Replies

The "magic bullet" theory is very plausible.

The theory is very plausible, if and only if, you ASSUME that:

a.) only three shots were fired; and
b.) each shot was fired from the rear.

Since these two assumptions were implicitly made by the WC, the SBT is the only plausible explanation. Expand your thinking to allow for the fact that there may have been other shooters in other locations and the SBT sounds preposterous.

Nellie Connolly herself states that only three shots were fired. That's a fact.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/22/lkl.00.html

In this interview with Larry King, Nellie Connolly says that there were only three shots - that the second one hit her husband - and that the third shot hit the President's head. She also says that there were no shots from the front.

'Splain that.

If four bullets were fired, but two of them were fired simultaneously or virtually simultaneously, how would Nellie Connally or any other witness know that there were more than three shots?

Expand your thinking to allow for the fact that there may have been other shooters in other locations and the SBT sounds preposterous.

The new WND offering "Triangle of Death" reveals that a laser trajectory analysis was performed at Deeley Plaza and concluded that the only possible trajectories were from the rear (5th/6th floor and 2nd floor rear locations).

This is consistent with the work performed by Howard Donahue as reported in the book "Mortal Error." Donahue is a shooting investigator who worked from terminal ballistic evidence, such as it was/is.

Donahue's reconstruction runs like this: The first shot, which fell short and struck the pavement behind the limo, fragmented and left copper jacket material in Kennedy's scalp, back of head, confirming a rear shooting location. (The inside of the front windshield also showed signs of this jacketting material striking it.) Kennedy verbally responded to this shot saying "I'm hit." Presumably, Connelly turned to see Kennedy. The second shot, a few seconds later, struck Kennedy in the upper back, passing through him into Connelly. The third shot, which followed the second shot very closely (as determined from the Zapruder film), struck Kennedy in the head. Donahue has a fascinating theory about who fired this last shot.

The slow moving 6.5mm Carcano round (160gr, 2200fps MV) has an impressive sectional density and can pass through almost 50" of pine. (see Donahue's testing in "Mortal Error") This penetrating ability is due to bullet construction and its slow velocity which promotes bullet integrity. And, of course, the recovered bullet, as can be seen from photographs, is not "pristine" by any stretch of the imagination (unless one doesn't know what an unfired bullet looks like).

The last 40 years of "expanded thinking" on the Kennedy Assassination has produced a nausiating collection of off-the-wall conspiracies (with WMD selling the most recent installment.) Oswald is still the best candidate. He was a Marine; practiced dry firing and throwing the bolt of his Manlicher-Carcano rifle incessantly according to his wife; and given the ranges involved (75 yards), a kneeling position with improvised rest, optics aren't even necessary to hit a man-sized target. Remember, the limo was moving away from the shooter--the ideal location (and not the grassy knoll which would have required a shot from the worst possible location, with the target moving laterally.)

I was 10 years of age when JFK was shot. We were release from school early that day. I saw Oswald shot "live" on TV news coverage. I've read many books on the subject. Not until I ran across Donahue's book "Mortal Error", penned by Bonar Menninger, did I have an opportunity to "expand my thinking" to reconsider the material evidence such as it was/is. And, informed by several years of long range rifle shooting, I was able to bring new tools to bear on this subject.

What do you know of ballistics?