WC Member's Views Confirmed By HSCA

[Rob Caprio]

How could this misconception have occurred? Two shooters with one leaving three shells. Caprio: "The SBT is false"..... OP: "if the SBT was false there had to be more than one assassin involved."


Brother Rob OP: Unfortunately for us, Senator Russell never seemed to grasp the significance of his statements regarding the SBT.  In his September 18, 1964, telephone conversation with LBJ, Russell said that his rejection of the SBT "don't [sic] make much difference" and was "just a little thing." He didn't seem (or want to see) grasp the fact that if the SBT was false there had to be more than one assassin involved.

Brother Rob: "The SBT is false. Without it I don't see how you can say that there was only one shooter."

Brother Rob: "My OP shows that Senator Russell had grave doubts about the SBT, as did several other members, and without the SBT there had to be a second shooter.
"
Brother Rob: "What it means is that you lie about what other people say AND that you cannot support the WC's ridiculous SBT claim that you endorse."

Bother Rob: "Another LNer that can't support their belief with evidence. The evidence shows that LHO fired NO shots, but we are discussing the fictitious SBT. "

Still true. Without the SBT there had to be another shooter. If you disagree then show how ONE bullet caused multiple wounds in TWO people. Go ahead "brother" Hogan.

[Jack Nessan]

It is apparent that you do not understand what the term "evidence" means. There are witnesses who recalled three shots. Harold Norman said he heard three shots being fired and heard the bolt action 3 times.  That is all evidence. So when you say there is "no evidence" of three  shots having been fired, you are not speaking the same language that the rest of us are speaking. 
Perhaps you missed the part on page 111 of the WC Report where the WC concluded:

"Nevertheless, the preponderance of the evidence, in particular the three spent cartridges, led the Commission to conclude that there were three shots fired".

How does that mean that the WC definitely felt it was likely that there were only two shots?
Why is that?  He not only recalled three shots, he heard three operations of the bolt action and heard three shells drop.

-----------------------------------Hudson's first statement is very different from his testimony in July/64 to the WC. Why do you prefer his later statement?  As far as Hickey is concerned, he said the second shot appeared to miss JFK because all he saw was his hair flew forward at the time of the second shot and there was no impact.  He saw the impact of the third shot.
That just shows you have not analyzed the trajectory.  The trajectory at z271 was downward from the SN at an angle of 15 degrees.  So over the 24 inches between JFK and JBC the bullet would have dropped 6.3 inches.  So if the bullet had passed  just over JFK's right shoulder and dropped 6 inches by the time it reached JBC, where do you think it would have struck him?
Read his first statement.

No, no, and no.
Hudson stated the second shot was the headshot.

According to you, JFK's hair moved not his lapel. Add another 8 inches to the 6 inches.

BRW 2 shots, Jarman 2nd shot head shot, you choose Norman whose was all over the board.

---------------------------

Exactly, Particularly the shells.
"in particular the three spent cartridges, led the Commission to conclude that there were three shots fired".

[Jack Nessan]

Still true. Without the SBT there had to be another shooter. If you disagree then show how ONE bullet caused multiple wounds in TWO people. Go ahead "brother" Hogan.

Brother Rob, we both know there is no convincing you. The bullet exited JFK's throat at 2000fps. Where do you think it went? JBC was directly in front of JFK.

A second shooter fired from where? The trajectories of the wounds tell you somewhere in this theory is an assassin firing two shots with three shells on the floor.

[Andrew Mason]

No, no, and no.

To what??

Hudson stated the second shot was the headshot.

Right. But he said that only in his July 1964 statement. In his two earlier statements he did not say this.  In his FBI statement on Nov 25/63 he said that the last two shots were in rapid succession, about as fast as one could operate a bolt action rifle. He did not comment on what they hit. He did note that the President slumped to one side on the first shot.

According to you, JFK's hair moved not his lapel. Add another 8 inches to the 6 inches.

Why? The bullet pushes air aside when it travels. Are you saying that a 2000 fps 6.5 mm bullet cannot cause hair to fly up 6-8 inches away from its path?

Exactly, Particularly the shells.
"in particular the three spent cartridges, led the Commission to conclude that there were three shots fired".

What they did not say is that it was likely there were only two shots. You said that they did.

[Andrew Mason]

Brother Rob, we both know there is no convincing you. The bullet exited JFK's throat at 2000fps. Where do you think it went? JBC was directly in front of JFK.

It went to the left side of JBC's midline. Where was JBC struck on the left side?

[Jack Nessan]

To what??Right. But he said that only in his July 1964 statement. In his two earlier statements he did not say this.  In his FBI statement on Nov 25/63 he said that the last two shots were in rapid succession, about as fast as one could operate a bolt action rifle. He did not comment on what they hit. He did note that the President slumped to one side on the first shot.Why? The bullet pushes air aside when it travels. Are you saying that a 2000 fps 6.5 mm bullet cannot cause hair to fly up 6-8 inches away from its path? What they did not say is that it was likely there were only two shots. You said that they did.

Same old Mason Dog and Pony Show. One legless, tail less, nose less dog and an imaginary pony.

[Andrew Mason]

Same old Mason Dog and Pony Show. One legless, tail less, nose less dog and an imaginary pony.

Not exactly an answer to a simple question: the trajectory shows that the bullet exiting from JFK's midline goes to the left side of JBC's midline, so where on JBC left of his midline was he struck by a bullet?

[Tim Nickerson]

Not exactly an answer to a simple question: the trajectory shows that the bullet exiting from JFK's midline goes to the left side of JBC's midline, so where on JBC left of his midline was he struck by a bullet?

The true trajectory of the bullet has it exiting from just to the right of Jfk's midline and then traveling to the point entry on JBC'S back, which was most definitely to the right of his midline.