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 ...
My conclusion is that it is HIGHLY unlikely that Oswald did it, especially as a lone gunman.
Nothing has ever been convincing that the head shot came from the rear and not from the front/side.
That is the main reason I conclude there had to be more than 1 shooter.
Whether or not Oswald was a shooter is less clear, but I lean strongly to no, based on rifle fuckery and him being spotted having lunch moments later.
His statement "I'm just a patsy" makes all the sense in the world -- especially when Rubenstein brazenly shot him in public shortly therefter. Somebody wanted Oswald dead VERY badly.
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
My conclusion is that it is HIGHLY unlikely that Oswald did it, especially as a lone gunman.
Nothing has ever been convincing that the head shot came from the rear and not from the front/side.
That is the main reason I conclude there had to be more than 1 shooter.
Whether or not Oswald was a shooter is less clear, but I lean strongly to no, based on rifle fuckery and him being spotted having lunch moments later.
His statement "I'm just a patsy" makes all the sense in the world -- especially when Rubenstein brazenly shot him in public shortly therefter. Somebody wanted Oswald dead VERY badly.