1. We have two films, Zapruder and Nix, showing the president's head snapping forward a split second after the fatal shot, indicating a shot from the rear. We also have photographic evidence of an exit wound in the right front of the president's head, more evidence of a shot from the rear.
- No. The Zapruder film clearly shows JFK falling back and to the left. As for the photograph, it appears to be touched up to me. The massive rear head wound depicted in the parkland doctor's initial drawing and confirmed by all the other doctor's and nurses is the best evidence. There was no motive to fabricate the drawing. Oswald was not even a suspect yet.
2.We have several autopsy photos that support a shot from the rear.
- No. We have one entry wound in the back (no exit), six inches below the collar. We have an entry wound in the throat. We have an entry wound in the right temple. We have the curb markings aof the Teague shot which missed. And we have the Connally wounds. At least five (5) shots.
3. We have numerous bullet fragments from the president and the governor traced back to Oswald's rifle, as well as a damaged bullet that was also traced to Oswald's rifle.
-Quite the contrary.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PGchp3.html"Yet, there is nothing in this evidence itself to prove either that Oswald's rifle was used in the shooting or, if it was, that Oswald fired it. The whole fault in the Commission's case relating the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle to the shooting is this: bullets identifiable with that rifle were found outside of the victims' bodies. Pieces of metal not traceable to any rifle were found inside the bodies. The Report merely assumes the legitimacy of the specimens found externally and works on the assumption that these bullets and fragments had once been inside the bodies, and thus were involved in the shooting"
4.We have evidence that Oswald purchased the rifle.
-We do? Alex Hidell? And whose handwriting?
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PGchp3.htmlWC defenders note that the order form, money order, and envelope used to purchase the Mannlicher-Carcano were filled out in handwriting identified as Oswald's (see, for example, Moore 48). Furthermore, they point to Oswald's alleged use of the alias "Alek Hidell." The rifle was sent to Oswald's post office box, but it was ordered in the name of, and addressed to, "A. Hidell." According to the Dallas police, Oswald was carrying an "Alek J. Hidell" ID card when he was arrested. Here's where things get interesting.
To begin with, Oswald was at work when he is said to have purchased the money order (Summers 213). So who bought the money order? If Oswald didn't buy it, why does the handwriting on it seem to be his? There are forgers who can copy a person's handwriting so well that it is difficult if not impossible to detect their fakery, especially if only a small quantity of writing is required. Also, the original order form and envelope were destroyed, so the FBI had to rely on microfilm copies of this evidence.
Another problem with the connection between Oswald and the Carcano is that nobody at Oswald's post office reported giving him a hefty package such as the kind in which a rifle would be shipped (Summers 59; Meagher 50). In fact, none of those postal workers reported ever giving Oswald ANY kind of a package. Oddly, the FBI apparently made no effort to establish that Oswald picked up the rifle from the post office, or that he had ever received a package of any kind there. Furthermore, postal regulations required that only those persons named on the post office box's registration form could receive items of mail from the box, yet there is no evidence that Oswald listed the name of Hidell on the form (Smith 290-291). In fact, in a report dated 3 June 1964, the FBI stated, "Our investigation has revealed that Oswald did NOT indicate on his application that others, including an 'A. Hidell,' would receive mail through the box in question" (Meagher 49, emphasis added).
There is a discrepancy in size between the weapon ordered by "A. Hidell" and the rifle that Oswald allegedly left behind on the sixth floor of the TSBD. "A. Hidell" ordered item C20-T750 from an advertisement placed by Klein's Sporting Goods in the February 1963 issue of AMERICAN RIFLEMAN. The rifle that was listed as item C20-T750 is 36 inches long. However, the Mannlicher-Carcano that Oswald supposedly abandoned on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building is 40.2 inches long (Lifton 20).
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Problems_with_case_against_Oswald.htmlMost conspiracy theorists see the mail-order murder weapon and the "Hidell" ID card as evidence of a frame-up. They note the sheer stupidity of it all. In the Texas of 1963 Oswald could have bought a rifle across the counter with few if any questions asked. He could have done so and risked only a future debatable identification by some gun shop worker. Instead, we are told, Oswald ordered the murder weapon by using the alias "A. Hidell," gave his own post office box number, committed his handwriting to paper, and then went out to assassinate the President of the United States with this same "Hidell"-purchased rifle and while carrying a "Hidell" ID card in his wallet!
Many WC critics doubt that Oswald was carrying the "Hidell" ID card at the time of his arrest. They point to the fact that the Dallas police said nothing about the fake ID card until the FBI later announced that the alleged murder weapon had been ordered by an "A. Hidell." Critics also note that neither the phony identification nor the use of an alias is mentioned in the transcripts of the radio traffic between the arresting officers and the police station (Groden and Livingstone 183-184; Lane 133-136). One of the officers who brought Oswald to the police station, Paul Bentley, said he established Oswald's identify by going through his belongings, and there was no suggestion that Bentley had to decide whether his suspect was named Oswald or Hidell. Said Bentley, "On the way to City Hall I removed the suspect's wallet and obtained his name" (Groden and Livingstone 184). Additionally, not one of the arresting officers mentioned finding or seeing the Hidell ID card in their reports to the police chief two weeks after the assassination (Meagher 186). (A further twist comes from the fact that former FBI agent James Hosty, who worked out of the Dallas FBI office at the time of the assassination, claims in a recent book that Oswald's wallet was actually found at the J. D. Tippit murder scene!)
5.We have Oswald's prints on the rifle.
-The question is: who put the prints on them? And when?
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Problems_with_case_against_Oswald.htmlIf Oswald did order the rifle and maintain possession of it for a while, he could have been instructed to do so by those who were framing him to be the patsy for the assassination. If nothing else, the plotters could have arranged for Oswald to handle the rifle before the shooting, in order to get some of his prints on the weapon. The Dallas police found some partial fingerprints on the Carcano's magazine housing (a part of the trigger guard). The FBI studied these prints the day after the assassination and determined that they were worthless for identification purposes. However, in recent years two independent fingerprint experts examined photographs of the prints and concluded they were Oswald's. What is odd about these prints is that they were located on a part of the rifle that would NOT have been handled while it was being fired. Some researchers are understandably skeptical of the recent identification of the partial prints as Oswald's. But, if the prints are his, then I would suggest they were made as a result of Oswald being manipulated into handling the rifle shortly before the shooting.
Are the partial prints Oswald's? Fingerprint experts Jerry Powdrill and Vincent J. Scalice examined photos of the prints in 1993 and concluded they were Oswald's. Many conspiracy theorists are skeptical of this identification and point out that the prints were studied carefully in 1963 by the FBI's Sebastian Latona, a highly skilled and experienced fingerprint expert, and found to be worthless. WC defenders reply that Latona didn't have access to the same photos of the prints that Powdrill and Scalice were able to use. However, not only was Latona able to study the original prints themselves, but he had additional pictures taken of them for examination purposes. Latona's WC testimony leads many researchers to doubt the validity of Powdrill's and Scalice's identification.
6.We have photos of Oswald holding the rifle and testimony of the woman, his wife, who took said photos (this destroys any claim that the photos were "doctored" by conspirators).
-Controversial, to say the least.
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Problems_with_case_against_Oswald.htmlAccording to the WC and the HSCA, all of the backyard snapshots were taken with a cheap, hand-held camera, known as the Imperial Reflex camera.
When the backyard photos were examined by Major John Pickard, a former commander of the photographic department of the Canadian Defense Department, he declared them to be fakes. Retired Detective Superintendent Malcolm Thompson, a past president of the Institute of Incorporated Photographers in England, analyzed the pictures and came to the same conclusion. (When the HSCA's photographic panel concluded that the backyard photos were authentic, Thompson deferred to the panel on most of the issues concerning the genuineness of the pictures. However, Thompson said he remained troubled by the chin on Oswald in the photos, which is different from his chin in other pictures.)
There are indications of fraud in the backyard photos that are obvious even to the layman. For example, the shadow of Oswald's nose falls in one direction while the shadow of his body falls in another direction. And, the shadow under Oswald's nose remains the same in all three photos even when his head is tilted. The HSCA's photographic panel could offer only an unrealistic reenactment based on highly improbable assumptions to explain the problematic nose shadow. In the end, the panel ended up appealing to a vanishing point analysis to explain all of the variant shadows in the backyard photos. I discussed this matter with a number of professional photographers, and none of them took the position that a vanishing point analysis would explain the kinds of conflicting shadows seen in the backyard pictures.
Another indication of fakery in the photos is the fact that the HSCA's photographic panel could find only minute ("very small") differences in the distances between objects in the backgrounds. This virtual sameness of backgrounds is a virtual impossibility given the manner in which the pictures were supposedly taken. In order to achieve this effect, Marina would have had to hold the camera in almost the exact same position, to within a tiny fraction of an inch each time, for each of the three photos, an extremely unlikely scenario, particularly in light of the fact that Oswald allegedly took the camera from her in between pictures to advance the film.
7.We have testimony from a man who saw Oswald carry a package into the book depository on the morning of the assassination, a package that was later found empty near the sixth floor sniper's nest. Oswald said it contained "curtain rods" but no curtain rods were ever found. Oswald was obviously lying that morning. Why?
- Not so obvious.
Sprague, Richard E.
The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald
Computers and Automation / October 1973
For the tenth anniversary of assassination, Sprague contributed this ambitious 15-page article that examined some of the photo-evidence against Oswald. Features several photos at the time not generally available, including full-page reproduction of James Murray Depository photo used in Six Seconds in Dallas. Publishes Hughes frame and Dillard photos as proof that no shots fired from Oswald window, observing later photos showed window bottom raised to height necessary to afford sniper view. Gene Daniels photo of landlady putting up curtains lends credence to Oswald’s story of bringing curtain rods to work. Presents work by Fred Newcomb on the Backyard Photos; and charges Marina with lying about her participation. Contends Howard Brennan never looks up during the Zapruder film. Implicates Marina, the Paines and deMohrenshildts, and Dallas Police. Even Oswald’s landlord and landlady are drawn in, as is Oswald co-worker Buell Wesley Frazier whom Sprague mentions was a crack shot who “disappeared for several.hours.after.the.assassination.
8. We have Oswald's prints on the boxes in the sixth floor sniper's nest.
-Sure, he worked there, didn't he? But how come no prints were found for any of his co-workers? They handled the boxes also.
9.We have the damning testimony of Oswald's co-workers (see post 95) who were on the fifth floor during the shooting and heard three shots come from above. They also heard what sounded like the the bolt action of a rifle, and three shell casings hitting the floor.
-They heard shots. So what? The question is: who did the firing?
10.We have evidence of Oswald fleeing the area and killing a police officer shortly after the shooting in Dealey Plaza.
-There is no evidence that he fled. He took a bus. And there is no evidence that he killed Tippet.
11.We have testimony from a Dallas Police officer that Oswald pulled a gun and yelled "This is it!" when confronted in the Texas theatre.
-He may have. By this time, he knew he had been set up.
12.We have the testimony of dozens of witnesses who heard three shots from the book depository (compared to the paltry few who thought they heard shots and saw "smoke" coming from the knoll), including a few witnesses who actually *saw* a man who matched Oswald's height, build and complexion fire three shots at the presidential motorcade.
-Many heard (and some saw) shots coming from the grassy knoll. Did you see "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" on the History Channel.? If not, it will soon be out on DVD. There is an eyewitness who claims to have seen two men (one shooting) from behind the grassy knoll fence. There is just a single eyewitness who claims to have seen someone looking like Oswald on the 6th floor. And he had faulty vision.
13.We have photograpic evidence showing several witnesses, including Secret Service agents, looking toward the book depository seconds after the shooting started.
-That could have been anyone firing, right? Just because they looked up, does not mean they saw LHO.
14.We have evidence that Oswald checked out library books on assassinations and JFK only a few months before the shooting in Dallas.
-Where is the evidence?
15.We have evidence that Oswald was an excellent shot, trained by the U.S. Marine Corps to hit a target at over 200 yards (the president was less than 100 yards from the TSBD when hit).
-He was? He had maggies drawers.
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Problems_with_case_against_Oswald.htmlIf anything, the evidence indicates Oswald had very little time for target practice in the weeks preceding President Kennedy's death. Oswald's landlady reported that in the forty days preceding the assassination Oswald usually watched TV or read after he came home from work. On the weekends, he almost always visited his wife and children. When and where did Oswald have the chance to practice firing at a moving target from sixty feet up and from an average of two hundred feet away?
And Oswald would have needed lots of practice. He was at best an average shot. One of his Marine Corps buddies, Nelson Delgado, reported that Oswald had trouble meeting the minimum Marine marksmanship standards, and that he was such a poor shot that he often missed the target completely. In 1977 former Rockefeller Foundation fellow Henry Hurt interviewed over fifty of Oswald's Marine colleagues. Apparently, not one of them described the alleged assassin as an excellent shot, and nearly all of them agreed with Delgado's testimony that Oswald was a poor marksman (Hurt 99-100).
Some WC defenders point to the CBS television network's reenactment of the assassination as proof that Oswald could have shot Kennedy. The CBS rifle test was reported in the 1975 documentary THE AMERICAN ASSASSINS and was presented as evidence of the WC's findings regarding the shooting. However, CBS's reenactment failed to establish that Oswald could have done what the WC said he did.
The CBS test was not a realistic simulation of the shooting feat attributed to Oswald. CBS used eleven expert riflemen, but Oswald was an average marksman at best. Also, the CBS test assumed the correctness of the single-bullet theory. Therefore, the shooters were not required to load and fire their second shot, or any shot, in approximately one second. They should have been asked to do so since numerous witnesses from all over Dealey Plaza said two of the shots came so closely together that they were nearly simultaneous (see, for example, Menninger 249, 253, 278, 298, and Brown 92-93, 99, 115). Some of these witnesses said the two shots were so close together that they almost sounded like a single burst of two bullets from an automatic weapon. No gunman, no matter how skilled, could have fired the Carcano with that kind of speed, and, obviously, the CBS shooters were not required to do so.
It should also be kept in mind that the CBS reenactment did not take into account such matters as the cramped conditions in which Oswald would have had to fire, and the fact that in the forty days preceding the assassination Oswald had few if any chances to target practice. The riflemen in the CBS test did not use the supposed murder weapon itself. They used a Carcano, but not the one Oswald allegedly used. Additionally, not one of the expert CBS shooters managed to score at least two hits out of three shots in less than six seconds on his first attempt, yet Oswald would have had only one attempt. Seven of the CBS riflemen failed to score two hits on ANY of their attempts.
16.We have evidence that Oswald left his wedding ring and a large amount of cash for his wife the morning of the assassination, something he had NEVER done before.
-Yes, one hundred seventy dollars. Why should he carry so much money. DTo buy a few cokes? Many men leave their wedding ring at home. What does this prove? That he expected to be caught? It's a reach. No evidence of anything.
17.We have Oswald's own brother (who visited Lee in jail) telling news media that Lee was guilty as charged.
-How would he know? Did Lee confess to him?
18.WE EVEN HAVE SOLID EVIDENCE THAT LEE OSWALD HAD TRIED TO ASSASSINATE ANOTHER PROMINENT POLITICAL FIGURE ONLY MONTHS BEFORE KENNEDY WAS KILLED!!!
-So Oswald, a left-wing nut-job, shot at Walker, a right-wing nut-job who hated JFK and Bobby. Why then would Oswald, a Marxist and Castro sympathizer, shoot JFK, a liberal who was seeking peace with Kruschev? You can't have it both ways.
19. Yet with all of this damning evidence (and there is even more evidence that I haven't presented) you clueless conspiracy nuts still cling to your ridiculous, unsubstantiated theories. It really boggles the mind.
-No, friend, you boggle the mind. Because you only consider the fabrications and misrepresentations put forth by the Warren Commission (primarily the totally discredited Magic Bullet Theory, but much else. You have lots of reading to do.
20. I bet you people thought O.J. Simpson was innocent too, right? Maybe the same conspirators who "framed" him also killed President Kennedy! Hell, they might even be the same folks who are currently "framing" Michael Jackson! It's all a vast, vast conspiracy!
-I happen to believe O.J. was guilty as sin. Because the evidence (blood) was overwhelming. So there. As for Michael Jackson, I don't give a damn one way or the other. And I have no interest in the case. So, not knowing the facts, I will not venture an opinion.
Finally, to you, sir, the JFK murder and all the facts pointing to conspiracy are all an improbable vast, vast coincidence!!!