Physical evidence of the first shot (miss)

[Charles Collins]

Based on what has been posted regarding what the witnesses have said they saw and the physical marks on the concrete manhole cover and curb, and what the Mythbusters have demonstrated regarding ricochets, here is a diagram of a possible scenario that I believe fits:



I have drawn the approximate position of the limo at Z133. And a black line from the sniper's window to a spot on the pavement near the limo. Then an orange line from the impact point on the pavement to the manhole cover area. Based on what the Mythbusters demonstrated, the angles involved are reasonable. The path of the bullet doesn't cross any bystanders or motorcade objects. It's just a theory that appears to me to be feasible.

[Charles Collins]

Here is a crop of an infamous Allen photo of the three tramps. I was scanning photos to see if any of them showed a good view of the area of pavement in which I showed the possible impact point for a first shot miss around the Z133 time frame. I have drawn a red arrow showing what I think could be the bullet mark in the pavement. I believe that it is in the exact area that I show on the map in the above previous post. You can get a better quality photo from the photo archives in this website. It is photo #49 in Allen's section. If there are any photo experts who might be able to verify what this image shows in the pavement, please feel free to comment on your opinions. Thanks!

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Charles: Max Holland theorizes something along the lines that you do. But he thinks the shot first hit the street light mast arm and was deflected and then hit the concrete. The Haag's determined that a Carcano bullet hitting directly into concrete would essentially disappear and leave a larger hole than is apparent. Holland argues, if I understand him correctly, that if the bullet first struck the mast first, was slowed and lost its jacket, and then hit the concrete that the damage would more closely resemble what appears. He also thinks the shot was fired before Zapruder had re-started filming.

His piece is here:  https://www.acsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/DeRonja-Holland-2.pdf

[Brian Roselle]

Steve, thanks for the Holland reference. I’ll throw in some speculation and some “fragmented” thoughts.

I think the main difference in Max Holland’s scenario is that it doesn’t have the full mass of a bullet hitting the pavement near the limo. If only part of the jacket hit the road after being ripped from its core, I’m thinking that it wouldn’t have the energy to kick up concrete shards accompanied by an upward burst of pavement dust that may have been seen coming off the pavement by a few onlookers (like Chism, Skelton) and looking like a small spark/explosion accompanied by some smoke coming off the pavement.

But staying within the TSBD three shot scenario, if you assume that some marks near the manhole cover concrete and the curb by Tague were actually caused in some way by the TSBD shots, there may be a couple of other possibilities that kind of fits in with these thoughts. For example, assume there is a strike to the pavement and it is violent enough to either 1) fully destroy all the bullet (like you said the Haags think) without acting downfield, or 2) partially destroy the bullet with a remaining fragment only making it downfield to the manhole cover concrete (like the diagram Charles has). I think it is a bit of a stretch to think it could fragment on the pavement and then go on to strike the manhole cover concrete and then go on to strike the curb, and then strike the underpass, having enough energy to gouge pavement and cement each step of the way as it goes along. Tague was always pretty sure the first shot was not the one that affected him.

For the first possibility 1) if the Haags are right, then any downfield marks would necessarily be solely from the third shot. About half the mass of that third bullet was never found. If the missing mass split into two fragments that had different drag properties when they escaped the limo, it looks like the manhole cover and the Tague curb could each be on a trajectory to receive a fragment. I once estimated that a missing third shot fragment could possibly make it to Tague and divot the curb.

Perhaps first shot version 2) like Charles depicts, is needed to have alignment with the Stavis Ellis first shot testimony and the Haags were only partially correct.  The Tague incident could then still be related to the third shot, but needing only one fragment escaping the limo.

It would be interesting to further figure out the disposition of that early first shot.

[Charles Collins]

Charles: Max Holland theorizes something along the lines that you do. But he thinks the shot first hit the street light mast arm and was deflected and then hit the concrete. The Haag's determined that a Carcano bullet hitting directly into concrete would essentially disappear and leave a larger hole than is apparent. Holland argues, if I understand him correctly, that if the bullet first struck the mast first, was slowed and lost its jacket, and then hit the concrete that the damage would more closely resemble what appears. He also thinks the shot was fired before Zapruder had re-started filming.

His piece is here:  https://www.acsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/DeRonja-Holland-2.pdf

Thanks Steve, yes I am familiar with both Holland’s ideas and the work that the Haags have done. Both are interesting and I respect them both and admire their efforts.

Holland appears to be trying to justify why an early first shot would miss. After all LHO was a competent marksman and an early shot would have been closer to him than the other two. Holland focuses totally on the traffic light mast as a potential culprit for a missed shot and apparently nothing else. Over the years he has tested it in all kinds of ways but came up empty. It appears to me that he managed to show that if the bullet struck the mast at an angle that would direct the bullet to the manhole cover, the resulting indention in the mast would be very shallow. And that that indention and the underlying changes in the grain of the metal most likely would have been completely obliterated by corrosion (rust) by the time they were able to perform the tests. I believe that they have shown that it is possible that the bullet struck the mast. But I don’t believe that they have shown that it actually did so.

When I created a virtual (computer) 3D model of the sniper’s nest, I discovered two additional possibilities for why an early first shot might miss the limo entirely. (1). There is potential interference from the barrel of the rifle hitting a corner of the box that lies on the window sill when a shooter is seated and aiming at the limo in Z133 area. (2). There is also potential interference from a shooter’s left elbow hitting the conduit closest to the window when aiming a rifle in the direction of the limo at the Z133 area. LHO could have mentally practiced his intended shots. However, I don’t believe that he would have taken a chance of being seen with the rifle practicing his shots before the motorcade arrived. Therefore, I think either one of the above potential interferences could have been a surprise to LHO and caused an early inadvertent missed shot that missed the limo entirely.

I had seen the Haag demonstration with the chunk of highway asphalt before. After reviewing it again, I am still left puzzled. Bullets don’t just disintegrate without leaving a trace! I would guess that it was deflected up and over their backboard. Also, asphalt is not homogenous, and it can be varying degrees of hardness depending on several factors. Temperature will affect the hardness. We have no way of knowing how the asphalt that the Haags used compares to what was on Elm Street on 11/22/63. And there a many, many more variables that need to be considered before reaching a conclusion. I know that the demonstration by the Mythbuster crew is using a pistol and ammunition that is different from the Carcano. However, their demonstration is apparently on an actual road that gets traveled and compacted and heated up by the sun and cooled down at night. The surface of the pavement on Elm Street on 11/22/63 appears to have been there for quite some time (the photos do not appear to indicate newly laid asphalt, it appears old and worn to me). Elm Street is a very, very, busy street with heavy trucks and busses on it daily. With all the traffic in the Dallas Texas weather, I imagine that it became very compacted and therefore was much harder than an average piece of asphalt.

One other factor that I think is worth mentioning is that if the bullet struck the white line (as it appears in the Allen photo), the white paint on some the small pieces of asphalt that get “ejected like a volcano” would have reflected the bright sunlight that day (better than just dark asphalt would). And could have made it more visible and possibly look like smoke, or sparks as the witnesses described. Just a thought…

Anyway, I think that neither Holland or the Haags have shown that the theory of a bullet ricocheting off the pavement is out of the question.

[Charles Collins]

Steve, thanks for the Holland reference. I’ll throw in some speculation and some “fragmented” thoughts.

I think the main difference in Max Holland’s scenario is that it doesn’t have the full mass of a bullet hitting the pavement near the limo. If only part of the jacket hit the road after being ripped from its core, I’m thinking that it wouldn’t have the energy to kick up concrete shards accompanied by an upward burst of pavement dust that may have been seen coming off the pavement by a few onlookers (like Chism, Skelton) and looking like a small spark/explosion accompanied by some smoke coming off the pavement.

But staying within the TSBD three shot scenario, if you assume that some marks near the manhole cover concrete and the curb by Tague were actually caused in some way by the TSBD shots, there may be a couple of other possibilities that kind of fits in with these thoughts. For example, assume there is a strike to the pavement and it is violent enough to either 1) fully destroy all the bullet (like you said the Haags think) without acting downfield, or 2) partially destroy the bullet with a remaining fragment only making it downfield to the manhole cover concrete (like the diagram Charles has). I think it is a bit of a stretch to think it could fragment on the pavement and then go on to strike the manhole cover concrete and then go on to strike the curb, and then strike the underpass, having enough energy to gouge pavement and cement each step of the way as it goes along. Tague was always pretty sure the first shot was not the one that affected him.

For the first possibility 1) if the Haags are right, then any downfield marks would necessarily be solely from the third shot. About half the mass of that third bullet was never found. If the missing mass split into two fragments that had different drag properties when they escaped the limo, it looks like the manhole cover and the Tague curb could each be on a trajectory to receive a fragment. I once estimated that a missing third shot fragment could possibly make it to Tague and divot the curb.

Perhaps first shot version 2) like Charles depicts, is needed to have alignment with the Stavis Ellis first shot testimony and the Haags were only partially correct.  The Tague incident could then still be related to the third shot, but needing only one fragment escaping the limo.

It would be interesting to further figure out the disposition of that early first shot.

I agree that there could be fragments from two different bullets involved with the two locations (manhole cover and Tague’s position). Or perhaps two separate fragments from the same bullet. Tague points out that the mark on the curb adjacent to his position is consistent with the size of an intact lead core of the Carcano bullet. (And that a much smaller fragment wouldn’t have left the size mark that was on that curb.) I don’t know if that is true or not, but something to consider. Also, Tague has been inconsistent and I believe one of his statements does leave open the possibility of the first shot being the one that caused his wound. Personally, I wouldn’t rule out that possibility. I think it is possible that if the first shot hit the pavement near the limo that the lead core was deflected to Tague’s position, and that the copper jacket from that bullet could have veered due to aerodynamics and caused the mark at the manhole position. That would explain Stavis Ellis’ description of grass flying. Ellis also describes this at the south side of the curb and I question whether or not he would even be able to see the pavement area where I show the impact and the mark is shown in the Allen photo.

[Charles Collins]

Here’s a partial transcript from the Haag’s TV show “The shot that Missed” I added a couple of my comments in brackets:

NARRATOR:  The next test will investigate what would happen to a Carcano bullet that hits asphalt.

LUKE HAAG: From the laser scanning data, I know that that asphalt creates about a 30-degree angle with the sixth floor window. That’s what we’ve set up here. We’ve got a section of highway asphalt here. We’ll see what happens to the bullet.

MALE VOICE: Five. Four. Three. Two. One.

NARRATOR:  When they check the witness panel for signs of fragments, the result is unexpected.

LUKE HAAG: The fragments of asphalt and stone basically come back out like a volcano erupting, but they don’t go out to the sides. So a person could be standing within a couple of feet of an event like this and not be hit by material.

NARRATOR:  Inspecting the asphalt, there’s another surprise.

LUKE HAAG: There’s loose debris down here in the crater, which is I’d say maybe an inch and a half deep. But there is no bullet, not even a piece of a bullet.  [What, nothing?!!!!]

NARRATOR:  The Haag’s tests have shown that if Oswald’s first shot did miss the car and hit the pavement, the bullet would have completely disintegrated, and the physical evidence would only have lasted a few days.  [ I find it very hard to believe that the Haags allowed this to be said by the narrator. This is impossible, this is not science folks. Shame on this show for trying to pass this off as the truth!]

LUKE HAAG: As soon as the street sweepers, the rain, and more traffic comes along, within days that crater that was nice and fresh and had very delicate edges and pulverized rock and loose material is now just a dimple in the road.


https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/the-shot-that-missed/

[Brian Roselle]

Charles,
I hadn’t noticed that street mark before,  good eye!  I have seen some others when I was arguing with another person on another forum that there probably was no formal street inspection up by the depository building for a bullet strike (at least I saw no record or photos of it happening). A bullet mark in the pavement up the street on Elm would probably not have really stood out as much as people think, and it is quite possible there could have been a bullet mark on the street up there that went unnoticed because the Plaza roads were not all that pristine and additionally no one suspected a missed shot that early, so that scenario was never investigated. 

For this discussion the pictures I was referencing are dropped in a summary here labeled Inspections for evidence of the first shot strike location. This will include the oak tree, traffic mast, and street. My favorite picture is of the Warren Commission members walking over “bullet strike like” divots in that area of the street.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hEtXLIwjVIU9plOW2X7E5cWuHVm-vb5w/view?usp=sharing