Conspiracy III: The Kennedy Assassination

1) On the acoustic conditions of Dealey Plaza. An interview with Marilyn Sitzman (found here: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu...) reveals some interesting things about the grassy knoll. Lets combine her testimony with some pictures of the plaza and the Zapruder film. Marilyn was standing next to Zapruder while he was filming - in other words, she was in the perfect spot to notice any sort of goings-on nearby. Sitzman: And as far as the sound of the shots go, the first one, as I said, sounded like a firecracker, and the second one that I heard sounded the same, because I recall no difference whatsoever in them. This shows that to someone ON THE GRASSY KNOLL, the shot that hit Kennedy's neck and the shot that hit his head sounded as though they came from the same place. The only other people Sitzman references as being in the area were a "colored couple" of about 18 and 21 eating their lunch. The people with their lunch smashed their coke bottle on the concrete there before leaving... Sitzman: The pop bottle crashing was much louder than the shots were. Furthermore, if you watch the Zapruder film (from Round 2), you can see that most of the people opposite the grassy knoll are standing in the area that the semi-circle points towards. In other words, most of the crowd is standing in a location where the reverberations of the echo in the semi-circle would increase the volume of the echo, making it appear as though the sounds came from there - a similar effect to that of a Whisper Dish. 2) On the nature of the headshot as an entry/exit wound... My opponent concedes that McClelland's testimony either way is useless. However, watch these two videos below. The second is the better one, but the first is needed to show the direction the melon was shot from... http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu... http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu... Both videos show a man shooting a melon with a rifle, and the melon recoiling TOWARD the shot. Furthermore, considering the nature of the neurological damage Kennedy would have sustained upon impact, it's completely impossible to accurately predict his motion - muscle impulses could have twitched his body completely unpredictably. 3) On the reconstruction of the shooting... Your "expert" marine snipers must not be very good. Here is a view from the window where Oswald shot Kennedy: http://2.bp.blogspot.com... Now bear with me, because the combination of these next elements is a little complex. Using the combination of the Nix film (http://www.youtube.com...), both versions of the Zapruder film - wide (http://www.youtube.com...) and cut (from round two), we can place the X from the street where Kennedy was killed into the picture above from Oswald's window, pictured by the inserted red dot: http://students.millikin.edu... Please note that this is the head shot that is placed in the picture, NOT the throat shot. Further confirmation of this placement can be seen by comparing this picture of the X on the street from Zapruder's filming location (http://www.cirrusimage.com...) with the Nix and wide angle Zapruder films above. Let me ask the reader... is it really that hard to believe that someone could hit a slow-moving person from that far away with a scope? Problems with the snipers' report: >> "the target was moving away at a drastic angle to the right from the window, meaning that I would have to position my body to compete with the wall and a set of vertical water pipes..." As you saw, the third shot would not have been any sort of positioning nightmare. And look at this picture taken moments after Kennedy was assassinated (http://www.jfk.org...). You see any pipes? >> "Second, I would have to be ready to fire exactly when the target emerged past some tree branches that obscured the kill zone." Oswald steadied his shot on the box in the above picture... did you see any obscuring tree branches there? And in this 11/23/63 photo of Dealey plaza, does it seem like the trees are "obscuring" (http://www.mackwhite.com...)?? It is only in modern pictures like this one (http://www.photohome.com...) that the vegetation around the building looks to be obscuring. 4) On the ten struck objects... Let's use the list Heart provided from the last round: "OBJECTS STRUCK - (1) street (2) curb (3) manhole cover (4) JFK's back (5) JFK's throat (6) windshield (7) trim strip (8) street sign (9) Connelly (10) JFK's head." Shot #1 - missed the car entirely. Struck the street, the curb, and even Mr. Tague's cheek with debris. Numbers 1 & 2 down. Shot #2 - the throat shot. Passed through Kennedy's back and neck, and then Connally. Numbers 4, 5, and 9 down. Shot #3 - the head shot. Passed through Kennedy's head. Number 10 down. Testimony of JW Foster regarding the manhole cover: Mr. BALL - Make it deep enough to mark. The arrow marks the position that you believe you saw the mark on the pavement? Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - It was not on the manhole cover? Mr. FOSTER - No, sir. Pages 76-77 of the Warren Commission Report (http://books.google.com...) detail how the windshield and chrome strip were dented be fragments from the bullet that hit Kennedy's head. That takes care of everything except the sign. I can't find any information regarding the sign, even in the source my opponent cites for the list above - it simply states, "An eighth shot strikes a sign along Elm. "The freeway sign, which had a bullet hole through it that came from the direction of the Grassy Knoll, quickly disappeared," said former sniper, Roberts." Without a better source to base an investigation on, my best guess is that if this indeed happened, it was another bullet fragment, most likely from the first shot that missed the motorcade entirely. However, there are no holes in the signs evident in the Nix or Zapruder films (but still possible, given the film quality at the time). I'm afraid that without better sources, any speculation on either of our parts concerning the sign is mere conjecture. *********************************************************** An excellent round. I look forward to another. AFFIRMED.