HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Oswald's Photograph
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 04:34:01 GMT

Mitchell S Todd    > & >>>
Bruce Schuck (me) >>

>>"Clearly identifiable pieces of metal were scattered about the head
>>and brain of the deceased according to x-rays of the shattered head.
>>A sizeable piece of metal was shown at the entrance wound, a fact
>>strongly indicative of a lead-nosed bullet."

>>A semi-jacketed
>>bullet with a soft lead nose exposed would be more likely to produce
>>the kind of head wound described at autopsy of the President than
>>would a metal-jacketed military bullet similar to the undeformed slug
>>that was presented as having been found on a stretcher in Parkland
>>Hospital"

>>    "Medicolegal Investigation of the President John F Kennedy Murder"
>>       Charles G. Wilber , Ph.D
>>       Fellow, American Academy of Forensic Sciences

>>So thats another trained Forensic Pathologist who clearly sees the
>>evidence pointing to a soft-nosed hunting bullet as hitting JFK in the
>>back of the head.

>	Dr Wilber is *not* a forensic pathologist, he's a forensic
>	biologist, as more than one reviewer of his book has pointed
>	out.

He was also a deputy coroner and Director of the Forensic Science Lab
at Colorado State. 

> Further, Wilber is basing his opinion on written
>	descriptions of the wounds, rather than examination of
> 	the autopshy photos and x-rays.

Do you need the actual X-Ray to count over forty? There were at least
forty bullet fragments seen in the X-Rays of JFK' skull.

>	It is interesting to note that the large fragments recovered
>	from the limo and attributed to the head shot, as well as 	
>	skull test bullets fired by Lattimer and the WC show the
>	same type of deformation as soft-nose and hollow-point 
>	hunting bullets, most importantly the "peeled back" jacket,
>	and full seapration of the core and the jacket.

They are nothing like the fragmentation pattern of soft-nosed hunting
ammunition. Soft-nosed bullets fragment into many small pieces upon
impact with the skull. Thats why the 6.5mm diameter fragment was found
embedded in the outside of JFK's skull. Over forty fragments were
counted  in JFK's brain, and thats after a good chunk of it was blown
out  or leaked onto the operating table. There were certainly many
more fragments in the missing part of the brain and just plain 
blown out of the exit wound.

The pattern of copper jacketed bullets is the separation of jacket and
core leaving essentially two big pieces. Thats what was found in the
limo. It is almost certain the limo pieces were really the bullet that
struck Connally.

The fragmentation pattern of the bullet that hit JFK in the back of the
head is consistent with soft-nosed ammunition, and completely
inconsistent with copper jacketed ammunition.

Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:2693 alt.conspiracy:9422 sci.skeptic:13257
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Oswald's Photo, 3 Bums and JFK.
Date: 27 Jul 92 15:38:58 GMT
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <1992Jul22.005658.12006@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU> dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (Derek Abbott) writes:
>
>        The significance of the photographic finds in the police files,
>Womack suggests, is that "they may represent part of the necessary
>steps -- an empty background, for example -- for faking backyard photos
>of Oswald.
>
>        "The real question is, what was the purpose of this exercise?
>To fake the photos or to demonstrate that the faking could be done?"
>Womack said.  "I'd have to ask why anyone -- in or out of police
>uniform -- would be trying to demonstrate this back in 1963 or 1964.
>No one but Mark Lane was talking conspiracy then, and his complaints
>were about the retouching done by major news organizations, not anything
>as sophisticated as matting."
>
Well, Oswald raised the question upon being shown the photos.
He said that they were faked and that someone had pasted his
head onto someone else's body.  He also said he had done such
work himself (intelligence work?).  Not that I think the
police would start trying to duplicate that to prove Oswald's
point.  They seemed to assume Oswald was guilty from the outset.



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: LH's interrogation
Date: 27 Jul 92 22:18:35 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: mingong-ws-2.ucsc.edu


In article <1992Jul26.061020.15626@gagme.chi.il.us> anton@gagme.chi.il.us (Andrzej Borowiec) writes:
|Whether LHO had the right to a legal council or not is not really as important
|as what happened to the record of his interrogation. Or if there was no record
|why weren't the people who interrogated him deposed on what exactly he had said.
`
I had heard speculation that Oswald said he worked for intelligence. There are
three confirmations of this. The attorny general of Texas claimed that Oswald
was on the FBI payroll, and his connections with Bannister and Ferrie, not to
mention his employment at the Atsugi Air Base, point to the CIA or other
intelligence work. Another is a FBI agent, Charles Nagell, who claimed to have
advanced knowledge of the assassination.
-- 
   |^^^^^^|      _______________________________________________________
   |      |      |"There is nothing in the marginal conditions that    | 
   |      |      | distinguish a mountain from a mole hill"            |
   | (o)(o)      O         Kenneth Boulding                            | 
   @      _)    o|_____________________________________________________|  
    |  ____\ o o
    |     /   
   /     \                              All comments  are mine---(David Wright)
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Tippett murder and Oswald revolver
Date: 28 Jul 92 21:32:06 GMT
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada

CONEGA@APPSTATE.EDU (Greg Cone) writes:

>I have read a lot about the analysis done to associate the bullet(s)
>found in the presidential limo to Oswald's M-C rifle, but what, if any,
>analysis was done to link bullets found in or around Tippett's body to
>Oswald's revolver (the one he was in possesion of when arrested in the
>movie theater)?

The bullets in Tippits body could not be linked to Oswalds revolver.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY)
Subject: Re: Clinton/Gore seem to support opening records...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 22 Jul 1992 08:48 EST  

In article <1992Jul22.071108.16308@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, rcarter@nyx.cs.du.edu 
(Ron Carter) writes...
> 
>I saw an article this week (3rd week July) that indicated
>that Clinton/Gore would like to see the Kennedy records
>opened.  Even though Gore seemed to be more hep on the
>idea, the article said that both Clinton and Gore thought
>the assassination was part of a conspiracy.

If they thought it might get them votes, they might even personally offer 
to exhume JFK themselves :-)

Keep in mind its an election year and that campaign promises rarely 
manifest themselves in reality after the election.  They also might change 
their mind if/when they get to see what is inside the records.

JD 
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:2601 alt.conspiracy:9279 sci.skeptic:13013
From: boyd@prl.dec.com (Boyd Roberts)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Oswald's Request for a Laywer (JFK)
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:49:25 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Paris Research Laboratory

In article <1659@necis.UUCP>, dlyons@necis.UUCP (Dave Lyons) writes:
> [...] The Supreme Court's Miranda
> Ruling specifically states that any accused has the right to a lawyer
> during questioning.  I don't remember the date that ruling was handed
> down but it certainly may have been after 1963...

The Miranda ruling was in '66 by the US Supreme Court.


Boyd Roberts			boyd@prl.dec.com

``When the going gets wierd, the weird turn pro...''
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: lej@pdn.paradyne.com (Leo James)
Subject: Re: Back to the Past
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:34:06 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.005840.15216@lester.appstate.edu> CONEGA@APPSTATE.EDU (Greg Cone) writes:
>I would like to invite the readers of a.c.jfk to take part in a little
>imaginary journey back in time.  You suddenly find yourself transported
>(never mind how) to Dealy Plaza, Dallas, Texas.  Its late in the morning,
>around 11:30 AM, as you gaze out at the gathering crowd awaiting the
>presidential motorcade.  With what you know, or at least think you know,
>about the events that transpired that day, what would you do?
>(no, I'm not fishing for ideas for a book or movie script)

Because, 1) I could not trust the authorities and 2) I would have to be
very, very, careful to not become one of those "loose ends" that had to
be "taken care of" later, I would have to conclude that it was too late
to save JFK.  However,  I would try to get, from the window of a build-
ing with sightlines to the TSBD and the knoll, as much hard evidence of
conspiracy as I could find.  I would keep that evidence under wraps and
get it,  undeveloped, to Jim Garrison as soon as he opened his investi-
gation.  Unfortuneately, I would have to do this anonamously.
--
+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
|Leopold E. James     | "A heart, a soul, AND | AT&T Paradyne         |
|ph: (813) 530-8425   |  a mind are terrible  | P.O. Box 2826, LG-132,|
|lej@pdn.paradyne.com |  things to waste."    | Largo, FL 34649 (USA) |
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: parys@ccsua.ctstateu.edu
Subject: write1224
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science, New Haven, CT
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 15:01:46 GMT


Kennedy gets quite a bit of praise for the Cuban Missle crisis, yet
had he supported the Bay of Pigs invasion the crisis might never have
happened in the first place.

If a little boy starts a fire and then calls the Fire department.....

                            IS HE A HERO?




















REPLY






CLOSE




















write

CLOSE
DIR
											





Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: davidg@meaddata.com (David Galehouse)
Subject: "The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald"
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:34:56 GMT

For those of you who haven't heard:

A&E (Cable network) is broadcasting a show called "The Trial of Lee
Harvey Oswald" starting at 7:00 EST this evening. It looks like it
could be interesting...

-- 
 David A. Galehouse | ...!uunet!meaddata!davidg                          
 Mead Data Central  | davidg@meaddata.com                             
 P.O. Box 933       | Any opinions expressed                          
 Dayton, OH  45401  | are mine, not MDC's.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: grimm@eecae.ee.msu.edu (Jerry Michael Grimm)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: JFK -- a meglomaniacal fool?
Date: 30 Jul 92 02:43:23 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University

<U54778@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:


>sex crazed, megalomaniac??????????

>I don't want to make a big deal about this but doesn't this point to the
>degradation of the school system.

>Do we really need another 50 years before, some teacher will put all this
>into perspective so that the students will have some iota of understanding?

>To understanding (not condone) that this male sex drive behavior was not
>looked down upon as much as in our current moral climate;  to understand
>that his drive may have been attributed to the medication he was receiving;

Wrong, buddy boy.  JFK was absolutely a notorious womanizer since his 
middle teens.  Remember, he got himself kicked out from his cushy job at
Office of Naval Intelligence in DC (acquired via Joe Kennedy, Sr.'s 
influence) for sleeping with knownm German agents ("Inga-Binga" was her
nickname -- I understand the pillow talk was amusing).  It was of course
after being kicked out of ONI at DC that JFK got the PT-109 berth (How 
anyone can be a hero for letting a small, fast boat be run over by a 
big, slow, lumbering destroyer is beyond me).

When JFK lived in Hollywood for a time, he was quite the mover.

So don't blame it on the medicine.  Blame it on his daddy (who was also a
womanizer).

>to understand the background and history that lead the US into its
>confrontation with the USSR; to understand JFK as compared to other leaders
>like Gen. LeMay or the Dulles brothers in the light of being an unthinking
>anti-communist;  to actually read what happened in the aftermath of the
>Cuban Missile Crisis, even to read what JFK's last speech was all about
>(world peace);  I guess this is asking too much of this generation.

Would it be too much to ask for you to be a bit clearer in your point/
observation here?

Mike G
From: saltzman@crd.ge.com (Bob Saltzman)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Release of JFK files-the truth comes out???
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:59:48 GMT
Reply-To: saltzman@crd.ge.com
Organization: GE Corporate Research & Development, Schenectady, NY

In article <1992Jul28.211906.5860@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com>, m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson) writes:
>--
>>  I just heard on the radio that the JFK files are going to be released (assu-
>>ing I heard the news right). I can only hope that the files will reveal the
>>truth.
>
>I for one am not counting on the files revealing too much. They have had 29
>years to puge this stuff you know.
>
>This all seemed too easy. 1 movie and a little uproar and now our government - who has resisted the revelation of just about anything regarding the JFK case
>to the public for 29 years - seems to repent and graciously release
>ALL the archives to us?  
>
>			"THAT DOG DON'T HUNT!"
>
>Lets just say that I'm sceptical but hopefull.
>
>Marty
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> M_Henderson               | "Could you please continue the petty bickering?
> Marty Henderson           |  I find it most intriguing."   ---    Data, 
> Woodland Park, Colorado   |  Star Trek, The Next Generation, "Haven"
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having received selected documents over the years as a result of
Freedom of Information Act lawsuits, I can assure you that the
use of the black Magic Marker is the most significant attribute
of anything that I've seen.  Censoring, "in the interests of
National security", is still applied even when the documents are
released.

Bob Saltzman
Committee to Investigate Assassinations
==============================================================================
Robert B. Saltzman (Bob)            Internet: saltzman@crd.ge.com
Information System Operation        Snailnet: Bldg KW, Room C120, PO Box 8
General Electric Company            AT&Tnet:  518-387-5828(B), 387-6560(FAX),
Corporate Research and Development            370-2222(H)
Schenectady, New York 12301 USA     ICBMnet:  42 50 04 N, 73 54 14 W, Alt 246
AEMT-4 Paramedic/Firefighter        HAMnet:   WB2ARK
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
From: mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd)
Subject: Re: Oswald's Request for a Laywer (JFK)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Applied Upyerstemmatey Corp
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:43:00 GMT

(Dave Lyons) writes...
>mst4298@sigma.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) wrote:
>> (Derek Abbott) writes...

>>>What is the official explaination for why Oswald got grilled without a
>>>lawyer, despite his repeated requests for one?

>> 	To answer a question with a question...
>> 	When did the Supreme court mandate that a defending lawyer be
>> 	present during questioning?

>This is pretty misleading, Mitchell.  The Supreme Court's Miranda
>Ruling specifically states that any accused has the right to a lawyer
>during questioning. On the other hand, the Miranda Ruling wasn't making
>new law but rather was spelling out rights that exist in the constitution
>and therefore Derek's question is valid and deserves an answer.

	Before Miranda, interrogating suspects without having counsel
	present was a very common phenomina. It still happens, and
	testimony taken from such interrogations are sometimes allowed
	as evidence. A review of _Texas v. Randal Dale Adams_ would
	be helpful reminder.

	As to your assertion that the _Miranda_ ruling didn't give the
	accused any rights that they already didn't possess, you are
	dead wrong. All purely legal discussion aside, the _Miranda_
	rights were not given to the accused *in practice* until
	the ruling was handed down.

 	Before _Miranda_, there was nothing in the Constitution,
	nor in court decisions, that explicitly gave the accused 
	the various rights asserted by the Superme Court.
	The Warren Court wove the Miranda rights from Constitutional
	inferences and from bits and pieces of common law, just as
	the Marshall Court gave itself the right of supreme judicial
	review from Constitutional inference and implication.

                                |  
		              \ | /	 
                               \|/
_________________________   ---(0)---   ______________________________________
\__                      \___/~/|\~\___/                              _______/
  \__ mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu / / | \ \\ 	      Ambiguity is the      ______////
    \__ Mitchell S Todd    /    |    \\   Devil's tetherball     ______////
      \___________________/           \\____________________________////
         \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/_____________\\\///////////////////////////
                           /////\\\\\\\\\\\
From: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Back to the Past
Date: 30 Jul 92 06:17:06 GMT
Reply-To: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Pyramid Technologies, Mt. View, California.

In article <1992Jul29.223406.18937@pdn.paradyne.com>,
lej@pdn.paradyne.com (Leo James) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul29.005840.15216@lester.appstate.edu>
CONEGA@APPSTATE.EDU (Greg Cone) writes:
|> >I would like to invite the readers of a.c.jfk to take part in a little
|> >imaginary journey back in time.  You suddenly find yourself transported
|> >(never mind how) to Dealy Plaza, Dallas, Texas.  Its late in the morning,
|> >around 11:30 AM, as you gaze out at the gathering crowd awaiting the
|> >presidential motorcade.  With what you know, or at least think you know,
|> >about the events that transpired that day, what would you do?
|> >(no, I'm not fishing for ideas for a book or movie script)
|> 
|> I would have to conclude that it was too late to save JFK.

I'm not sure about this.  Funny, I just thought about this question.  I think
I would go for the umbrella and if possible, the walkie talkie of the guy
standing next to the umbrella man.  If the umbrella/walkie-talkie pair was
the go/no-go, signal, disabling the signal team might prevent the 
assassination.

It would also be fascinating to follow Oswald after he leaves.  I might
try to warn him, by telling him that he is going to be set up, then 
move him into hiding.  With Oswald alive to give details, the
investigation would be easier.

Paul Collacchi
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: Robert.Daniels@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Robert Daniels)
Subject: The state of Oswald's health
Summary: Any analysis done?
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:20:50 GMT

I realize that there are several books that discuss LHO's physical
dimensions and whether or not a soviet agent was substituted for him, who
else was running around Texas impersonating him, etc.  THE OSWALD FILE,
for example, examines much of the photographic evidence from earlier
stages in his life (the split/composite photo, the 13 inch head, etc.).

But has anyone written about his state of health at the time of the
assassination?  If one assumes that _some_ of the earlier photos are the
same man -- the ones of him handing out pamphlets in New Orleans for
example -- then it seems from the post-arrest photos that he had lost a
significant amount of weight and been under a great deal of stress.  I
know that he had separated from Marina, and was probably not eating well
while living in those boarding houses, and was bruised during the
arrest.  But that seems an inadequate explanation IMHO.  Is anyone else
struck by the fact that LHO looked like he had been through a wringer when
he was arrested?

Robert Daniels 


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Clay Shaw
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Date: 27 Jul 92 15:53:04 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <92206.18554332GCHRG@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> 32GCHRG@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU writes:
>Is Shaw still alive...if so coulnd't he be arrested for
>lying in his trial?  Pictures show that he knew David Ferrie,
>yet he claimed that he newver met him.
>
Shaw died several years after the trial.  No autopsy, of course.
Garrison did try to indict Shaw for perjury, I believe.





-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: maione@cs.toronto.edu (Ian Christopher Maione)
Subject: Re: Back to the Past
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Distribution: usa
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:31:53 GMT

In article <182854@pyramid.pyramid.com> pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi) writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.223406.18937@pdn.paradyne.com>,
>lej@pdn.paradyne.com (Leo James) writes:
>|> In article <1992Jul29.005840.15216@lester.appstate.edu>
>CONEGA@APPSTATE.EDU (Greg Cone) writes:
>|> >I would like to invite the readers of a.c.jfk to take part in a little
>|> >imaginary journey back in time.  You suddenly find yourself transported
>|> >(never mind how) to Dealy Plaza, Dallas, Texas.  Its late in the morning,
>|> >around 11:30 AM, as you gaze out at the gathering crowd awaiting the
>|> >presidential motorcade.  With what you know, or at least think you know,
>|> >about the events that transpired that day, what would you do?
>|> >(no, I'm not fishing for ideas for a book or movie script)
>|> 
>|> I would have to conclude that it was too late to save JFK.

>It would also be fascinating to follow Oswald after he leaves.  I might
>try to warn him, by telling him that he is going to be set up, then 
>move him into hiding.  With Oswald alive to give details, the
>investigation would be easier.
>
>Paul Collacchi

    Or, even better, to remove Oswald from the TBSD before the assassination.
Take him to a public place somewhere in Dallas with a lot of witnesses
present and make sure he doesn't go anywhere until well after 12:30PM.  That's
assuming it would really be too late to save JFK.  Intercepting the parade
somewhere and causing a disturbance would be a possibililty.  You'd have to
find some way of stopping the President short of Dealey Plaza, I think, 
as once into the middle of a military-style ambush, JFK doesn't have much of
a chance.

Regards,
Ian
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic