From Behind the Fence

[Fergus O'Brien]

Once again Bowers said he saw no one behind the fence at the time of the shooting. And he said he heard three shots. That is him saying this not me.

You can disqualify me, whatever that means, but you can't disqualify Bowers and his account while at the same time saying he's your "critical witness". You have to confront the fact that he said he saw no shooter behind the fence and that he heard three - not four, not five, not six - shots.

It is Bowers you need to deal with - to disqualify - not me or my views of the conspiracy advocates. I am quoting him I am not quoting me.

And of course I don't believe "all conspiracy believers" believe the same thing or are in lock step agreement. That's really their problem. They have 20 different theories - at least - as to what happened. That can't be true. It only happened one way. They need to look at the evidence first and then come up with a theory and not start with a pre-existing theory - the CIA, the military, the mob, the anti-Castro Cuban, the rich Texas oilmen - and then find evidence for it.

Did you ever ask yourself why so many conspiracy believers are at odds with each other?

if you dont see a person somewhere does that mean they were never there ? . of course not .so its not impossible that bowers didnt see someone there .the place was a sea of cars and trucks with over hanging trees and shrubbery and shadow from them .. he was not expecting an assassination , no one was . its not unreasonable that he looked at the space between the knoll fence and the pergola because logically that is the only spot he could have hoped to see any of the motorcade through . what it seems you are in essence saying is if he was asked DID YOU SEE ANYONE ? and he said NO that that can only mean no one was there . while it can mean no one was there it can equally mean he just did not notice someone there .

[Royell Storing]

if you dont see a person somewhere does that mean they were never there ? . of course not .so its not impossible that bowers didnt see someone there .the place was a sea of cars and trucks with over hanging trees and shrubbery and shadow from them .. he was not expecting an assassination , no one was . its not unreasonable that he looked at the space between the knoll fence and the pergola because logically that is the only spot he could have hoped to see any of the motorcade through . what it seems you are in essence saying is if he was asked DID YOU SEE ANYONE ? and he said NO that that can only mean no one was there . while it can mean no one was there it can equally mean he just did not notice someone there .

    The Railroad Tower that Bowers was inside is in a DIRECT LINE with the parking spaces that run directly into the N-S section of the Picket Fence. Bowers was looking straight down the space between the Picket Fence and the Concrete Walkway that leads to The Steps. The only thing possibly blocking Bowers "Shot Gun" view down that "corridor" would be the large tree that is close to the shelter and roughly 3 feet out from the picket fence. That tree has a thick trunk on it. Other than that, Bowers could have fired a cannon down that "corridor" and Not hit anything.   

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

johnson had an opinion about these men and that is his right , but that is proof of nothing . again by his own admission he was not looking where simmons , dodd and holland said they looked until after jfk and his limo were out of his sight . so he really cant be used to contradict them .

well i think we need to know if the shrubbery was cut back at all between november 1963 and when mark lane and holland were there  some 3 years later . if they were not cut back they should have grown quite a bit in 3 years i would imagine .perhaps another poster or duncan has information on this and can chime in and let us know . i do know that holland also stood behind the fence alone while another  picture was taken from across the street , if you will in the area where mary moormon stood .upon zooming in he could be seen all be it not clearly . and im sure the camera used was of a better quality than the cameras used that tragic day .

i agree holland did  not immediately run around to look behind the fence , i am sure he was not being dishonest about that . more that the nature of events caused him to believe he had ran around the fence sooner than he did . but that could have been dealt with by the commission in order to ascertain just how long it was before he left where he stood .

i have no problem with anyone who may have a theory as long as it is merited and supported by evidence .

if your theory re hickey is 100% correct with all due respect then it should have iron clad proof to back it up .ive yet to see anyone who goes alone with the hickey did it theory come anywhere near to proving it . not even the author who came up with it and the publisher who published it . if they did have proof why would they not take that to a court of law to win the law suits ? . all of that said if anyone has a valid theory and they have evidence or even proof in support of it i am only too willing to look at it .i have seen a lot of your work on this site regarding the hickey theory or regarding other aspects of the case and as i have said i just feel i am asking valid questions and some times posting relevant information , and am in no way meaning any disrespect to you . i value all info posted on this site about this case even if i may not always agree with it . thanks for your reply .

The dent in the chrome trim is to me the hard proof that the AR15 did the dirty deed.
The stink of gunsmoke in the motorcade is hard evidence too.
My giffs of Hickey holding the AR15 all the way from where Bell's sequence starts all the way to the TUP where the sequence stops is hard evidence too.

Comparing the printscreen from the youtube to the Moorman photo, yes, the shrubbery has grown taller, & yes the leafage had been pruned a bit.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

       I'll start with you last misnomer. All those that believe there were multiple shooters can interpret the Evidence differently. This is along the lines of, "many paths leading to the same destination".
       When are we going to see a single LN using SCIENCE to dispel the findings of Knott Lab and their Laser 360 Technology which is routinely used in courtrooms around this country? The SBT = DOA

The various claims are shooters from the fence, shooters from the underpass, shooters from the sewer, shooters from the Dal-Tex building.....you folks have shooters all over the place. How many shooters? How many shots? From where?

There is no same destination when you can't agree on any of these basics: the number of shots, where the shooters were and how many of them were there. That's fundamental differences that 60 years later you all can't agree with. Just saying "We all believe in a conspiracy" and that's our agreed upon destination is meaningless.

Meanwhile, your "crucial witness" Lee Bowers is still telling you there was no one there. You've got a problem on your hands.

[Royell Storing]

The various claims are shooters from the fence, shooters from the underpass, shooters from the sewer, shooters from the Dal-Tex building.....you folks have shooters all over the place. How many shooters? How many shots? From where?

There is no same destination when you can't agree on any of these basics: the number of shots, where the shooters were and how many of them were there. That's fundamental differences that 60 years later you all can't agree with. Just saying "We all believe in a conspiracy" and that's our agreed upon destination is meaningless.

Meanwhile, your "crucial witness" Lee Bowers is still telling you there was no one there. You've got a problem on your hands.

    Not sure WHERE you are referring to when You say, "Lee Bowers is still telling you there was NO ONE THERE". Specifically, where is THERE? Bowers does mention "commotion", but that would indicate possible activity by a person or persons. Like I said previously, with Bowers being responsible for track switching and train traffic atop The Triple Underpass, I believe a pair of binoculars was standard equipment inside the Railroad Tower that he manned. His detailed WC description of what men were wearing, "in line with the Triple Underpass"/grassy knoll, the 3 cars, bumper stickers, etc , makes me believe he was using binoculars at least part of the time leading up to the Kill Shot. With that corridor view he had straight down into the area between the cement walkway/The Steps and the picket fence, he was a very valuable witness that the WC failed to cultivate. 

[John Mytton]

    Not sure WHERE you are referring to when You say, "Lee Bowers is still telling you there was NO ONE THERE". Specifically, where is THERE? Bowers does mention "commotion", but that would indicate possible activity by a person or persons. Like I said previously, with Bowers being responsible for track switching and train traffic atop The Triple Underpass, I believe a pair of binoculars was standard equipment inside the Railroad Tower that he manned. His detailed WC description of what men were wearing, "in line with the Triple Underpass"/grassy knoll, the 3 cars, bumper stickers, etc , makes me believe he was using binoculars at least part of the time leading up to the Kill Shot. With that corridor view he had straight down into the area between the cement walkway/The Steps and the picket fence, he was a very valuable witness that the WC failed to cultivate.

Cultivate this, do you "believe" Bowers was using his binoculars when he saw the invisible motorcycle? Hehehe.

Mr. BALL - Did you see any activity in this high ground above Elm after the shot?
Mr. BOWERS - At the time of the shooting there seemed to be some commotion, and immediately following there was a motorcycle policeman who shot nearly all of the way to the top of the incline.
Mr. BALL - On his motorcycle?
Mr. BOWERS - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Did he come by way of Elm Street?
Mr. BOWERS - He was part of the motorcade and had left it for some reason, which I did not know.
Mr. BALL - He came up---
Mr. BOWERS - He came almost to the top and I believe abandoned his motorcycle for a moment and then got on it and proceeded, I don't know
Mr. BALL - How did he get up?
Mr. BOWERS - He just shot up over the curb and up.

JohnM

[Royell Storing]

Cultivate this, do you "believe" Bowers was using his binoculars when he saw the invisible motorcycle? Hehehe.

Mr. BALL - Did you see any activity in this high ground above Elm after the shot?
Mr. BOWERS - At the time of the shooting there seemed to be some commotion, and immediately following there was a motorcycle policeman who shot nearly all of the way to the top of the incline.
Mr. BALL - On his motorcycle?
Mr. BOWERS - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Did he come by way of Elm Street?
Mr. BOWERS - He was part of the motorcade and had left it for some reason, which I did not know.
Mr. BALL - He came up---
Mr. BOWERS - He came almost to the top and I believe abandoned his motorcycle for a moment and then got on it and proceeded, I don't know
Mr. BALL - How did he get up?
Mr. BOWERS - He just shot up over the curb and up.

JohnM

    This is where people such as yourself are at a tremendously embarrassing disadvantage. You would rather screw around with posting gory cartoons and pictures vs becoming familiar with JFK Assassination Sworn Testimonies. Skinny Holland also reported seeing a motorcycle jumping the curb and racing Up the Knoll. The common denominator of Holland and Bowers would be their: (1) Close Proximity, and (2) Uniquely HIGHLY ELEVATED VIEW of the Knoll. There's never anything humorous in the face of ignorance.

[Richard Smith]

The various claims are shooters from the fence, shooters from the underpass, shooters from the sewer, shooters from the Dal-Tex building.....you folks have shooters all over the place. How many shooters? How many shots? From where?

There is no same destination when you can't agree on any of these basics: the number of shots, where the shooters were and how many of them were there. That's fundamental differences that 60 years later you all can't agree with. Just saying "We all believe in a conspiracy" and that's our agreed upon destination is meaningless.

Meanwhile, your "crucial witness" Lee Bowers is still telling you there was no one there. You've got a problem on your hands.

They can't even agree on the "conspiracy."  In some instances, Oswald is completely innocent.  In others, he has some unspecified involvement but is not the shooter.  In still others, he is the shooter but there were other shooters and/or participants.  Working backward toward the facts to avoiding accepting the obvious conclusion that Oswald was the assassin and there is no credible evidence of the involvement of anyone else after 60 years of trying to make that case.