Explaining the Shooting of Governor John Connally

Shown on FreeRepublic for the first time. | October 25, 2006 | Bill Charleston

[SoCal Pubbie]

The only two worth the time are Conspiracy of One and Case Closed.

[Lando Lincoln]

As usual, I've shown up at the party after everyone has gone home. I have fired a Carcano. They are everything you say they are. Not a precision fit firearm, but reliable and quite accurate. I have also been to the book depository. In my years of hunting, I have connected on many shots more difficult than Oswald's. In fact, because of the angles involved, Kennedy was nearly stationary. Not remarkable shooting, IMO. Also, Oswald only had to it once (hit his target 2 out of three times). He did.

[Shooter 2.5]

There's a new restaurant in Dallas. It's called Ozzie Rabbit. That name was Oswald's nickname while he was in the military. The owners only devoted one space in the restaurant to Oswald. It has the picture of Ruby shooting LHO.

[SoCal Pubbie]

After narrowly surviving an attack with a hand grenade, and despite warnings not to go, Archduke Ferdinand decided to go to the hospital to see the victims of that earlier attack. The driver was not given the right directions, and took a wrong turn while en route. When the Archduke's host called out the mistake, the driver stopped, and backed up slowly, within five feet of the assassin who poured bullets into Franz Ferdinand and his wife.

Was that random, or random squared?

[Churchillspirit]

Thanks.

[SoCal Pubbie]

I was just short of my fourth birthday when JFK was killed. I remember the funeral, but I do not remember anything specifically about JFK's murder. I do recall, rather vividly, my mother's reaction to Ruby shooting Oswald as we watched on TV.

[The KG9 Kid]

Hilarious and tasteless.

Must be part of that trendy underground hipster scene emerging in Dallas.

What's their menu look like?

[Shooter 2.5]

I just read the review this afternoon in the free Fort Worth Weekly. It's probably tofu.

[The KG9 Kid]

I nailed it.

[BILL_C]

What factor would you give to the hypothetical fact that Gov. Connally was holding his hat 25 seconds after Pres. Kennedy was shot in the back? Would you consider that to be an indication (although not absolute proof) that Gov. Connally was not shot in the wrist until at least 25 seconds after Pres. Kennedy was shot in the back? Would you say it's over 0.9 (very important and valid)?

I think the 0.9 that I defined is a believability factor. Obviously IF Connally held on to his hat with his right hand all the way to the hospital that says NOTHING about when he was shot. So I agree the observation of John Connally holding on to his hat AFTER the time the Single Bullet Shot was made is not proof of anything, but it's a reasonable indication that he was shot after we see him with the hat in his hand, sitting up, and turning around.

One of the many presentations I made was to an ex-Army Officer from Viet Nam days. His point was that people can do extraordinary things when shot, he'd seen it so he even ruled out the turn Connally made after the Z=230 recovery (from what I said was a minor wound to his left leg) all the way to Z=325 when Connally is shot in the back.

So what IS a show stopper for the magic bullet theory? One of them I listed was the FBI agent at the autopsy who said there was no point of exit for the bullet found by probing with an instrument and his finger. That totally rules out the magic bullet. BUT what factor do you assign to the credibility of his observation? None of the doctors said that, and Humes (sp?) destroyed his autopsy notes. And that fact is well known and still a sizable fraction of people understand that fact, so it won't convince any more people.

Along that same line is the angle of the trajectory down through JFK, then through his neck. THE sketch provided to the Warren Commission was showing the entry to the back of JFK's neck. The Autopsy photos were NOT shown to the Warren Commission and the excuse is that was out of respect to the Kennedy Family. That to me, the fact is the bullet went UP if it took the trajectory the Warren Commissioin said it did as it went through JFK. That fact is also known but we have (IMHO) rediculous conclusions that the bullet traveled down through JFK because his arm was on the car, and therefore 4 inches BELOW his back collar was above the front of his neck at the knot of his tie.

SO none of those things I put in the table will convince anyone else that the Magic Bullet is not valid.

BUT, this presentation for the first time gives an alternative to the MAGIC BULLET. There are MANY things which indicate there were two closely spaced shots at the end of the shooting (Z=313, Z=325). That information, if true, will convince everyone that there were multiple shooters.

So using a table with the observations I have individually is not nearly as convincing as the sum of the observations. The MAGIC BULLET THEORY scores poorly per my rating. The alternative for the first time is a Connally back shot at Z=325.

Putting the poor showing of the Single Bullet Theory in my table vs. the good showing of the Z=325 shot scenario seals the deal for me. So that convinced me, it removed all doubt. BUT it may not convince you, or the majority of people who are exposed to this information. Presentation is everything.

Now most everyone will bring up Occam's razor. Given the fact that EXTRAORDINARY things must have happened for the SINGLE BULLET THEORY to be true, then the alternative scenario presented above is simple by comparison.

[The KG9 Kid]

"... As usual, I've shown up at the party after everyone has gone home. I have fired a Carcano. They are everything you say they are. Not a precision fit firearm, but reliable and quite accurate."

Thanks for coming. I only get the occasional response like that from someone who's actually owned or fired a 'Carcano.

Seems that everyone else who is a detractor of the Mannlicher-Carcano has fired it at length, personally owned several dozen of them, and have always said that they'd rather be armed with a pointy plastic tent stake than the loathesome 'Carcano. Why, that rifle would explode into fragments at the slightest touch (loaded with it's inferior unreliable ammunition that has the chamber pressure of a Daisy BB-gun), surrender itself to the enemy at the first sign of conflict, or shoot with the accuracy of a wiffle ball -- and that's only if you can get a round chambered, which you can't since it jams every single time. Why, the Mannlicher-Carcano is the worst rifle ever made and that's why the conspiracists have so much trigger time on one.

The truth is that these rifles were highly suitable Italian military arms that served that nation for a half century and saw quite a lot of action in African colonial wars, WWI, and WWII. They're simply a rugged military rifle made by Italians -- a race of people who clearly know what they're doing in regards to firearms manufacture.

I don't know what it is about people that don't like the 'Carcano: Maybe they don't like it's slender and gripless Italian stock profile, Mannlicher-style magazine bloc, or it's kooky-looking bottleplug ammunition cartridge. Maybe it's the 'Carcano's Italian heritage and the old 'Never fired, only dropped once' joke that's been retold for ages. Also, I have rarely seen military surplus 'Carcanos that didn't have cosmoline-darkened and beat-up stocks so maybe it's an issue of aesthetical attraction. Some people think that vintage Ferarri sportscars from the early 1950s look a bit silly. To each his own.

As you said, I wasn't making the Mannlicher-Carcano out to be the world's finest shootin' iron. Just that I was defending the suitability of rifle from a real-world observation. Thanks for your reply.

[BILL_C]

Watch the video of Dale Meyers describing Connally's jacket lapel moving out at Z=224 and concluding the bullet penetrated his chest. Notice a few frames later Connally has raised BOTH of his arms in reaction to the bullet fragment to his left leg. If you look up to the end of the clip, you will notice that Connally has turned to look right, you see nothing of the bloody mess if there would have been a sizeable hole blown in his chest at that time (about 10cm of his rib was destroyed).

Dale Meyers talking about Connally's Z=223-4

You can also see if you look that when Connally's lapel bounces out JFK has ALREADY started raising his hands to his throat. HOW could JFK react to a bullet before it moves Connally's lapel?

[BILL_C]

I messed up when I hit reply and replied to myself :-)

Please see post 272 for the video on the jacket lapel.

[BILL_C]

"BUT explain Connally's description of how the bullet drove him forward Because he was shot in the back. Duh."

I understand your comments in the OLD context. BUT you ONLY see Gov. Connally driven forward 5 seconds later than the theorized Single Bullet. John Connally turns around after the theorized time and looks over his right shoulder. The question is how was he able to do that?

For the FIRST time, there is an alternative explanation that he was shot AFTER Kennedy's head shot, NOT before it. Now with the volume of things written about the assassination and this NOT being one of them, why should you believe there is any possibility of this being true? The simple reason is, there's a simple reason to compare to the complicated reason.

The reason I checked so many NO's in the comparison table is that there have always been doubts about the Single Bullet theory by some, but not all. The reason that's true in my opinion is that things like the table tell you that parts of the single bullet theory don't make sense.

Now your explanation of him clinching his hat after the single bullet theory is a good explanation, and is entirely possible but the question remains is it the right answer when faced with the alternative that you see John Connally driven forward in his seat:

(1)After Kennedy's head shot

(2)When the Dallas Police Recording says the second shot occurred in the last grouping of shots

(3)When several witnesses described a second shot occurred, for example, Secret Service agent Kellerman said the last two shots were on top of each other, BANG-BANG

Now you may decide that you believe the single bullet theory, surely there are many reasons to do that. BUT with a simple alternative to how John Connally was shot, then I contend history will eventually show that it took several shooters to explain what happend in that 8 seconds in Dallas.

I appreciate your comments and I'm glad you took time to consider the alternative scenario. I think there's a possibility it will grow on you and over time make become accepted because it's simple and makes sense compared to the alternative.

Regards

[Shooter 2.5]

I hate telling you this but I think Mrs. Connally stated the Governor held onto that hat all the way to the hospital. I think she said something like he would never let go of it. There may be pictures taken at Parkland that confirms this.

[exnavy]

No one has shamed anyone into the truth in the last 43 years, why do you think your going to do that now?

[exnavy]

P.S. If you haven't read Mark Lane, Plausible Denial, you should, than get on with your life.

[exnavy]

You need to read the book by Mark Lane, Plausible Denial.

[100-Fold_Return]

So who's buried in Oswald's grave? Grant? While JFK lies at the bottom of the ocean. Truth is stranger than fact hahahahaha>

[Tares]

I think the 0.9 that I defined is a believability factor. Obviously IF Connally held on to his hat with his right hand all the way to the hospital that says NOTHING about when he was shot. So I agree the observation of John Connally holding on to his hat AFTER the time the Single Bullet Shot was made is not proof of anything, but it's a reasonable indication that he was shot after we see him with the hat in his hand, sitting up, and turning around.

So if evidence was provided that Gov. Connally held his hat for an extended period of time after Pres. Kennedy was shot in the back, you agree that Gov. Connally holding his hat immediately after Pres. Kennedy was shot in the back is irrelevant in determining when Gov. Connally was shot in the wrist?