How Fast Could Lee Harvey Oswalds Rifle Be Fired An Interesting 1960's Analysis

[Duncan MacRae]

How Fast Could Lee Harvey Oswalds Rifle Be Fired An Interesting 1960's Analysis

[Joe Elliott]

Actually, Walter Cronkite was mistaken on a detail. He said the Warren Commission concluded that the first shot was fired at frame 210. And the last shot at frame 313.

While their were some involved in the investigation that thought the first shot occurred at, or shortly after frame 210, some disagreed. While their may have been a small majority (I think) of the investigators who thought the shots were confined between z210 to z313, there was enough doubt to give no definite scenario in the final report. They said there was a shot around z210 and z313 but the other shot could have been before z210 or between z210-z313. This was a wise decision.

In the sixty years since then, with more analysis of the Zapruder film, there is now a general consensus among LNers that the:

* first shot: hardest to pin down, but may have been around z152 (my view). In any case, well before z221.
* second shot: universal consensus that the second shot was at z221-z225.
* third shot: universal consensus that the third shot was at z312-z313.

However, the general consensus among CTers is, well, there is no general consensus among CTers. No CTer has ever come up with a compelling scenario, even among just their fellow CTers.

[Andrew Mason]

Actually, Walter Cronkite was mistaken on a detail. He said the Warren Commission concluded that the first shot was fired at frame 210. And the last shot at frame 313.

While their were some involved in the investigation that thought the first shot occurred at, or shortly after frame 210, some disagreed. While their may have been a small majority (I think) of the investigators who thought the shots were confined between z210 to z313, there was enough doubt to give no definite scenario in the final report. They said there was a shot around z210 and z313 but the other shot could have been before z210 or between z210-z313. This was a wise decision.

In the sixty years since then, with more analysis of the Zapruder film, there is now a general consensus among LNers that the:

* first shot: hardest to pin down, but may have been around z152 (my view). In any case, well before z221.
* second shot: universal consensus that the second shot was at z221-z225.
* third shot: universal consensus that the third shot was at z312-z313.

That consensus seems to be that the 40+ witnesses who distinctly recalled that the last two shots were closer together and "in rapid succession" or "followed rapidly by another shot” or “The second two shots were immediate --- it was almost as if one were an echo of the other -- they came so quickly. The sound of one did not cease until the second shot.” … “and then the third shot came very, very quickly, on top of the second one” were all mistaken.

That consensus also seems to be that photographers Hugh Betzner, Phil Willis and Ike Altgens were completely wrong in when their photos were taken relative to the first shot.

And the consensus also is that Nellie Connally (along with about 20 others) was hallucinating about seeing JFK react to the first shot before the second shot, and that JBC never turned his neck to see JFK after the first shot and before he was hit in the back.

The SBT is the biggest reason conspiracies abound.  There is abundant evidence that conflicts with it, not just the shot pattern. It is not just the witness evidence that strains belief.  It is the position of JBC, his wounds and CE399.  I do not understand why LNs refuse to consider the plausible alternative to the SBT that fits all the evidence and is still consistent with the overwhelming evidence that Oswald fired all three shots.

However, the general consensus among CTers is, well, there is no general consensus among CTers. No CTer has ever come up with a compelling scenario, even among just their fellow CTers.

No argument there.

[Andrew Mason]

Legal Fixer Mason mischaracterizes everything that goes against his silly theory. This particular off-the-rails rant was inspired by yesterday's performance by Trump's defense attorney.

Sorry, I thought you thought those witnesses were all mistaken. I am pleased to see that you now think that Nellie Connally, the witnesses to the rapid last two shots and the photographers were not mistaken.

[Joe Elliott]

The video around 7:00 is very interesting that shows that people do jiggle camera when hearing a rifle shot. I assume the delay was similar to the Zapruder film, about a third of a second. Keep in mind that people do jiggle cameras when filming a moving object from time to time, even without any loud noises.

So the possibility of a 'False Positive'  should always be kept in mind. A camera jiggle at z250 does not necessarily mean a shot at z244.

However, there are no 'False Negatives'. So the absence of a large jiggle around z250 does rule out a loud rifle shot at around z244. Although the use of a silencer cannot be ruled out, but that would require a less powerful and accurate handgun, likely only effective at under 20 feet.

[Joe Elliott]

Also around 8:00, they show using a metal detector on the tree but failed to find a bullet. Since a rifle bullet goes through two feet of hard wood and four feet of soft wood there is very little chance of a branch containing a bullet even if it was struck by one.

[Andrew Mason]

Also around 8:00, they show using a metal detector on the tree but failed to find a bullet. Since a rifle bullet goes through two feet of hard wood and four feet of soft wood there is very little chance of a branch containing a bullet even if it was struck by one.

Yes.  But it would show a hole or damage of some kind to the branch. No one appears to have found any.  Besides, it would not have deflected a bullet very much. It could have destabilised the bullet which would cause it to gradually drift off course.  That is not nearly enough to explain how a shot aimed at someone in the limo missed the entire car, let alone the entire street.

[Joe Elliott]

Yes.  But it would show a hole or damage of some kind to the branch. No one appears to have found any.  Besides, it would not have deflected a bullet very much. It could have destabilised the bullet which would cause it to gradually drift off course.  That is not nearly enough to explain how a shot aimed at someone in the limo missed the entire car, let alone the entire street.

Well, they didn't say they were looking for a hole or damage. They said they were using a metal detector. I don't think one would find a hole, there would only be some damage to a branch which the tree would party heal and I would think it would not be easy to tell if the old damage was caused by a bullet or something else, like a tree trimmer, which is periodically done for trees growing over a road. In any case, no hole, no damage, was found.

I have heard that small branches can deflect a bullet. Even a minor deflection could cause a bullet to miss the limousine. But this is irrelevant to me because I don't think there was any shot fired while the limousine was behind some branches so there was no deflection.

Why would the bullet miss the entire limousine? I have started a thread on this subject at:

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3570.0.html

According to my calculations, the angular velocity of a moving target was:

3.2 degrees per second, for the Olympic 1908 Running Deer competition.

4.8 degrees per second, for Oswald’s first shot at z-153, which missed the limousine.
1.9 degrees per second, for Oswald’s second shot at z-222, which wounded both Kennedy and Connally.
0.58 degrees per second, for Oswald’s third shot at z-312, which killed Kennedy.

In 1908, using shooters competing for the Olympic Gold Metal, very good shooters with (I assume) a good deal of practice firing a rifle at a moving target, had trouble firing accurately at a target moving at 3.2 degrees per second, 110 yards from them. Some of them missed the entire target, the size of an adult deer with most of their shots, at a range of 110 yards. I don't find it wildly implausible that Oswald, who never tried to fire a rifle at a moving target before (although he did have excellent training at stationary targets) could miss from 43 yards, at a target with 50 % greater angular velocity than the 1908 Running Deer competition.

As far as missing the street is concerned, the street was never searched for damage, and ballistic experts who have tested this found that the damage to the street would be small, making a small crater that is not too noticeable and maybe not too different from the ordinary damage a busy road receives from traffic were even large potholes can form.