From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: How easy was the rifle shot?
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 06:12:20 GMT

Mitchell S Todd >>>>>  &  >>>  &   >
Bruce Schuck >> & >>>> & >>>>>>

>>She heard the first shot, turned back, saw JFK reacting to his wound,
>>and then saw John C get shot.

>	She says she heard a shot, turned around, saw JFK "clutching
>	his throat," "with his hands *at* his throat [my emph]," turned
>	around again, heard a shot, and then saw her husband turn right,
>	obviously reacting to the wound. Interestingly enough,
>	Connelly says he said "Oh, no no no" after he was shot,
>	while Nellie says she heard him say it before he was shot.

>	JFK doesn't have his hands "at his throat" until frame 227.

What? At 225 his hands are within an inch of his throat , as seen by
Zapruder who was above JFK. The point of view of Nellie Connally,
shorter than JFK and sitting in a lower seat would see the hands
higher before 225, in all probablility well before JFK reappears from
behind the sign.

>	The HSCA forensics panel asked Dr Shaw about the appearence
>	of the entry wound. Specifically, they asked if the wound 
>	had a "tailed" abrasion collar with an indentation in the "tail."
>	This feature is the indicator of a bullet that strikes
>	obliquely. Shaw says that he observed no such feature.

Since the wound was excised immediately and probably covered in blood,
I didn't expect Shaw to have been checking for an abrasion collar.

>	Shaw believed that Connelly wasn't struck by a tumbling bullet
>	because he didn't think that a tumbling bullet would do enough
>	damage. However, Shaw admitted to the HSCA that his expertise in
>	such matters is very limited.

The man had treated between 900 - 1000 bullet wounds.
Name someone *more* qualified!	

>>11-18 degrees is not enough to compensate for the *upwards* bullet
>>track if you connect the back wound and throat wound [which are
>>probably not connected anyway]

>	Actually, it does. Just read the HSCA. Also, I believe that 
>	JFK/JBC was hit between Z215 and 220, when JFK was leaning
>	further forward than he was at Z190, when the HSCA trajectory
>	analysis was done.

Ahhhhh. I see. You can see back in time and look at JFK when he was
behind a street sign. Thanks for letting us in on your special power.
Ha ha ha ha. 

Since JFK was not leaning forward when he went behind the sign,
and wasn't leaning forward when he emerged from behind the sign,
there is *zero* evidence he suddenly leaned over and back in less than
one second.

>>> As Wecht notes, JFK is turned a bit to his
>>>	right from 193 to the time he disappears.

>>Yes. His throat is facing the grassy knoll.

>	So what?

>>> The angle between
>>>	the TSBD's sixth floor and level ground is [Atan (62/195)]
>>>	17.6deg, and Elm slopes downwards at about 3 degrees away from
>>>	the depository. The entry wound in JFK's back is about 1 3/8in to
>>>	the right of his midline, while the throat wound is just to
>>>	the right of the midline.

>>There you go. It was a 38 degree angle from the TSBD to JFK.

>>It is *impossible* for a bullet to enter the 1 3/8 inches to the right
>>of JFK's spine and exit to the right of midline in his throat if it is
>>going through his body right to left at an angle of 38 degrees!

>	Every WC critics diagram of the SBT (you know, the one with
>	JFK and JBC sitting forwards as if they were statues) has
>	the bullet between JFK's throat and neck wounds being at
>	a greater angle than the one with the TSBD. If anything,
>	this diagram places the throat wound too far to the left,
>	and doesn't account for JFK's rightward facing.


Let's make this real clear.

I took a map of Dealey Plaza. I drew onto it the 1 and 3/8 inch from 
midline wound in the back. I continued the line. If JFK's upper chest
was less than 4 1/2 inches thick, the bullet would have exitted from
the centre of JFK's throat. If his upper chest was any thicker, a
bullet fired from the TSBD would have exitted from the left of JFK's
throat. Since I think it more likely JFK's upper chest was 7 - 9
inches thick [on the safe side] the bullet *should* have exitted from
the left side of his neck. 

If there is a connection from the back wound to the throat wound, the
bullet certainly wasn't fired from the 6th floor TSBD window
supposedly used by Oswald. Only a shot from the Dal-Tex or County
Records building would account for the shallow sideways angle through
JFK's upper chest.

>	There is little eveidence that Tague was injured directly or
>	indirectly by a bullet or bullet fragment. 

Bzzzzt. Wrong. A bullet struck the curb in front of James T Tague who
was standing near the Triple Underpass. A Police Officer saw Tague
bleeding.

The reason you so blithely dismiss Tague is for the same reason the WC
ignored for so long. His wounding proves that there was a second
shooter and at least a 4th shot!

>	I'm using 155-165 as a range, not necessarily as a specific
>	indicator of when the reactions to a gunshot started. 

What crowd reactions.

>>1) The crowd starts to react *after* 189.

>	Says who? You?

Josiah Thompson. It's clear in the Z film frames.

>>2) Zapruder's camera starts to shake *after* 189, as if he heard a
>>   rifle shot that startled him.

>	Or, as if he felt he lost his balance. The "startle reaction"
>	thoery was never well enough tested to be very convincing.

Alvarez thinks so. His analysis fits remarkably well. 


Zapruder saw JFK get hit through the viewfinder of his camera. He said so.

>	Reread the quote. Zapruder never said he saw JFK "get hit."
>	He said he heard a shot and then saw JFK lean and "grab
>	himself." 

Is there a fundamental difference. No.

>       Further Zapruder's testimony is certainly not
>	very precise. If JFK was hit at 189, then he would have
>	disappeared behind the sign before "grabbing himself." 

Maybe before completing the motion. He probably started the motion
before 210 and he had over a second to do it in.

>       If JFK was hit at 220, he would be behind the sign as Zapruder
>	heard the shot. Zapruder, however, never mentions the
>	sign itself.

Thats because the sign wasn't in the way when he heard the shot.
That's the point. JFK was shot, and seen by Zapruder through the
telephoto lens in his camera before JFK wnet behind the sign!

>>If you read his testimony again, JFK 'leaned over and grabbed himself'
>>*after* the first shot. Not after the second! Not after the third!

>	So? Zapruder may not have recognized the first shot. 

Since his camera jerked ater 189, and didn't before, then he certainly
heard that shot. His ears certainly recognized it and his brain sent
signals to his body and his body jerked. Thats no big leap of faith is
it? People jump when startled by loud noises.

>>You ignore the massive destruction of the rib, and the explosion
>>of rib pieces as they are blown out of Connally's body.

>>If you really think he could have sat perfectly still for *seconds*
>>while after that had gone on, you are crazy. 

>	If Connelly was hit at about 220, As I've proposed, he only
>	"sits still" for a second between 220 and 238. 

I've been waiting for some evidence that *anybody* 'sits still' even
for a second after such a massive shock to the system.
You've never posted any.



Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk