Can anybody provide proof of a successful reenactment of Oswald's feat?

[John Iacoletti]

If it's 1963, one would probably take the parcel card that was placed in the box, go to the window and say Box 2915, and leave with the parcel without having to show ID or sign for it.

Well, the postal regulations said that the package should have been returned to sender, but if that was the case then anybody could have picked up that alleged package, right?

What does it all mean? Nothing! The damning part is the fool should have destroyed the A. Hidell ID card earlier, allegedly found on Oswald's person at Police HQ.

Well, sure.  But you're assuming that Oswald ever had that Hidell ID card.

[Zeon Mason]

Mr. EISENBERG - I am now going to ask you several hypothetical questions concerning the factors which might have affected the aim of the assassin on November 22d, and I would like you to make the following assumptions in answering these questions: First, that the assassin fired his shots from the window near which the cartridges were found--that is, the easternmost window on the south face of the sixth floor of the School Book Depository Building, which is 60 feet above the ground, and several more feet above the position at which the car was apparently located when the shots were fired.
Second, that the length of the trajectory of the first shot was 175 feet, and that the length of the trajectory of the third shot was 265 feet.
And third, that the elapsed time between the firing of the first and third shots was 5 1/2 seconds.
Based on those assumptions, Mr. Frazier, approximately what lead would the assassin have had to give his target to compensate for its movement--and here I would disregard any possible defect in the scope.
Mr. FRAZIER - I would say he would have to lead approximately 2 feet under both such situations. The lead would, of course, be dependent upon the direction in which the object was moving primarily. If it is moving away from you, then, of course, the actual lead of, say, 2 feet which he would have to lead would be interpreted as a considerably less lead in elevation above the target, because the target will move the 2 feet in a direction away from the shooter, and the apparent lead then would be cut to one foot or 12 inches or 8 inches or something of that nature, due to the movement of the individual.


Zeon Question 1:
So the shooter from the SE 6th floor SN of the TSBD would have to guestimate shoot at some point 2 ft to the right of JFK, meaning that JFKs head, nor even his body, would be in the sight picture of the fixed sights?


Mr. FRAZIER - Commission Exhibit No. 555 is a diagrammatic drawing of the manner in which the crosshair ring is mounted in Exhibit 139, showing on the right-hand side of the diagram a circular drawing indicating the outer part of the tube, with an inner circle with a crossed line in it representing the crosshairs in the telescope.
There is an elevation-adjusting screw at the top, which pushes the crosshair ring down against a spring located in the lower left-hand portion of the circle, or which allows the crosshair ring to come up, being pushed by the spring on the opposite side of the ring. There is a windage screw on the right-hand side of the scope tube circle which adjusts the crosshair ring laterally for windage adjustments.
The diagram at the left side of Commission's Exhibit 555 shows diagrammatically the blade spring mounted in the telescope tube which causes the ring to be pressed against the adjusting screws.
We found in this telescopic sight on this rifle that this ring was shifting in the telescope tube 80 that the gun could not be sighted-in merely by changing the screws. It was necessary to adjust it, and then fire several shots to stabilize the crosshair ring by causing this spring to press tightly against the screws, to the point that we decided it would not be feasible to completely sight the weapon inasfar as windage goes, and in addition found that the elevation screw could not be adjusted sufficiently to bring the point of impact on the targets down to the sighting point.


Zeon question 2:
So using the deftect inherent in the  scope, (noted by Frazier) would only make it  worse for the shooter, attempting to guestimate what lead he needed for the variable changing speed, moving  target of JFK?  (variable changing speed = JFK limo accelerating again, from having slowed to 5 mph to make the sharp turn on Elm, then accelerating down the slope up to 15mph, then a deceleration to 8mph, almost stopping.)

And now add: The shooter wasnt able to set himself up like Frazier did, and be in a solitary position  AT THE START, for all 3 shots. The shooter has to MOVE into position for shot 1, take that shot from some standing position, then MOVE AGAIN, so as to rest his rifle on the not horizontal, oddly angled box on the window ledge, and take 2 more shots so rapidly that most ear witness, including Harold Norman, the closest witness, heard them spaced apart only about  2 secs apart.


note: Harold Norman WC testimony is somewhat contradictory, regarding if he actually stated "several seconds" or not:

Mr. BALL. I have here a document 493, which is a copy of a statement made by this witness, which I now mark 493.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 493, for identification.)
Mr. BALL. The document that I have here shows the date 4th of December 1963. Do you remember having made a statement to Mr. Carter, Special Agent of the Secret Service, on that day?
Mr. NORMAN. I can't remember the exact date but I believe I remember Mr. Carter.
Mr. BALL. I want to call your attention to one part of the statement and I will ask you if you told him that:
"Just after the President passed by, I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots. I knew that the shots had come from directly above me, and I could hear the expended cartridges fall to the floor. I could also hear the bolt action of the rifle. I also saw some dust fall from the ceiling of the fifth floor and I felt sure that whoever had fired the shots was directly above me."
Did you make that statement to the Secret Service man?
Mr. NORMAN. I don't remember making a statement that I knew the shots came from directly above us. I didn't make that statement. And I don't remember saying I heard several seconds later. I merely told him that I heard three shots because I didn't have any idea what time it was.


Harold Normans recorded interviews, however, he demonstrates the 3 shots fired in less than 5 seconds.


And Harold Norman also noted that he heard the 1st shot, then saw JFK slump, then heard the next 2 shots AFTER seeing JFK slump. Therefore, Norman must be hearnig Z224 shot, saw the result of that shot, which is the FIRST shot, and then Norman heard 2 more shots. Those 3 shots occur in 4.8 seconds, which fits Normans video interview demonstration (the boom clak clak repetion).


Zeon question 3:

What is the probability that a shooter using only the fixed iron sights, could have correctly guestimated the 1 to 2 ft leading the target on a variably changing speed target between ranges of 175 ft and 265 ft (or 60 yds,  and 90 yds approx), having to shoot 1st shot while moving from seated position to 1 standing position,,then moving again, to leaning somehow on top the boxes, rest his rifle on the oddly angled box on the window ledge, and then shooting 2 more shots, and hitting 2 times,.... and did it all in 4.8 seconds, as Harold Norman saw it and demonstrated it?

[Matt Grantham]

Joe Rogan commented that Oswald may have thrown down the rifle after the shooting and therefore causing the damage to the scope. However , considering where the rifle was found it is unlikely that it could have been thrown. Is it possible that he intentionally threw it down, perhaps out of frustration for missing the easy earl shots, or maybe intentionally damaged it to make it look like he was even more handicapped in his efforts and again allowing an excuse for the poor early shooting?

[Walt Cakebread]

The soviets ran a simulation of the shooting in 1963 in Russia, it can be done

Sorry....  It cannot be done....    The configuration of the cramped cubbyhole behind the window of and by itself precludes the feasibility of anybody firing a rifle as proposed by LBJ's "Special Select Blue Ribbon Committee of Venerated and Honorable Men" (aka the Warren Commission)

[Jerry Organ]

Sorry....  It cannot be done....    The configuration of the cramped cubbyhole behind the window of and by itself precludes the feasibility of anybody firing a rifle as proposed by LBJ's "Special Select Blue Ribbon Committee of Venerated and Honorable Men" (aka the Warren Commission)

[Jerry Freeman]

Joe Rogan commented that Oswald may have thrown down the rifle after the shooting and therefore causing the damage to the scope....  Is it possible that he intentionally threw it down, perhaps out of frustration ....

After quite meticulously wiping off his prints

[Gary Craig]

No.

Oswald's rifle when tested was as accurate as the then current American M-14.

Mr. EISENBERG. I should ask first if you are familiar with this weapon.
I have handed the witness Commission Exhibit 139.
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. We fired this weapon from a machine rest for round-to-round dispersion. We fired exactly 20 rounds in this test, and the dispersion which we measured is of conventional magnitude, about the same that we get with our present military rifles, and the standard deviation of dispersion is .29 mil.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is a fraction of a degree?
Mr. SIMMONS. A mil is an angular measurement. There are 17.7 mils to a degree.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do I understand your testimony to be that this rifle is as accurate as the current American military rifles?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. As far as we can determine from bench-rest firing.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you consider that to be a high degree of accuracy?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, the weapon is quite accurate. For most small arms, we discover that the round- to-round dispersion is of the order of three-tenths of a mil. We have run into some unusual ones, however, which give us higher values, but very few which give us smaller values, except in selected lots of ammunition.
Mr. McCLOY. You are talking about the present military rifle--will you designate it?
Mr. SIMMONS. The M-14.



JohnM

The scope was misaligned when they found it in the TSBD. To zero it in they needed to shim it. There is no way the scope could have helped anyone shooting the Carcano hit a target on 11/22/63.

The iron sights were fixed and zero'd in at 200 meters. When US Army experts test fired the rifle for the WC using the iron sights, at the distances the WC claimed, the bullets tended to not only miss high they sailed over the top of the board holding the target at the head shot distance.

Those same Army experts found the bolt action to be sticky. Cycling the bolt between shots caused their shooters to take the sights off the
target. The LN shooter didn't have time to reacquire a moving target between shots in the time the WC came up with.

The trigger on the Carcano was 2 stage. They found the 2nd stage to be a hair trigger that took live practice firing.
There is no record of Ozzie practice firing it.


~snip~

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think a marksman who is less than a highly skilled marksman under those conditions would be able to
shoot in the range of 1.2-mil aiming error?
Mr. SIMMONS. Obviously considerable experience would have to be in one's background to do so. And with this weapon, I
think also considerable experience with this weapon, because of the amount of effort required to work the bolt.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would do what? You mean would improve the accuracy?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. In our experiments, the pressure to open the bolt was so great that we tended to move the rifle off the
target, whereas with greater proficiency this might not have occurred.

~snip~

Mr. EISENBERG. When you say proficiency with this weapon, Mr. Simmons, could you go into detail as to what you mean--do
you mean accuracy with this weapon, or familiarity with the weapon?
Mr. SIMMONS. I mean familiarity basically with two things. One is the action of the bolt itself, and the force required
to open it; and two, the action of the trigger, which is a two-stage trigger.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can familiarity with the trigger and with the bolt be acquired in dry practice?
Mr. SIMMONS. Familiarity with the bolt can, probably as well as during live firing. But familiarity with the trigger
would best be achieved with some firing.

~snip~

Mr. EISENBERG. Why is there this difference between familiarity with the bolt and familiarity with the trigger in dry firing?
Mr. SIMMONS. There tends to be a reaction between the firer and the weapon at the time the weapon is fired, due to the
recoil impulse. And I do not believe the action of the bolt going home would sufficiently simulate the action of the recoil
of the weapon.


Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. But there are two stages to the trigger. Our riflemen were all used to a trigger with a constant pull.
When the slack was taken up, then they expected the round to fire. But actually when the slack is taken up, you tend to
have a hair trigger here, which requires a bit of getting used to.
Mr. McCLOY. This does not have a hair trigger after the slack is taken up?
Mr. SIMMONS. This tends to have the hair trigger as soon as you move it after the slack is taken up. You achieve or you
feel greater resistance to the movement of the trigger, and then ordinarily you would expect the weapon to have fired,
and in this case then as you move it to overcome that, it fires immediately. And our firers were moving the shoulder into
the weapon.

~snip~

[Jerry Freeman]

The soviets ran a simulation of the shooting in 1963 in Russia, it can be done....
https://archive.org/details/TheSecretKGBJFKAssassinationFiles1998
Fast forward to 45 minutes

That sure is a funky simulation