JFK: Kennedy Assassination Etc.

Who killed JFK?

  • Lee Harvey Oswald

    Votes: 26 28.6%
  • Mafia

    Votes: 6 6.6%
  • CIA/FBI

    Votes: 31 34.1%
  • Cubans

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • KGB

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • The Illuminati/Masons/Lizards

    Votes: 8 8.8%
  • all of the above

    Votes: 18 19.8%

  • Total voters
    91

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
Just to clarify- I should have said; ''the road layout was different at one time, which is true, but only insofar as that the part of Elm steet where JFK was shot was once a two-way street and at some point before the assassination, it was turned into a one-way, which it still is today''.

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on these interviews with the railway workers who were stood on the triple overpass bridge at the time.
 

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
To Floyd1:
Thank you for posting that excellent video - hadn't seen that before, very interesting that these men's testimony wasn't given more prominence! They actually saw the gunfire smoke, and this leaves one wondering just WHY they are still blabbering away on tv about Oswald doing the shooting, when evidence points in different directions. And all the witnesses standing in the grass on Kennedy's right who stated shots coming from behind them, just more ignored testimony it seems..........
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
To Floyd1:
Thank you for posting that excellent video - hadn't seen that before, very interesting that these men's testimony wasn't given more prominence! They actually saw the gunfire smoke, and this leaves one wondering just WHY they are still blabbering away on tv about Oswald doing the shooting, when evidence points in different directions. And all the witnesses standing in the grass on Kennedy's right who stated shots coming from behind them, just more ignored testimony it seems..........
Hey Ronnie, yes they certainly seem to genuinely believe what they heard and saw.
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
To Floyd1:
Thank you for posting that excellent video - hadn't seen that before, very interesting that these men's testimony wasn't given more prominence! They actually saw the gunfire smoke, and this leaves one wondering just WHY they are still blabbering away on tv about Oswald doing the shooting, when evidence points in different directions. And all the witnesses standing in the grass on Kennedy's right who stated shots coming from behind them, just more ignored testimony it seems..........
Also of interest is James Tague who was stood on Commerce street by the bridge pier. He was hit by shards of concrete from the curb. He also said that he thought the shot had come from the knoll/pergola area. It's difficult to tell from google earth whether that bullet could have come from the sixth floor, but to me it seems like if it had it would have been a very high shot to have cleared Elm street, the grass in between, Main street, and a bit more grass to finally hit the curb on Commerce street. It would also have landed around 114 feet further up (east) Commerce street, (according to my measurements) which is quite a way from the bridge pier where Tague was stood. (It could, I suppose, have been deflected from hitting the car/Kennedy though.)
 

Ascalon

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
657
Reaction score
1,816
Points
154
To Floyd1:
Thank you for posting that excellent video - hadn't seen that before, very interesting that these men's testimony wasn't given more prominence! They actually saw the gunfire smoke, and this leaves one wondering just WHY they are still blabbering away on tv about Oswald doing the shooting, when evidence points in different directions. And all the witnesses standing in the grass on Kennedy's right who stated shots coming from behind them, just more ignored testimony it seems..........

I think the recent work done to understand the old magic bullet and the appearance of recoil from the major destructive shot has shown that the shots that did the actual damage came form the School Book Depository. Furthermore, LHO's Marine records show that he was a distinctly above average sharp shooter. The only issue seems to be that with the fairly agricultural weapon he chose, the Mannlicher–Carcano, was never known for accuracy, or rapid fire, both of which LHO seemed to have achieved. So if the ballistics match the shooter position, then the issue of grassy knoll or overpass shots becomes a much lesser concern, as they did not hit the president.

IMHO, LHO was undoubtedly involved in some sort of wider operation, by whom, I have no idea, but it is highly unlikely he acted alone. It is entirely possible he was able, with practice and preparation, to achieve the feat of marksmanship he did with what he did, none of which necessitated another shooter.

So, a second, or multiple shooters begs the question of whether other forces were at work, or whether they were merely back up to LHO.

What does appear to be clear is that it wasn't the Soviets, or at the very least nothing officially sanctioned, as records discovered post 1990 show fairly comprehensively that the Soviets did a lot of work to understand what happened and what was possible, fairly clearly showing they hadn't a rasher's of what went on at the time.
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
Some people say that Oswald actually only fired two shots, not three and that the third shell casing found in the book depository was due to the practice at the time of keeping an empty shell in the chamber to stop dirt etc getting in, which he then would have had to eject before commencing shooting. That certainly would raise suspicions that he wasn't the only one shooting that day.

Some others believe that he fired his first shot before Zapruda started filming, when Kennedy was much closer to him (only just having turned onto Elm street from Houston), and that his view was blocked by the traffic light arm so that one completely missed.
 

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
Interesting that, if I recall correctly, Oswald's hands were tested for powder burns, and it was determined that he had not fired a weapon that day. That leaves a huge hole in the official version of events, one that has never been addressed, apparently.
I certainly don't believe that the secret service agent, George Hickey, supposedly shot JFK by accident from a car behind, but that's just my feeling. ('Mortal Error: The Shot that Killed JFK', by Bonar Menninger)
However, supposedly the 'head shot' was a different type of bullet from the others which hit Kennedy, at least that Colin McLaren (the Australian who investigated the case on the tv show 'JFK: The Smoking Gun') believes, which would make this a whole different case with more shooters.
I remember my Dad, who was very familiar with guns and rifles, saying that there was no way Oswald could have accomplished this, he never believed it.
November 20, 1963, 'Rose Cheramie' was telling about the coming assassination:

https://www.kennedysandking.com/joh...ramie-how-she-predicted-the-jfk-assassination

Seems the assassination was originally planned for Florida, that fell through, then Dallas became the target area and Oswald was, handily, working in a building right on the parade route - and he became 'the patsy'.
Just my opinion that the conspirators were waiting for their chance, it was going to happen, just a matter of where and when.
All these years later, and it doesn't seem that a really thorough investigation into all the people supposedly involved was ever done, that's sad.
 

Ascalon

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
657
Reaction score
1,816
Points
154
Interesting that, if I recall correctly, Oswald's hands were tested for powder burns, and it was determined that he had not fired a weapon that day. That leaves a huge hole in the official version of events, one that has never been addressed, apparently.
I certainly don't believe that the secret service agent, George Hickey, supposedly shot JFK by accident from a car behind, but that's just my feeling. ('Mortal Error: The Shot that Killed JFK', by Bonar Menninger)
However, supposedly the 'head shot' was a different type of bullet from the others which hit Kennedy, at least that Colin McLaren (the Australian who investigated the case on the tv show 'JFK: The Smoking Gun') believes, which would make this a whole different case with more shooters.
I remember my Dad, who was very familiar with guns and rifles, saying that there was no way Oswald could have accomplished this, he never believed it.
November 20, 1963, 'Rose Cheramie' was telling about the coming assassination:

https://www.kennedysandking.com/joh...ramie-how-she-predicted-the-jfk-assassination

Seems the assassination was originally planned for Florida, that fell through, then Dallas became the target area and Oswald was, handily, working in a building right on the parade route - and he became 'the patsy'.
Just my opinion that the conspirators were waiting for their chance, it was going to happen, just a matter of where and when.
All these years later, and it doesn't seem that a really thorough investigation into all the people supposedly involved was ever done, that's sad.
Is there any references for the gunshot residue tests on Oswald? I've never seen any evidence of that before.
Addition: Apologies, is this referencing the warm parafin test for nitrates? If so, there appear to be two words to associate: unreliable and inconclusive.

Also, on what is the headshot round assertion based?

As for the shot from the car behind, that doesn't fit with the wound examination, as the trajectory would be too shallow and would have resulted in an exit wound far below the one recorded.
 
Last edited:

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
Please watch 'JFK: The Smoking Gun' with Colin McLaren, he was the retired policeman who brought up this head shot evidence, with what he believes is a different type of bullet, his hypotheses are different than anyone else's. Here it is:

https://tubitv.com/movies/319705/jfk-the-smoking-gun

(I don't agree with him, but his ideas are interesting!)
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
Interesting that, if I recall correctly, Oswald's hands were tested for powder burns, and it was determined that he had not fired a weapon that day. That leaves a huge hole in the official version of events, one that has never been addressed, apparently.
I certainly don't believe that the secret service agent, George Hickey, supposedly shot JFK by accident from a car behind, but that's just my feeling. ('Mortal Error: The Shot that Killed JFK', by Bonar Menninger)
However, supposedly the 'head shot' was a different type of bullet from the others which hit Kennedy, at least that Colin McLaren (the Australian who investigated the case on the tv show 'JFK: The Smoking Gun') believes, which would make this a whole different case with more shooters.
I remember my Dad, who was very familiar with guns and rifles, saying that there was no way Oswald could have accomplished this, he never believed it.
November 20, 1963, 'Rose Cheramie' was telling about the coming assassination:

https://www.kennedysandking.com/joh...ramie-how-she-predicted-the-jfk-assassination

Seems the assassination was originally planned for Florida, that fell through, then Dallas became the target area and Oswald was, handily, working in a building right on the parade route - and he became 'the patsy'.
Just my opinion that the conspirators were waiting for their chance, it was going to happen, just a matter of where and when.
All these years later, and it doesn't seem that a really thorough investigation into all the people supposedly involved was ever done, that's sad.
Yes, I have seen the documentary about the theory that Hickey accidentally shot Kennedy. I think it's possible, but unlikely.
There are so many theories about it's difficult to keep up with them all. The Rose Cheramie case certainly has some weight though in my opinion.
I have also read that about the powder burns and that the two police officers who initially found the scene in the store room stated that the rifle left there was a Mauser, not a Carcano. It may be an easy mistake, but I'd have thought that two Dallas cops would know their guns.

Some 'experts' say it is quite feasible that he could have fired three shots in the time he had, other 'experts' say he couldn't possibly have done so.

So many testimonies that were ignored.
Dino Brugioni who saw the full Zapruda film is worth looking up. See post #848
 

Ascalon

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
657
Reaction score
1,816
Points
154
Please watch 'JFK: The Smoking Gun' with Colin McLaren, he was the retired policeman who brought up this head shot evidence, with what he believes is a different type of bullet, his hypotheses are different than anyone else's. Here it is:

https://tubitv.com/movies/319705/jfk-the-smoking-gun

(I don't agree with him, but his ideas are interesting!)
Alas, Tubi content is not available in Europe due to failure to meet GDPR requirements. Even Amazon won't let me see it. :(
Edit to add: There's a decent critique of the McLaren theory here at the Philadelphia Inquirer.

For my part, I don't buy the accidental shot from the following car. There is just too much required to have it happen and even if it did, for it go unnoticed is too far fetched. I am firm believer in the old Conan Doyle axiom of when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is left, however, improbable, must be the truth. But in this case, the shot from the following car just doesn't stand up.
 
Last edited:

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
Alas, Tubi content is not available in Europe due to failure to meet GDPR requirements. Even Amazon won't let me see it. :(
Years ago I saw the documentary with Colin McLaren about the theory that Hickey accidentally did it. It was a good prog but I just don't know. Could he have done it without anyone seeing it? Or did people see it happen but their reports were just ignored like many other peoples were?
The JFK case wears me out sometimes. Too many possibilities!
 

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
Alas, Tubi content is not available in Europe due to failure to meet GDPR requirements. Even Amazon won't let me see it. :(
Edit to add: There's a decent critique of the McLaren theory here at the Philadelphia Inquirer.

For my part, I don't buy the accidental shot from the following car. There is just too much required to have it happen and even if it did, for it go unnoticed is too far fetched. I am firm believer in the old Conan Doyle axiom of when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is left, however, improbable, must be the truth. But in this case, the shot from the following car just doesn't stand up.
That's the word I was searching for - too 'far fetched', thank you!
And it's no wonder their book 'Mortal Error' never went anywhere.
 

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
Years ago I saw the documentary with Colin McLaren about the theory that Hickey accidentally did it. It was a good prog but I just don't know. Could he have done it without anyone seeing it? Or did people see it happen but their reports were just ignored like many other peoples were?
The JFK case wears me out sometimes. Too many possibilities!
I was a bit stunned that McLaren seems so CERTAIN about his theory, don't understand that.
Too many possibilities is right, there are so many people who should have been thoroughly investigated at the time, and it seems that every documentary or show on the case just goes with the Warren Commission version of events, the rest of the witnesses (and there were many) who saw and heard conflicting evidence, as you say, were and are ignored. Right there that would seem suspicious.
And - again if I recall correctly - the doctors at Parkland Hospital, didn't one of them say on camera that the head shot entered from the front?
It does wear one out!
 

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
Yes, I have seen the documentary about the theory that Hickey accidentally shot Kennedy. I think it's possible, but unlikely.
There are so many theories about it's difficult to keep up with them all. The Rose Cheramie case certainly has some weight though in my opinion.
I have also read that about the powder burns and that the two police officers who initially found the scene in the store room stated that the rifle left there was a Mauser, not a Carcano. It may be an easy mistake, but I'd have thought that two Dallas cops would know their guns.

Some 'experts' say it is quite feasible that he could have fired three shots in the time he had, other 'experts' say he couldn't possibly have done so.

So many testimonies that were ignored.
Dino Brugioni who saw the full Zapruda film is worth looking up. See post #848
WOW - that is some eye-opening information, Thank You for posting this!
How is it that Life Magazine came forward to purchase Zapruder's film, I've often wondered that, wasn't it actually something of interest to our government to obtain, after all this was the murder of our President? I believe this man, Mr. Brugioni, when he states what he saw on the early Zapruder film, I did get a bit lost on all the points of this video, is he saying that the CIA or someone else manipulated the film? And then Life Magazine kept it locked up for years, strange.
And this is why the film we see today (that we are ALLOWED to see) is so choppy? Whole pieces have been removed.
I recall one of the first things that was done to the limousine is that it was removed from the scene, cleaned completely, and a new windshield installed - and that windshield had damage to it, allegedly, which would show the direction of shooting perhaps?
Dreadful cover-ups at every turn, it seems.
 

DrPaulLee

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
1,458
Reaction score
1,649
Points
189
I wouldn't say that the Zapruder film has whole sections removed. He started filming when the police outriders turned on to Elm Street and, only having a small amount of film, he stopped until the motorcade had actually turned on to the street. Yes, there are frames missing which was noted at the time. Some of these are said to have been damaged but they have somehow been unearthed and can be seen in some versions of the film online (the last time I looked, the inter-sprocket area were blank for these frames).
It isn't just the Zapruder film that was midhandled. Orville Nix said that some of the frames of his film were ruined. And one of Mary Moorman's photos has vanished. Its been a long time since I delved into the JFK shooting so my memory may be a bit off. I know Mark Lane discusses some of these in his book and film, "Rush to Judgement."
 
Last edited:

maximus otter

Recovering policeman
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
9,955
Reaction score
23,590
Points
334
To Floyd1:
Thank you for posting that excellent video - hadn't seen that before, very interesting that these men's testimony wasn't given more prominence! They actually saw the gunfire smoke, and this leaves one wondering just WHY they are still blabbering away on tv about Oswald doing the shooting, when evidence points in different directions. And all the witnesses standing in the grass on Kennedy's right who stated shots coming from behind them, just more ignored testimony it seems..........

lt’s a very convenient fact for (military) snipers that the sound of their shots bounces between buildings. This helps them stay hidden, as enemy forces can’t detect their firing positions due to the confusing echoes in an urban setting. l believe that this may account for some bewilderment among witnesses.

Also, most people don’t realise that every rifle shot produces two sounds if the bullet passes close to the observer. The first - a crack! - is the supersonic “wake” of the bullet’s passage impacting the observer’s ear; the second - a thump - is the actual sound of the shot being discharged, the high frequencies filtered out by distance. As this travels at only 1,100 feet per second (roughly the speed of sound) it arrives after the bullet itself.

Factor in the sound of possible ricocheting fragments, the sound of bullets impacting concrete or flesh and the confusion of startled witnesses, and the varying testimonies are understandable.

Here is a short, amateur video of a .223 bullet being fired past a microphone (FF to about 20 seconds). You will hear:

a) The crack of the bullet’s passage, then;

b) The whine of it ricocheting, followed almost immediately by;

c) The “thump” sound of the shot being fired.


maximus otter
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
WOW - that is some eye-opening information, Thank You for posting this!
How is it that Life Magazine came forward to purchase Zapruder's film, I've often wondered that, wasn't it actually something of interest to our government to obtain, after all this was the murder of our President? I believe this man, Mr. Brugioni, when he states what he saw on the early Zapruder film, I did get a bit lost on all the points of this video, is he saying that the CIA or someone else manipulated the film? And then Life Magazine kept it locked up for years, strange.
And this is why the film we see today (that we are ALLOWED to see) is so choppy? Whole pieces have been removed.
I recall one of the first things that was done to the limousine is that it was removed from the scene, cleaned completely, and a new windshield installed - and that windshield had damage to it, allegedly, which would show the direction of shooting perhaps?
Dreadful cover-ups at every turn, it seems.
Yes the windscreen removal and disposal is yet another point.
What I often wonder is why Oswald left the building. When the police officer entered (because he thought the shots came from the sixth floor), he met the manager of the building and on the way up they bumped into Oswald. He asked the manager if Oswald worked there, to which he replied that he did. Oswald wasn't nervous, out of breath or panicky, but quite calm by their accounts. If he'd just stayed in the canteen or wherever he was headed to/from he would have probably been fine. Why go and get on a bus (or in a car by a couple of accounts) and head to his rooming house, then a theatre? Very odd.

Dino Brugioni was a very well respected image analyst and had worked on many projects for the goverment.

Don't forget, the American public weren't allowed to see the head shot (with the blood/brain splatter) for 12 years, because they thought it would upset the people too much. That's how easy it is to cover something up.
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
Some of these are said to have been damaged but they have somehow been unearthed and can be seen in some versions of the film online
So you are saying that it is possible for us to view the same Zapruder film that Dino Brugioni and the two secret service guys viewed late on the Saturday night?
 

Roland Deschain

All things serve the beam
Joined
Sep 8, 2015
Messages
520
Reaction score
844
Points
104
The only issue seems to be that with the fairly agricultural weapon he chose, the Mannlicher–Carcano, was never known for accuracy, or rapid fire, both of which LHO seemed to have achieved. So if the ballistics match the shooter position, then the issue of grassy knoll or overpass shots becomes a much lesser concern, as they did not hit the president.
That is a common misconception. In truth the specification and factory acceptance testing of the Carcano was more stringent than any other battle rifle of its day.
The misconception is due to people using unsuitable ammunition. If you used the correct Italian surplus ammo it was perfectly accurate and the shots were made at what is close range for a rifle anyway.
 

maximus otter

Recovering policeman
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
9,955
Reaction score
23,590
Points
334
That is a common misconception. In truth the specification and factory acceptance testing of the Carcano was more stringent than any other battle rifle of its day.
The misconception is due to people using unsuitable ammunition. If you used the correct Italian surplus ammo it was perfectly accurate and the shots were made at what is close range for a rifle anyway.

IIRC, the rifle itself was basic but of acceptable accuracy. The issue was with the way that a (cheap) 4X telescopic sight had been attached to it by (cheap) mounts.

The assassination shots were at a range of only ~90 yards. At a range of 100 yards, the FBI were able to keep all bullets from Oswald’s rifle inside a 3” to 5” circle.

maximus otter
 

Roland Deschain

All things serve the beam
Joined
Sep 8, 2015
Messages
520
Reaction score
844
Points
104
IIRC, the rifle itself was basic but of acceptable accuracy. The issue was with the way that a (cheap) 4X telescopic sight had been attached to it by (cheap) mounts.

The assassination shots were at a range of only ~90 yards. At a range of 100 yards, the FBI were able to keep all bullets from Oswald’s rifle inside a 3” to 5” circle.

maximus otter
Did he even use the telescopic sight though? The scope was offset to allow the en-bloc clips to be loaded which leaves the iron sights usable. The iron sights were fixed at 200 meters (about 3 inches high at 100 meters) which would have been ideal for what he did.
 

Ascalon

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
657
Reaction score
1,816
Points
154
That is a common misconception. In truth the specification and factory acceptance testing of the Carcano was more stringent than any other battle rifle of its day.
The misconception is due to people using unsuitable ammunition. If you used the correct Italian surplus ammo it was perfectly accurate and the shots were made at what is close range for a rifle anyway.
That's a fair point, but what I was getting at was that LHO, in his experience as a marine sharp shooter and subsequently, could have allowed him to prepare the weapon, or train with it sufficiently, to ensure that he was able to achieve the accuracy necessary. As for the different effects of the shots, he could have had a mix of prepared rounds, such as manually hollow-pointed or notched, that would have changed the characteristics.

These are not far fetched circumstances, and are well within what was known of the man. As regards his appearance in the building after the shooting, unflustered and and calm, that doesn't necessarily say much either, as many people who have been in the kind of training that marines receive learn to control themselves during an active situation, and do not release tension until afterwards. Again, it all points back to the fact that LHO had capabilities more like a trained agent, than a mere enthusiastic amateur. It is not evidence of such, but certainly hints at it.
 

maximus otter

Recovering policeman
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
9,955
Reaction score
23,590
Points
334
...LHO...could have had a mix of prepared rounds, such as manually hollow-pointed or notched, that would have changed the characteristics.

While it's very possible that LHO might have (a) heard and (b) believed that mutilating the bullets in the ammo that he as using would have increased the wounding effect, it's not usually the result achieved. The Carcano fired a 160 grain bullet at about 2,200-2,400 feet per second. Such a bullet would carry far more destructive energy, simply by virtue of its mass and speed, than the end-user could jury-rig in by fiddling with the bullet. (Roughly 1,400 foot-pounds of energy for LHO's bullet at ~90 yards.)

Here is a video showing a bullet of similar calibre to LHO's, albeit travelling a little faster, striking a flesh simulant:


Any additional effect possibly produced by tampering with the projectile would have been merely gilding the lily.

Also, and even worse for the adapted bullet theory, any such home-made alterations to the bullet would probably have degraded its accuracy, possibly to the point where it would have flown wide, even at 90 yards.

maximus otter
 
Last edited:

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
Yes the windscreen removal and disposal is yet another point.
What I often wonder is why Oswald left the building. When the police officer entered (because he thought the shots came from the sixth floor), he met the manager of the building and on the way up they bumped into Oswald. He asked the manager if Oswald worked there, to which he replied that he did. Oswald wasn't nervous, out of breath or panicky, but quite calm by their accounts. If he'd just stayed in the canteen or wherever he was headed to/from he would have probably been fine. Why go and get on a bus (or in a car by a couple of accounts) and head to his rooming house, then a theatre? Very odd.

Dino Brugioni was a very well respected image analyst and had worked on many projects for the goverment.

Don't forget, the American public weren't allowed to see the head shot (with the blood/brain splatter) for 12 years, because they thought it would upset the people too much. That's how easy it is to cover something up.
I've wondered the same thing - why Oswald left the building, and if he was the shooter, why he would leave that evidence up on the sixth floor.
Then again, he couldn't have been in that lunchroom and up on the sixth floor at the same time.
Perhaps he was waiting inside the building, for someone to show up to give him instructions, or was waiting in the lunch room for a phone call which didn't come and he became aware that he was in danger? (I've read that there was an employee phone in that lunchroom)
His landlady stated that a police car stopped in front of the house, while Oswald was changing in his room, and beeped. ???
Could Oswald have left because he was to meet someone at that movie theater after the shooting, someone who never showed up, or was he just in hiding until he decided what he should do next?
Seems many of Oswald's actions are too strange to decipher, same with that Jack Ruby.
 

Ronnie Jersey

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
253
Reaction score
609
Points
98
I wouldn't say that the Zapruder film has whole sections removed. He started filming when the police outriders turned on to Elm Street and, only having a small amount of film, he stopped until the motorcade had actually turned on to the street. Yes, there are frames missing which was noted at the time. Some of these are said to have been damaged but they have somehow been unearthed and can be seen in some versions of the film online (the last time I looked, the inter-sprocket area were blank for these frames).
It isn't just the Zapruder film that was midhandled. Orville Nix said that some of the frames of his film were ruined. And one of Mary Moorman's photos has vanished. Its been a long time since I delved into the JFK shooting so my memory may be a bit off. I know Mark Lane discusses some of these in his book and film, "Rush to Judgement."
I had no idea Mary Moorman had taken a second photo, I just looked it up and found this:

https://coolinterestingstuff.com/jfk-conspiracy-the-mary-moorman-jfk-picture

Supposedly her 2nd photo showed the 6th floor of the book depository building? And the FBI confiscated it, according to this article anyway.
And that can only mean one thing, it went against 'their' agenda, just my opinion.

Every time I look at this case, it's just more questions..........
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
47,663
Reaction score
43,987
Points
334
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
I've wondered the same thing - why Oswald left the building, and if he was the shooter, why he would leave that evidence up on the sixth floor.
Then again, he couldn't have been in that lunchroom and up on the sixth floor at the same time.
Perhaps he was waiting inside the building, for someone to show up to give him instructions, or was waiting in the lunch room for a phone call which didn't come and he became aware that he was in danger? (I've read that there was an employee phone in that lunchroom)
His landlady stated that a police car stopped in front of the house, while Oswald was changing in his room, and beeped. ???
Could Oswald have left because he was to meet someone at that movie theater after the shooting, someone who never showed up, or was he just in hiding until he decided what he should do next?
Seems many of Oswald's actions are too strange to decipher, same with that Jack Ruby.
I am becoming more convinced that he was set up, used as a diversion to let the real killer get away.
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
I had no idea Mary Moorman had taken a second photo, I just looked it up and found this:

https://coolinterestingstuff.com/jfk-conspiracy-the-mary-moorman-jfk-picture

Supposedly her 2nd photo showed the 6th floor of the book depository building? And the FBI confiscated it, according to this article anyway.
And that can only mean one thing, it went against 'their' agenda, just my opinion.

Every time I look at this case, it's just more questions..........
Yes, why confiscate it? It would either show Oswald at the window, no one at the window, or someone else at the window. And what do you think to Gordon Arnold's statements?
 

Floyd1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
5,428
Points
209
Could Oswald have left because he was to meet someone at that movie theater after the shooting, someone who never showed up, or was he just in hiding until he decided what he should do next?
I don't think Oswald intented to go to the movie theatre as he was heading east on east 10th street, (which is going away from the theatre) when Tippit pulled up to him.
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
4,918
Reaction score
5,938
Points
214
Movie theater seems like the place you'd go if you need to meet someone and hand over passports or such things, before heading out of the country.
 
Top