From: cortez@milton.u.washington.edu (Tom Warner)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: More Warner Etc.
Date: 12 Sep 92 06:14:41 GMT
Organization: University of Washington

grant_jo@ripple.enet.dec.com (Joel Grant) writes:

>>Think a little harder. It's a question of the angle through the neck.
>>Two inches differences on a neck is a big difference in degree angles.
>>Either study your geometry, or leave the issue to somebody that understands
>>this simple concept.

>	Two inches on a neck is indeed a big difference.  Getting
>	to that degree of accuracy over a difference of 150-190
>	feet is another thing altogether.  Not knowing the exact
>	location and posture of the neck is yet another problem.
>	

I don't understad your point. Since all I was doing was standing up for
Bruce Schuck, who made a claim that at a particular Z-frame the hit could
not have both come from the the TSBD "assassin's lair" and traversed JFK's
neck, which you attempted to refute by displaying a misunderstanding of
basic geometry, I don't see any need to anything further. I don't think
the bullet traversed the neck, so it's not important to me.

>>>	What Lattimer actually tested was the medical and
>>>	ballistic evidence.  This evidence indicates decisively
>>>	that JFK was struck twice from behind,

>>The most any of Lattimer's tests could do was show that it was
>>*possible* that Kennedy was hit twice from behind. The only
>>thing decisive about any of it was, similar to yours, his
>>pretentious language.

>	I appreciate the compliment.

>>>       from bullets
>>>	fired from a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle with serial
>>>	#C2766.

>>Lattimer did absolutely nothing toward this goal, and it would be
>>quite impossible for him to do so. He might, however, be able to test
>>the *possibility* that Kennedy was hit by copper-jacketed bullets.
>>fired from that Mannlicher Carcano.

>	Lattimer relied upon the ballistics evidence that
>	showed both CE399 and the limo fragments came
>	from C2766 to the exclusion of all other rifles
>	in the world.  This evidence is presented in
>	the WCR.  It might make interesting reading for you.

First, if you think it's so damn interesting, why don't you post it?

What chapter? My NYT copy has a lousy index.

You really think you've got something to refute that the fragments are
too small to rule out all other rifles in the world. In the WCR? Hahahaha.

>>Since there is no evidence connecting the bullets in evidence
>>to the scene of the crime, the best anyone can do is compare
>>rifling. CE399 was almost certainly fired from Oswald's rifle,
>>the fragments alleged to be the fragments recovered from the limo
>>were probably fired from the same rifle.

>	They compare more than rifling per se when they
>	make these ballistic matches.  Again, try reading
>	the ballistic evidence that was presented.

>	See also the NAA analysis which not only ties
>	the Connally wrist fragments to CE399, but the
>	limo fragments to the fragment removed from
>	JFK's head.

Again, the NAA analysis could only and did only show that the 
composition of the fragments did not rule out the copper jacketed
bullet and fragments in evidence. They didn't and couldn't "tie" anything
to anything.

This is typical of how you operate, Joel. Someone at some point questions
whether some piece of evidence might exclude the possiblity of the official
explanation occurring. Someone else shows that no, it doesn't. You take that
and try to present it as conclusive evidence that the official explanation
is true. Sorry, but it just isn't that easy.

>>>       It is Lattimer's opinion, which I share, that
>>>	the guy pulling the trigger was the owner of the rifle,
>>>	Lee Harvey Oswald.  You perhaps observe the difference?

>>Yes. Although I think it is more a matter of faith than opinion.

>	Perhaps so, though I have noticed that "faith" is 
>	needed more desperately by those who have to keep
>	inventing ways to explain away the mountains of
>	physical evidence.

All you've shown us are wispy threads. Where are the mountains?
For that matter, where is *any* evidence at all that Oswald fired the
rifle, or any rifle? Or was even on the sixth floor at the time?

>Joel Grant (speaking on his own behalf)