neAGle96 said:

---

Edit.

I see the sharpshooter designation assigned to him in 1956 and then marksman assigned in 59 when he scored lower.

When were his marine corps records released?

---

neAGle96 said:

---

What's your opinion on the house select committees 1979 ruling there was a high probability there were 2 shooters?

Why discount this?

---

Quote:

---

The acoustic analyses do not demonstrate that there was a grassy knoll shot, and in particular there is no acoustic basis for the claim of 95% probability of such a shot.

The acoustic impulses attributed to gunshots were recorded about one minute after the President had been shot and the motorcade had been instructed to go to the hospital.

Therefore, reliable acoustic data do not support a conclusion that there was a second gunman."

---

neAGle96 said:

---

I've been to the school book depository museum.

A trained marksman could make the shot. Could they do 3 or potentially four shots w w bolt action in the time frame? (4.8 to 8 seconds, in the allotted time, I dint know.. I've seen varied claims from sound of the to the head wound),

Ale Marne corps buddy was classified as an "expert" marksman and spent his last 2 years in the corps as the rifle range instructor at Camp Pendleton.

He went to the school book depository museum w me and said absolutely not could he get 4 shots off w a bolt action in under 10 seconds and stated unlikely could he get 3 off w a bolt action any degree of accuracy.

I think undoubtedly LHO was involved. I'm unsure if there was anyone else.

My 2 pesos, I think I have more reservations w the Warren commission report then I do w the 1979 congressional house select committee report

---

BoerneGator said:

---

I've never seen any conclusive evidence/ proof that Oswald ever fired the rifle that day. I believe he "passed" paraffin tests which would seem exculpatory.

---

Quote:

---

He was an average marksman at best, as a Marine. He (or many people) could have made AN accurate shot from the TSBD perch, but the question unanswered is could someone make three in the time allotted, with the needed degree of accuracy.

---

Quote:

---

That still doesn't account for Arlen Specter's ludicrous "single bullet theory".

---

Quote:

---

Nor does it explain the "kill shot" revealed in the unedited Zapruder film showing JFK's head exploding and moving backwards, with the spray of blood and brain matter exiting to the rear, which ended up getting all over the motorcycle cops escorting the limousine's left rear flank. Not to mention that troublesome piece of skull Jackie retrieved immediately from the limo trunk lid. How do people simply gloss over these indisputable pieces of evidence observed by the entire world?

---

Quote:

---

I've no doubt LHO was involved in some capacity. His rifle convicts him of that. But I remain unconvinced he was even on the sixth floor at the time. I'm certain he was framed for Officer Tippet's murder. Yet another red flag, and further evidence of a conspiracy.

---

Quote:

---

The farthest shot was less than 100 yards and he had a 4x scope.

---

Jugstore Cowboy said:

---

Quote:

---

The farthest shot was less than 100 yards and he had a 4x scope.

---

I'm curious how far people think that is. Some of the "experts" I've seen on TV shows make it sound like he would've been aiming at a dot. Internet results say 265 feet. A good kicker could have dropped a football into JFK's lap from that distance.

I have pretty clear pictures of deer taken with my crappy old iphone at close to 500 feet, with no scope.

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Didn't the House Committee agree with the single bullet theory?

---

Im Gipper said:

---

So they concluded that the single bullet did all the damage that the Warren
report said?

---

Quote:

---

The committee's forensic pathology panel was composed of nine members, eight of whom were chief medical examiners in major local jurisdictions in the United States.(11) As a group, they had been responsible for more than 100,000 autopsies, (12) an accumulation of experience the committee deemed invaluable in the evaluation of the medical evidence--including the autopsy X-rays and photographs--to determine the cause of death of the President and the nature and location of his wounds.


The forensic pathology panel concluded that President Kennedy was struck by two, and only two, bullets, each of which entered from the rear. The panel further concluded that the President was struck by one bullet that entered in the upper right of the back and exited from the front of the throat, and one bullet that entered in the right rear of the head near the cowlick area and exited from the right side of the head, toward the front. This second bullet caused a massive wound to the President's head upon exit. There is no medical evidence that the President was struck by a bullet entering the front of the head,(19) and the possibility that a bullet could have struck the President and yet left no evidence is extremely remote. Because this conclusion appears to be inconsistent with the backward motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film, the committee consulted a wound ballistics expert to determine what relationship, if any, exists between the direction from which a bullet strikes the head and subsequent head movement. (20) The expert concluded that nerve damage from a bullet entering the President's head could have caused his back muscles to tighten which, in turn, could have caused his head to move toward the rear.(21) He demonstrated the phenomenon in a filmed experiment which involved the shooting of goats. (22) Thus, the committee determined that the rearward movement of the President's head would not be fundamentally inconsistent with a bullet striking from the rear.(23)

---

Quote:

---

The forensic pathology panel determined that Governor Connally was struck by a bullet from the rear, one that entered just below the right armpit and exited below the right nipple of the chest. It then shattered the radius bone of the Governor's right wrist and caused a superficial wound to the left thigh. (24) Based on its examination of the nature and alinement of the Governor's wounds, the panel concluded that they were all caused by a single bullet that came from the rear. It concluded further that, having caused the Governor's wounds, the bullet was dislodged from his left thigh.

The panel determined that the nature of the wounds of President Kennedy and Governor Connally was consistent with the possibility that one bullet entered the upper right back of President Kennedy and, after emerging from the front of the neck, caused all of the Governor's wounds. (25) A factor that influenced the panel significantly was the ovoid shape of the wound in the Governor's back, indicating that the bullet had begun to tumble or yaw before entering.(26) An ovoid wound is characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or glanced off an intervening object. (27) Based on the evidence available to it, the panel concluded that a single bullet passing through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally would support a fundamental conclusion that the President was struck by two, and only two, bullets, each fired from behind. (28) Thus, the forensic pathology panel's conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory advanced by the Warren Commission. (29)

---

Quote:

---

You can use Google Maps to measure it

---

Jugstore Cowboy said:

---

Quote:

---

You can use Google Maps to measure it

---

I used google earthview to measure the distance from where I was taking the pictures, and where the tree line is. It was eye-opening, so to speak, to put a number on what's clear to the naked eye and what's clear with a little magnification.

But anyone who played a little football, or watched enough, knows what an adult male looks like at 100 yards. It's not a great distance.

---

nortex97 said:

---

Moving targets?

---

Quote:

---

There were no nitrates on Oswald's cheek, indicating he hadn't fired a rifle. There were nitrates on his hands, but on the palms, not the back of his hand. When you fire a pistol it deposits nitrates on the back of the hand holding the pistol. In 1963 handling cardboard boxes or a newspaper could cause you to test positive for nitrates. Oswald handled boxes in his job and read newspapers all the time, including on the morning of the 22nd of November, 1963. So, Oswald had no nitrates on his cheek and the back of his hand, indicating he did not fire a rifle or pistol. Because of his job, the nitrates on the palm of his hand is meaningless.

To be fair, the FBI did tests with firing a rifle and some of the shooters tested negative. Overall, the the FBI and the WC decided that the "Paraffin tests were unreliable.

---

BoerneGator said:

---

Quote:

---

There were no nitrates on Oswald's cheek, indicating he hadn't fired a rifle. There were nitrates on his hands, but on the palms, not the back of his hand. When you fire a pistol it deposits nitrates on the back of the hand holding the pistol. In 1963 handling cardboard boxes or a newspaper could cause you to test positive for nitrates. Oswald handled boxes in his job and read newspapers all the time, including on the morning of the 22nd of November, 1963. So, Oswald had no nitrates on his cheek and the back of his hand, indicating he did not fire a rifle or pistol. Because of his job, the nitrates on the palm of his hand is meaningless.

To be fair, the FBI did tests with firing a rifle and some of the shooters tested negative. Overall, the the FBI and the WC decided that the "Paraffin tests were unreliable.

---

There's a lot of conflicting info on the internet. One can find whatever he needs to confirm a bias

---

AlaskanAg99 said:

---

The big one is Epstine.

Everything else is so long ago I don't think many will care. Even those responsible are all long dead.

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

So they concluded that the single bullet did all the damage that the Warren
report said?

---

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1a.html

Yes. They also brought in experts to examine the autopsy photos and X-rays and to authenticate them.

Quote:

---

The committee's forensic pathology panel was composed of nine members, eight of whom were chief medical examiners in major local jurisdictions in the United States.(11) As a group, they had been responsible for more than 100,000 autopsies, (12) an accumulation of experience the committee deemed invaluable in the evaluation of the medical evidence--including the autopsy X-rays and photographs--to determine the cause of death of the President and the nature and location of his wounds.


The forensic pathology panel concluded that President Kennedy was struck by two, and only two, bullets, each of which entered from the rear. The panel further concluded that the President was struck by one bullet that entered in the upper right of the back and exited from the front of the throat, and one bullet that entered in the right rear of the head near the cowlick area and exited from the right side of the head, toward the front. This second bullet caused a massive wound to the President's head upon exit. There is no medical evidence that the President was struck by a bullet entering the front of the head,(19) and the possibility that a bullet could have struck the President and yet left no evidence is extremely remote. Because this conclusion appears to be inconsistent with the backward motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film, the committee consulted a wound ballistics expert to determine what relationship, if any, exists between the direction from which a bullet strikes the head and subsequent head movement. (20) The expert concluded that nerve damage from a bullet entering the President's head could have caused his back muscles to tighten which, in turn, could have caused his head to move toward the rear.(21) He demonstrated the phenomenon in a filmed experiment which involved the shooting of goats. (22) Thus, the committee determined that the rearward movement of the President's head would not be fundamentally inconsistent with a bullet striking from the rear.(23)

---

The House Select Committee on Assassinations was pretty clear in their findings.

They went on to confirm the single bullet:

Quote:

---

The forensic pathology panel determined that Governor Connally was struck by a bullet from the rear, one that entered just below the right armpit and exited below the right nipple of the chest. It then shattered the radius bone of the Governor's right wrist and caused a superficial wound to the left thigh. (24) Based on its examination of the nature and alinement of the Governor's wounds, the panel concluded that they were all caused by a single bullet that came from the rear. It concluded further that, having caused the Governor's wounds, the bullet was dislodged from his left thigh.

The panel determined that the nature of the wounds of President Kennedy and Governor Connally was consistent with the possibility that one bullet entered the upper right back of President Kennedy and, after emerging from the front of the neck, caused all of the Governor's wounds. (25) A factor that influenced the panel significantly was the ovoid shape of the wound in the Governor's back, indicating that the bullet had begun to tumble or yaw before entering.(26) An ovoid wound is characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or glanced off an intervening object. (27) Based on the evidence available to it, the panel concluded that a single bullet passing through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally would support a fundamental conclusion that the President was struck by two, and only two, bullets, each fired from behind. (28) Thus, the forensic pathology panel's conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory advanced by the Warren Commission. (29)

---

---

stetson said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

So they concluded that the single bullet did all the damage that the Warren
report said?

---

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1a.html

Yes. They also brought in experts to examine the autopsy photos and X-rays and to authenticate them.

Quote:

---

The committee's forensic pathology panel was composed of nine members, eight of whom were chief medical examiners in major local jurisdictions in the United States.(11) As a group, they had been responsible for more than 100,000 autopsies, (12) an accumulation of experience the committee deemed invaluable in the evaluation of the medical evidence--including the autopsy X-rays and photographs--to determine the cause of death of the President and the nature and location of his wounds.


The forensic pathology panel concluded that President Kennedy was struck by two, and only two, bullets, each of which entered from the rear. The panel further concluded that the President was struck by one bullet that entered in the upper right of the back and exited from the front of the throat, and one bullet that entered in the right rear of the head near the cowlick area and exited from the right side of the head, toward the front. This second bullet caused a massive wound to the President's head upon exit. There is no medical evidence that the President was struck by a bullet entering the front of the head,(19) and the possibility that a bullet could have struck the President and yet left no evidence is extremely remote. Because this conclusion appears to be inconsistent with the backward motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film, the committee consulted a wound ballistics expert to determine what relationship, if any, exists between the direction from which a bullet strikes the head and subsequent head movement. (20) The expert concluded that nerve damage from a bullet entering the President's head could have caused his back muscles to tighten which, in turn, could have caused his head to move toward the rear.(21) He demonstrated the phenomenon in a filmed experiment which involved the shooting of goats. (22) Thus, the committee determined that the rearward movement of the President's head would not be fundamentally inconsistent with a bullet striking from the rear.(23)

---

The House Select Committee on Assassinations was pretty clear in their findings.

They went on to confirm the single bullet:

Quote:

---

The forensic pathology panel determined that Governor Connally was struck by a bullet from the rear, one that entered just below the right armpit and exited below the right nipple of the chest. It then shattered the radius bone of the Governor's right wrist and caused a superficial wound to the left thigh. (24) Based on its examination of the nature and alinement of the Governor's wounds, the panel concluded that they were all caused by a single bullet that came from the rear. It concluded further that, having caused the Governor's wounds, the bullet was dislodged from his left thigh.

The panel determined that the nature of the wounds of President Kennedy and Governor Connally was consistent with the possibility that one bullet entered the upper right back of President Kennedy and, after emerging from the front of the neck, caused all of the Governor's wounds. (25) A factor that influenced the panel significantly was the ovoid shape of the wound in the Governor's back, indicating that the bullet had begun to tumble or yaw before entering.(26) An ovoid wound is characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or glanced off an intervening object. (27) Based on the evidence available to it, the panel concluded that a single bullet passing through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally would support a fundamental conclusion that the President was struck by two, and only two, bullets, each fired from behind. (28) Thus, the forensic pathology panel's conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory advanced by the Warren Commission. (29)

---

---

You can find an expert to counter any expert or argument. It doesn't mean they are right. Ballistic exit holes are larger than entrance holes. I will never believe that a shot that blew off a rear part of JFK's skull, which landed on the trunk of the limousine and that Jackie climbed back to retrieve, came from the rear. I also don't buy the "magic bullet" theory.

---

Quote:

---

Something non-scientific that I have always found curious, as someone who has stood at "the window" back when you could do that, is why Oswald didn't take the shot during the hairpin turn onto Elm? Why wait until JFK is moving down and away, still with little relative motion but with increasing range? The question screams in your mind as you look out that window. The relative motion in the hairpin turn is zero and the distance is point blank. The only conclusions I could draw were either Oswald wasn't ready (unlikely) or the hairpin turn does not provide the crossing fields of fire that Dealey Plaza does and that Oswald was not a lone gunman.

---

japantiger said:

---

Here's where I am on the shooter:

Oswald had a 4x18 scope on the 6.5mm Carcano Model 91/38 rifle; it was an Ordnance Optics scope, 3/4-inch tube, an 18mm objective lens, a simple crosshair reticle, and basic windage/elevation adjustments. It was a low-quality, imported scope, side-mounted on the rifle, with poor optical clarity and a misalignment that required shims to correct during FBI testing. Its field of view was approx 20 feet at 100 yards.

A few points in no particular order:

• That's a pretty narrow field of view. Most "more modern" scopes with 30+mm objective lenses will provide 3x+ field of view at 4x magnification.
• The scope was side mounted and "shimmed" in place
• When tested by the FBI; the rifle was not zeroed
• Both Zeroing and aiming a side mounted rifle presents challenges
• The iron sights were still on the rifle
• The best data I can find on the timing from 1st shot to final shot was "likely 5.6 seconds (accepted by the Warren Commission)"; but could be as long as 8 seconds based on some views.

My bonafides: I shoot a fair amount. I qual'd as Marine Expert as a young man....no special marksmanship training beyond that from the military perspective. I never used a scope until about 10 years ago. So everything I shot up until then was with iron sights. In the last 10 years I have spent a lot of time shooting with scopes. I shoot a lot to be proficient for the type of hunting I do. I don't really view myself as a great shooter; though I have made my share of great shots. I have trained with elite shooters...they are spooky good. I am confident in saying I am well above average and well trained; but I would not say "elite".

I practice on ranges with varying scopes and some specific exercises; shooting; cycling the bolt, re-acquiring another target; and placing an accurate round on that target; with someone with a stop watch on me. The goal; shoot and reacquire and accurately shoot in less than 10 seconds. The "moved target" being anywhere from 25yds to 500 yds away. This simulates shooting an animal; not knocking it down with the first shot; and having to shoot the wounded animal as it has moved away. So, basically, what the lone gunman shooter would have had to do.

I score very well on getting an accurate round on the followup shot within 10 seconds; by accurate I mean on anything from a 6" to 12" plate depending on distance to target. ..usually 8". 80% of the time...some days (especially with little wind) better. But consistently 8 of 10 within 10 seconds across a wide range of distances. Many times in under 5 seconds...but often clicking the round when the counter says 9....mostly now I use a Z8i 2.3-18x56 scope...so great field of view on picking up the second target (about 20m field of view). I don't have to worry about my scope retaining zero even with heavy abuse. I don't have to do anything special holding a different distance or for wind; my BRH reticle makes that doable.

---

Quote:

---

As a Marine, Oswald struggled to maintain "Marksman" status...his skills degraded during his tenure according to records; he qualified with the M1 Garand. He scored 191 at the range in 1959; anything below 190 is failing.

---

Quote:

---

Friends/acquaintances told the Commission he was a poor shot

---

Quote:

---

...now, the magic shot was from about 88yds...so a far cry from trying to qualify from 200, 300 and out to 500 yds. But, he was nothing special in the Marines....below average. But, I feel as far as against the general population of shooters, though, he was probably at least an average shot.

---

Quote:

---

Given all of the above; I find it unlikely Oswald fired 3 shots; accurately; cycled the bolt twice (2.3 seconds required each time according to the FBI), reacquired a moving target twice, looking thru a "tunnel" (the 18mm FOV scope) under pressure.

---

Quote:

---

I believe it much more likely he didn't use the scope at all; and fired using the iron sights. He was used to iron sights; had trained with them. It would be much easier to reacquire a target using iron sights:

Scope Issues Outweigh Benefits: The scope's misalignment, poor quality, and side-mount configuration likely made it a liability rather than an asset. At 60-88 yards, 4x magnification offers minimal advantage over iron sights, and the narrow FOV and awkward positioning could have slowed Oswald downcrucial in a short shooting window. FBI tests showed the rifle was accurate with iron sights at similar ranges.

Oswald's Comfort Zone: His Marine training with iron sights at longer ranges (200-500 yards) suggests he could handle 88 yards effortlessly with the Carcano's sights. His lack of scope experience reinforces this preference, as adapting to a new system under pressure seems unlikely for a marginal shooter (191 in 1959).

Practicality in the Moment: For three shots, including a miss and two hits, iron sights line up with the need for speed and simplicity. The headshot's precision could result from a steady aim over familiar sights, not a misaligned scope requiring guesswork.

Absent this explanation; I don't think there is any way Oswald fired 3 shots (2 accurately) in that timeframe, while cycling the bolt, using that scope to re-acquire the target each time.

---

Bighunter43 said:

---

#1 I know the HSCA determined there was a conspiracy based the dictabelt recordings of the open motorcycle "mic" in Dealey Plaza. Subsequent tests later "disproved" that theory….however here is 2022 study that tends to agree that the HSCA "might" have gotten it right after all
.
https://maryferrell.org/archive/essays/mgriffith/hscaacous.pdf#page30

---

Quote:

---

#2. , This new analyses of the magic bullet theory by Knott Laboratories seems to disprove it, because Connally would have to be sitting at least 6 to 10 more inches inside than he was. Yes I actually own a dvd of Dale Myers computerized laser tests with him proving the trajectory of the Magic Bullet in the early 2000's…although I have read from several critics that he moved Connally more inside for his findings.

---

Quote:

---

As said on here earlier, you can pretty much find anything to refute just about anything on either side of the story. I've said numerous times that I've always thought Oswald was involved, just that he might not have acted alone…after all, who was flashing a secret service badge behind the picket fence when the first officer got up there, when there were no agents on the ground?? I have said that I believe that obviously there would be no "smoking gun" in the released files….no one CIA or whoever would ever write that down in the files. However, I still think more files are set to be released and we'll see what they contain. (I'm enjoying all the discussion as well)

---