JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots

[profmunkin]

There are only a few autopsy photos so it's not like one has to comb through hundreds of em.

It amazes me that someone could reach the conclusion it was a conspiracy without having known about the autopsy photos. And he accuses us of being biased.

please post link to exact photo being referenced
thank you

[profmunkin]

I dare say that I have read far more of the Warren Commission report than you have. I think that most of the participants in this discussion have also read far more of the Warren Commission report than you have, judging by their accurate knowledge of the evidence, the conclusions reached and the rationale for each one.

Warren Report is just an interpretation an opinion of some specific parts of the evidence.

[Jason Thompson]

please post link to exact photo being referenced

You have already been told that will not happen, so stop asking for it. You have also been told how to find them, without us having to post links here. There are only a handful of autopsy pictures, each showing a different aspect. There is, for example, only one showing the back wound.

[profmunkin]

please post link to exact photo being referenced

You have already been told that will not happen, so stop asking for it. You have also been told how to find them, without us having to post links here. There are only a handful of autopsy pictures, each showing a different aspect. There is, for example, only one showing the back wound.

I know it won't happen.
You can't post evidence that impeaches your postions.
Because when it finally comes down to it, you all know where the back wound was, about right where I said it was.
Significantly lower on JFK's body then his throat wound, which makes the wounds supposedly caused "magic bullet"  impossible.

You disagree with this conclusion - post the autopsy picture and lets discuss it.

[profmunkin]

That human hearing is notoriously inaccurate at determining the location of a fired rifle?

That we have abundant and reliable evidence exclusive of earwitness perceptions of direction, consistently showing beyond any doubt that the shots came from the easternmost window on the south side of the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository?

May be your correct concerning human hearing, because even Norman and Williams who were within 12 feet from the rifle could not determine the direction from which the shots were fired.

Would Norman and Williams testimony be considered abundant and reliable evidence?
How about Jarmin, who had been in the Army for 8 years, he was also 12 feet away but testified the shots did not come from TSBD, would any of this be considered abundant and reliable evidence?

Please post your abundant and reliable evidence.
And while your at it give my you best wild ass guess as to why Norman and Williams could not determine the direction from which the reports came and how could Jarmin's guess be so "incorrect".

[Echnaton]

I dare say that I have read far more of the Warren Commission report than you have. I think that most of the participants in this discussion have also read far more of the Warren Commission report than you have, judging by their accurate knowledge of the evidence, the conclusions reached and the rationale for each one.

Warren Report is just an interpretation an opinion of some specific parts of the evidence.

As are all investigations, including yours.  That is why I have been asking you to show why your reasoning, interpretation and opinions are better than those of the multiple professional investigations that have come to the same conclusion.  So far you have refused to tell us why your claim of a conspiracy is preferred.    This tells me that you don't have any evidence in your favor, but are desperately hoping that your bluffing will get some traction.  But you have an enormous hill to climb to get yourself up to the level of the others and using this lame comparison to elevate your work has failed.  As all can see, you have been slipping downhill since you got here.

[Echnaton]

Please post your abundant and reliable evidence.
And while your at it give my you best wild ass guess as to why Norman and Williams could not determine the direction from which the reports came and how could Jarmin's guess be so "incorrect".

You conveniently keep forgetting that the burden of proof is yours.  So quit bluffing and provide a analysis of how the WC used the testimony, what they missed or misinterpreted and what your interpretation is and why it is better.

[Abaddon]

please post link to exact photo being referenced

You have already been told that will not happen, so stop asking for it. You have also been told how to find them, without us having to post links here. There are only a handful of autopsy pictures, each showing a different aspect. There is, for example, only one showing the back wound.

I know it won't happen.
You can't post evidence that impeaches your postions.
Because when it finally comes down to it, you all know where the back wound was, about right where I said it was.
Significantly lower on JFK's body then his throat wound, which makes the wounds supposedly caused "magic bullet"  impossible.

You disagree with this conclusion - post the autopsy picture and lets discuss it.

Good grief. The forum owner has explained that he does not want those images posted, or linked, and has explained why.

A quick google will get you those images, yet you are somehow unable to google them, but prefer to spend far more time moaning here that nobody will do your research for you.

Get over yourself.

[Jason Thompson]

I know it won't happen.
You can't post evidence that impeaches your postions.

I will not post pictures or links to pictures of dead people on a public forum, and the forum owner has taken the same position. That has nothing to do with hiding anything and everything to do with common decency. however, I have told you (and anyone else who cares to read this forum) exactly where to find those images. Your complaint is rather like saying I am hiding a book at your local library because I will not go and hire it out myself and hand it to you in your own house. Get over yourself.

Because when it finally comes down to it, you all know where the back wound was, about right where I said it was.

Can you find any evidence, anywhere at all, that anyone has disagreed with the location of the back wound as described in that photograph? I have never once disagreed that the back wound was located near the top inner corner of the scapula, about six inches below the mastoid process and four inches left of the acromion process, around the level of the third thoracic vertebra. In fact pretty much where the autopsy report and the photograph say it was.

The only one being inconsistent is you, and your earlier suggestion of the back wound being 'six inches lower than the Adam's apple' was patently absurd, even for you.

Significantly lower on JFK's body then his throat wound,

No, a little lower (as I showed on an earlier post in fact), and only if you assume he was sitting bolt upright when the bullet struck. How many more times must the same things be said to you?

which makes the wounds supposedly caused "magic bullet"  impossible.

Only if you assume he was bolt upright at the time. He clearly was not and in fact he also had his right arm propped up on the side of the limo, elevating his right shoulder.

You disagree with this conclusion - post the autopsy picture and lets discuss it.

The location of the wound in the photo is NOT the issue, as you well know. You want to discuss it, post a photo showing that Kennedy was sitting bolt upright with his arms down.

[profmunkin]

So far I have uncovered 62 people that stated within their testimony that they were aware of a rhythm to the reports.

44 said it was Bham...Bham-Bham they claimed the last two reports were "simultaneous" or "like automic rifle fire" or "quick" or "rapid". 4 others stated there were 4 shots Bham...Bham-Bham-Bham and another 4 had the order reversed Bham-Bham...Bham

Only 6 people thought the reports had been evenly spaced Bham...Bham...Bham
 

[ka9q]

Would Norman and Williams testimony be considered abundant and reliable evidence?
How about Jarmin, who had been in the Army for 8 years, he was also 12 feet away but testified the shots did not come from TSBD, would any of this be considered abundant and reliable evidence?

*SIGH*

Profmunkin, why do you keep misstating the evidence? No, scratch that. Why do you keep LYING about the evidence? At this point I'm hard pressed to see how you're not doing it deliberately. Norman, Williams and Jarman all agreed among themselves that the shots came from above them in the building -- the Texas School Book Depository Building. How did they quickly come to that conclusion? Not only were the shots very loud, but Williams had cement dust in his hair and Norman had heard the sound of the bolt being operated and the ejected shells hitting the floor above them. Jarman's exact words to the others: "That shot probably did come from upstairs, up over us."

After running to the west side of the building to see what had happened to the motorcade, Norman and Jarmin ran out of the building and quickly reported what they'd seen and heard to a policeman who was already talking to Howard Brennan, the witness who saw (and later identified) Oswald as he actually fired the shots. That's three witnesses (and there were more) telling the police about a rifle being fired at least a half hour before the rifle itself was even found.

Norman's ability to hear these sounds was verified in an experiment where he took the position he had during the motorcade while a Secret Service agent at the 6th floor sniper window operated the bolt of a rifle and dropped spent shells on the floor. The experiment was later repeated for the Commissioners. All seven clearly heard the shells drop too.

What do you really hope to accomplish here? As I said before, if you deliberately misstated the evidence like this as an attorney in court, the judge would toss your ass in jail for contempt. Trying to convince others of your opinion or interpretation of the facts is one thing. That's what a debate is all about. But you step way over the line when you repeatedly and undoubtedly deliberately misstate established facts while doing it. It is obvious that you aren't the least interested in determining the truth, so there is little point in continuing to have a proper debate with you under these conditions.

[ka9q]

So far I have uncovered 62 people that stated within their testimony that they were aware of a rhythm to the reports.

And this is relevant....how, exactly?

I suppose it might be interesting as a study of how people perceive the sounds of unexpected gunshots in an urban environment. But as for changing the established conclusions of the many investigations of the JFK assassination...sorry, but no. Just no.

[LunarOrbit]

http://dolk.host.sk/dolkpage96/horror/famosos/jfk2.htm
This is a link to JFK autopsy sheet

Do you believe that is an accurate representation of the location of the bullet wound, Profmunkin? Yes or no?

[profmunkin]

http://dolk.host.sk/dolkpage96/horror/famosos/jfk2.htm
This is a link to JFK autopsy sheet

Do you believe that is an accurate representation of the location of the bullet wound, Profmunkin? Yes or no?

Let us use the autopsy photos as you suggested, instead of relying on a depiction?

[LunarOrbit]

http://dolk.host.sk/dolkpage96/horror/famosos/jfk2.htm
This is a link to JFK autopsy sheet

Do you believe that is an accurate representation of the location of the bullet wound, Profmunkin? Yes or no?

Let us use the autopsy photos as you suggested, instead of relying on a depiction?

You based your conclusion that the wound wasn't possible from TSBD on that autopsy diagram, apparently without having ever seen the actual autopsy photographs. Are you now saying that you no longer believe the diagram is good enough? Are you now saying that without having seen the photographs, you can't rule out TSBD as the location of the assassin?

Is that diagram an accurate depiction of the location of the wound. Yes or no? Feel free to consult Google if you want.