posted on Nov, 22 2014 @ 12:16 PM
First, answer OP's question:
The FIRST statements of Parkland Hospital staff were pretty much unanimous in key areas that blew the theory of all shots from the rear right
out of the water. The biggest part of that is the wound which you can only see as a deformation at the rear of JFK's head in slow versions of the
Zapruder film, but the supporting statements from Parkland confirm that the back of the skull was blown out, brain matter was oozing out or lying on
the stretcher, and the wound was still intact in that the skin and skull were attached at one point so it could be hidden in the subsequent autopsy
photos at Bethesda simply by pulling the flap back into place. Additionally, initial statements from Parkland staff regarding the throat wound BEFORE
the tracheotomy indicated a wound of entry. These things in and of themselves condemn the subsequent investigations and leave no doubt that there was
more than one shooter because the back wound was in the back and there were other wounds in the front.
Second, be careful with the distractors.
Some things come up as critical evidence which are either NOT critical, or could fall under such suspicion, especially after 51 years, that they are
virtually useless in terms of investigative value.
-whether or not Oswald was capable at marksmanship is moot. All shots from the TSBD would have been 100 yds or less. Rumors or insinuations about
Oswald's record as a marksman from the USMC really mean nothing. He had been out of the Corps for a few years and could have been shooting (or not)
like crazy and his true skills will never be known.
-the "magic bullet" or "single bullet" theory doesn't have to play into the equation, at least tied to CE399. The bullet found on the floor
after falling from one of the stretchers doesn't have to be "the bullet". In fact it can't be, because a bullet that did the damage this one is
purported to have done would be smashed beyond recognition, bottom line. But that doesn't preclude that a single bullet did the damage, and it was a
different bullet and wasn't recovered. Now, having defended Specter's case of single bullet, I'll counter my own argument with Connolly's
statements that he stuck with to his dying day, that the first bullet that hit JFK in the back happened before the bullet that hit him.
-all Oswald in Mexico stories and Oswald impostor stories are too distracting and take the focus away from facts that could solve the issue.
-many of the mysterious witness deaths listed on the internet aren't all that mysterious. Some are though.
-many of the conspiracy-related events prior to, during, and after the assassination over time have been shaped by the investigator to fulfil a need
to find a conspiracy and are very slanted in their interpretation. Use due caution when reading these accounts.
Third, there are some things that are absolute fact and are really bizarre.
-Howard Hunt's presence in Dallas at the time and the saga around that which came to light in a civil suit that Hunt had filed against a periodical
which claimed he was there. Hunt won his suit but it was appealed and the appeal was defended by Mark Lane and the rest is really interesting. It
changed a lot of my views of the 3 tramps, initially that they were irrelevant, but suddenly became a lot more important.
I think if we stay focused on facts and initial statements, we'll learn a lot more. Sensationalized hokey stories are just muddying the waters.