresting officer who managed to get his hand at the hammer in time for a misfire. His fingerprints were on boxes in the sixth floor window.
Hard evidence….sorry to keep bringing this up. But it does not go away with time.
Acoustic evidence is hard evidence. People’s perceptions of events fluctuates from what they experience. One person hears three shot another person hears four…HSCA experts gave a 95% chance of a fourth shot. Like DNA results, the acoustic is near absolute
See post above that starts with Nope. Thanks.
“When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Arthur Conan Doyle
That statment does not mean to ignore evidence.
Some would argue that it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter, because there wasn't enough time from the shooting until he was found in the lunch room, must moments afterwards.
So, if it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter ...
You’re correct. If the single bullet theory is incorrect, then it’s impossible for a lone gunman conclusion
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/contents.htm