Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Which JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theory Do You Prefer?

page: 8
13
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

Thanks! Got it bookmarked, lot's of good stuff there. The family explanation makes sense, in this particular instance, anyway.

There are other conundrums that I'm not able to wrap my head around, possibly because we have no way of knowing the context of what the circumstances were at the time the family made them(decisions). It just soaked into me yesterday that I need to tread lightly as I'm wading through all this new stuff. Although the information recovered and evaluated by the ARRB is available through the National Archives, Mr. Horne's book(set) is copyrighted and I don't want to violate that by citing specifics only found in those pages. Kinda gives me a bit of a kick that I've been obliquely accused of being an agent of disinformation. When possible, I've bent over backward to provide links or others sources of verification to anything new that I've brought to the table. (I just let the "will-fully ignorant" part slide, I've been around long enough to feel confident that the majority of those who've been aware of my posts know me better than that. If anything, I may be a bit too OCD at times.
)

Anyway... You gave me a neat little link as a bit of a Christmas present so I'll try to return the favor. On October 29, 1966 the Kennedy family performed a bit of legal slight-of-hand their with their Deed of Gifts letter to the National Archives. The April 26, 1965 Secret Service Inventory List was for 9 items. The 1966 letter transferred items 2 - 8 from the 1965 inventory. The HSCA concluded that RFK had disposed of the other two items. (I'm not sure if I can say what they were without violating the copyright. The next thing you know I'll be accused of being a shill for Mr. Horne's books...)


ETA:
The ARRB may not have been successful in getting everything out there, but they found out a LOT. There are more records coming and I hope a few more pieces of the puzzle are in there somewhere. The gov't has done a rotten job as far as respecting the American people. The HSCA deposed the man that was photographer for Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, LBJ & Nixon then turned back around and sealed the transcript for 50 years!!!! Thankfully, since there were no redactions in his transcript, it was in the first document dump. Although his family verified his signature in 1993 (he passed away in January of 1989), he was never given the transcript he was promised and the family had never seen it...
edit on 12 26 2014 by CornShucker because: formatting
edit on 12 26 2014 by CornShucker because: spelling and dropped words as well as ETA
edit on 12 26 2014 by CornShucker because: still more formatting




posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   
OP's please remove my thread if the following opinion is too cruesome and does not abide by the ATS charter rules.
In my previous reply I stated I believed the FBI Secret Service agent, in the car behind JFK's car, accidently shot Kennedy. Previously to this belief, upon viewing the Zapruder film, I believed the head shot came from the grassy knoll. I believed this because of the way Kennedy's head moved in a direction towards Jackie Kennedy.

Upon further research on ballistics of the . 223 bullet, the smoke smelled at ground level near the motorcade by several witnesses, the forensic evidence of Kennedy's head, the strange decisions of the FBI's head agent at the hospital helped me change my mind into believing the FBI agent did it.

The. 223 55 grain round traveling at 3240 feet per second has approximately 1281 foot pounds of energy. Upon impact, a large amount of energy from the high velocity bullet rapidly converts into a pressure wave and heat. The heat generated by the dissipation of energy can be so extreme the fluid in the brain turns into steam, creating a rapid increase in pressure.

In the case of Kennedy's head forensic the pressure within the skull causes a portion of his skull to be removed. The remaining and continuing pressure forces the head towards Jackie in my opinion. You can think of this concept the same why a rocket or jet engine works. The exhaust coming out of the rear of the rocket or jet engine is same as or similar to JFK's skull exploding. The pressure within the combustion chamber of the rocket or jet engine pushes the rocket or jet engine in the opposite direction same as or similar to JFK's head moving in the opposite direction from the exploding portion of the skull or in other words towards Jackie Kennedy.

As for the catalyst or catalysts that made the person or people want to assassinate Kennedy is/are up for debate.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: bucsarg

Star! Good info there.

It adds to the incredible disconnect between whatever really happened and what we've been told. This is one time I wish I wasn't working "old-school". Having books that are searchable is convenient, for sure. I've just got paper at the moment.

Your post made me think of the info about the "second" brain autopsy (yes, there were two). The brain used for the second autopsy reflected what you would expect from the effects of the official story. Incredibly, it wasn't until after this second brain inspection that Commander Humes finally recorded a weight for the President's brain, 1500 grams!! That's actually larger than a normal, uninjured adult male brain.

One thing I think we all pretty well agree on is there was one H*ll of a cover-up!



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Makes since to me that JFK's brain was replaced with another one. Why? If his brain would have been examined they my have found fragments from the. 223 bullet. Not sure how good forensics was back then but perhaps the bullet fragments could have been analyzed tying back to the agents weapon. Perhaps a material analysis.

Also, I had a business trip to Dallas. During this trip I had a chance to visit the assassination site. I was floored at how compact the area was. The film and photos make the site seem larger. I walked to the knoll, to the building were the window is marked, and stood on the road at the X. While standing on the X I looked over to the knoll, the building, and the overpass. I could not believe how short a distance these places were to where I was standing. It was a great ambush site.
a reply to: CornShucker



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: bucsarg
Makes since to me that JFK's brain was replaced with another one. Why? If his brain would have been examined they my have found fragments from the. 223 bullet. Not sure how good forensics was back then but perhaps the bullet fragments could have been analyzed tying back to the agents weapon. Perhaps a material analysis.

Also, I had a business trip to Dallas. During this trip I had a chance to visit the assassination site. I was floored at how compact the area was. The film and photos make the site seem larger. I walked to the knoll, to the building were the window is marked, and stood on the road at the X. While standing on the X I looked over to the knoll, the building, and the overpass. I could not believe how short a distance these places were to where I was standing. It was a great ambush site.
a reply to: CornShucker


Also, if it was still available, we'd have the ability to use DNA testing to prove it wasn't from JFK. It's not surprising it has disappeared. I just have a hard time understanding why RFK (and the earlier posts are almost certainly true) would destroy something that could have led to the truth about his brother's murder. The Bethesda senior photographer was there to take the photographs of the thin slices of brain that had been set with formalin solution in time to be photo'd before the funeral. Dr. Finck, the third pathologist, actually had more forensic training than either Commander Humes or Dr. Boswell (who worked directly under Commander Humes). He wasn't at the first brain inspection & photographer Stringer wasn't there for the second several days later.

Unlike the first, during the second there was no sectioning done. Only tissue samples were taken from important areas and photos taken. This brain was photo'd from above & below. Doesn't matter, though... The photos of this brain are part of what is missing from the archives. All we have is a drawing commissioned by the HSCA for use in public hearings.

ETA:
This is what they expect us to believe his brain looked like! Yet the Zapruder film is supposed to be what happened, too? Pretty hard me to reconcile the two...




edit on 12 26 2014 by CornShucker because: formatting
edit on 12 26 2014 by CornShucker because: self explanatory - added graphic



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 07:40 PM
link   
I was in combat in Vietnam. I've seen things no person should see. I'm a country boy and have hunted most of my life. The artist rendition of the supposed damage to Kennedy's brain is completely unrealistic for me. How in the world could one part of the brain hemisphere be so damaged while the other half is almost perfect. Can't happen. The energy build up within the skull would have caused the soft brain tissue to have much more damage than is shown.
a reply to: CornShucker



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: bucsarg

Yeah, it's really a unrealistic. In order to get the president's brain firm enough for the sectioning process they put it in the formalin solution upside down plus had the fixative solution drip-feeding into every major artery or vein they could to speed the process.

I've never hunted, but I've heard that a brain from a fresh kill is almost like thick Jello. I'm not quite as trusting of the Zapruder film as I used to be but if it is even a LITTLE bit of a realistic representation, I'd expect there to be massive damage to the inside of the left hemisphere. That's not even taking into account what the doctors at Parkland reported. While Dr. Perry was doing the tracheostomy and Dr. Crenshaw was holding the retractor for him, he had several minutes of looking straight down at the president from the head of the table. It IS gruesome to talk about, but President Kennedy's cerebellum was dripping onto the table! In that picture there is NO damage to the cerebellum at all.

Btw, I d@mned near went to 'Nam. They threw me back for a year because I was too sickly. The last guy I talked to at Louisville told me to plan on going next year when they called me back. My wife and I got married the same day Nixon went on tv to announce the end of the draft. I lost several buddies over there and the ones that came back were never the same. I believe you when you say what you've seen, pretty sure I woulda been one of those that couldn't handle it and snapped.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: CornShucker

Also, if it was still available, we'd have the ability to use DNA testing to prove it wasn't from JFK. It's not surprising it has disappeared. I just have a hard time understanding why RFK (and the earlier posts are almost certainly true) would destroy something that could have led to the truth about his brother's murder.


In my heart of hearts I hope that RFK locked the brain away in some highly secret safe location until such time that he, as president, could order a real investigation. If RFK did anything with the brain (and who else would--or could--and how, and why?) he either didn't tell his own brother Ted, or Ted lied about it, as when asked he said he did not know where the brain was. Not that Ted was not a liar either way, but if it was buried in 1967, photographs taken at the time show Ted to have been present. If it wasn't buried, Ted was possibly genuinely too afraid after Bobby's death to say where it was, or he really didn't know where it was...otherwise why lie about it? Brad Meltzer could be right, if RFK had the brain placed somewhere so secret not even Ted knew about it, it could still turn up.



posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 10:40 PM
link   
From what you both say, it seems you reject or don't consider the proposal which was made of the damage to the right side of the head being an exit wound--fired either from the front or the opposite side--between or past the other occupants of the car--from the opposite direction of both the Grassy Knoll (across from it) and the School Book Depository (facing it)...or so it seems.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Interesting conspiracy debunking article says JFK's supposed threat to destroy the CIA was unsubstantiated and they got along well. www.skeptic.com...

Personally I don't know whether Oswald acted alone but his involvement in some way can hardly be doubted.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: CoriSCapnSkip
From what you both say, it seems you reject or don't consider the proposal which was made of the damage to the right side of the head being an exit wound--fired either from the front or the opposite side--between or past the other occupants of the car--from the opposite direction of both the Grassy Knoll (across from it) and the School Book Depository (facing it)...or so it seems.


I'm still keeping an open mind on all counts. What Dan Rather said he'd seen was almost certainly true. Also, early in Volume I I saw another reference to a back-left entrance would with the comment it would be covered in detail later.

The amount of totally unexpected stuff I've turned up in the last couple of months has kinda shaken me up. Even after you've sorted out what you consider to believe to be dead ends or deliberate distraction, the amount of Machiavellian crap surrounding the assassination is mind boggling.

Btw, you appear to have figured out that the brain was one of the items the HSCA assumed RFK had destroyed. The other took a short paragraph to describe because, while listed in the Secret Service Inventory was labeled as Item 9, it was actually one item with multiple copies.

We are in agreement about hoping the brain still exists. Short of an exhumation that proved otherwise, I'm positive the rush to complete the sectioning and photos in time to bury his brain with his body is true.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: CoriSCapnSkip
Interesting conspiracy debunking article says JFK's supposed threat to destroy the CIA was unsubstantiated and they got along well. www.skeptic.com...

Personally I don't know whether Oswald acted alone but his involvement in some way can hardly be doubted.


I appreciate the link, but I've always had major problems with the self-satisfied attitude of almost everything that comes out of that publication. For example (regarding the Warren Commission):


Careful and sober analysis of the evidence affirms the commission’s conclusions and vanquishes the arguments of the skeptics.


Whose "careful and sober analysis", HIS?? I just read an article this morning that included an interview with Charles Barkley regarding the uproar over some of his recent statements. He said, "Everybody tells me how much they appreciate the fact that I'm a straight-shooter and speak my mind regardless of what others think, that is until they don't like what I say." (of course I'm paraphrasing from memory)


Obviously, it is imperative that we remain alert to the possibility of very real conspiracies in our midst (eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, after all), but it is equally important that we use our critical faculties to distinguish verifiable evidence from idle speculation.


Man, there's just SO much in that one... Here I am currently reading the sworn testimony of the actual people involved but the attitude of the article leaves me feeling pretty insulted.

There was such a shell game going on that even key players disagree, yet the author can sit in his ivory tower and pronounce what is fact?

He'd have a hard time getting that article past ATS. I'd like to see some links to back up his assertions.

Three tramps were arrested that day. What is his proof the three tramps were the same three men marched through the crowd at Dealey Plaza that afternoon?

I can't find a link for it, but I'll throw this out there for now:
The first edition of the Dallas Times Herald to hit the streets that day carried a column buried in a few pages that included this.
--------------------------
"Patrolman W. E. Barker saw workers in the Texas School Book
Depository pecking on a window from the third floor and pointing to
a man wearing horn-rimmed glasses, a plaid coat and rain coat. The
officer immediately arrested the man for questioning and placed him
in a room of witnesses in Sheriff Bill Decker's office across the street
from the Depository.

"With the young man protesting, the crowd all along the way
jeered at him as he was escorted across the street. One woman said
to the man: 'I hope you die.' Another screamed hysterically, 'Is that
him? Is that him?' An unidentified photographer shot a picture of
the arrested man and then said bitterly, 'I hope you burn.' Officers
on the case would not explain what connection the man might have
with the shooting nor would they identify him."

So here we have a young man who was identified by eye-witnesses
as a possible killer and who was arrested on the spot, while
Oswald was still at large—and that same person was still in jail three
weeks later! Furthermore, the "investigative charges," i.e., those filed
against him on the day of the assassination for "conspiracy to commit
murder," were not dropped until Monday, Dec. 2—ten days after
Oswald had been "convicted" by the police of being the one and only
killer of President Kennedy! Such are the strange ways of Dallas
justice.
-----------------------------
Regarding all the Parkland doctors, he says:


Surely, the reasoning goes, these highly trained and experienced professionals could not all be wrong. But they were wrong, and research shows this is not at all unusual.


How so? Again, I'd like a link to the information to make such a concrete statement. They were right there handling the president's body and he wasn't. In fact, they were far from alone. Others who saw the body at Bethesda described the same blowout in the back of the head as seen at Parkland.

What really galled me was the way he besmirched the memory of Dorothy Kilgallen.


Even the Ramparts staff felt the need to qualify their inclusion of Kilgallen’s name on the list, stating, “We know of no serious person who really believes that the death of Dorothy Kilgallen, the gossip columnist, was related to the Kennedy assassination. Still, she was passionately interested in the case, told friends she firmly believed there was a conspiracy and that she would find out the truth if it took her all her life.”


Kilgallen was able to use her celebrity to convince the judge at Ruby's trial to allow her a short meeting with Ruby in a small office situated directly behind the judge's desk. It was brief (less than ten minutes) but probably the only "secure" conversation Ruby had the opportunity to have before his death.

Since I'm only paraphrasing, I think I can say this without violating the Horne copyright...

When under oath, both Dr. Boswell & Dr. Finck exhibited unusual behavior when shown evidence records from the autopsy.

Dr. Boswell at times would be so excitable that it made the whole process tedious and frustrating, almost bordering on mania. When shown a document, even if only to verify his own signature, he'd hold it up to his face nearly to his nose scanning every single word at least once before answering. With many autopsy photos his answer was either, "I don't know" or "I can't answer that". Attempts at clarification such as asking, "Are you saying you can't or won't?" accomplished nothing.

Dr. Finck became confused and almost dissociative during his deposition. What he was being shown and asked to identify or comment on often caused him to seem disoriented and answering out of cognitive dissonance, "That's my signature, so I guess that's right..." Bear in mind that he'd only seen the one brain examination. During his residencies at two different places (2 years each) he had done somewhere between 200 & 300 autopsies, many involving gunshots. At one point he seemed to try to reconcile the photo he was being shown with how the brain may have been sitting in the formalin solution (while his body language gave the impression that he wasn't at all confident in his answer).

It's hard for me to give an article from "Skeptic" a fair shot (though I DO try) because, with a very few exceptions, what seen them publish always leaves me feeling that a more honest title would be "Debunker Magazine".

There have been many times over the years that I've wished I could "turn it off for a while" but I'm constantly rolling things around in the back of my mind and assessing things from different angles. In fact, I've realized since my post about Daniel Sheehan's lecture about Critical Thinking that my analogy about the fork in the road needed tweaking. If you are presented with new information and you go down the Does Not Apply fork while weighing what you find against your accumulated bias and you reach the point where things no longer fit logically or rationally, I shouldn't have said that that was when it was time to go back to the fork. Everything up to where you are still fits so, in fact, Here is the actual fork in the road....



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Maybe I should take a break for a few days before I post on this again. It has nothing to do with disagreeing with anyone or anything personal in any way. I'm really conflicted about trying to discuss this at the same time that I am wading through so much that I had never expected. President Clinton's intentions were admirable and I'm glad the JFK Records Act was signed into law, but it certainly shines a new light on the situation. There were conflicts within the HSCA that we were never told about.

I have tremendous respect for the men and women of our military. At times they have to honor letters of silence knowing that keeping their word means they look bad to those on the outside.

As an example, Mr. Knudsen (the third photographer & the one who worked under five administrations) went in circles with the man who deposed him (for the HSCA), Andy Purdy. Purdy kept coming back to the color pictures and the stainless steel probes. Mr. Knudsen continued to try to explain that they were getting into an area he'd been instructed to never discuss. He kept suggesting that if Mr. Purdy would just get a set of the photos for the HSCA he would have his answers and Mr. Knudsen wouldn't be in an ethical bind. What Mr. Knudsen didn't know was that there were NO color photos of the president with probes in his body at the National Archives.

I'll also note that he testified about being sent back to make seven sets of certain color photos. When pressed on how it was handled he finally said they were laid out in seven sets that included one of each photo. They were then labeled as to where they were expected to go. Again, he had to be pressed on the subject but he finally gave the example of one that went to the Whitehouse, one to the Attorney General, one (he was pretty sure) to Teddy Kennedy and I think that's all that's listed in the book.

He also stated that a set had been made available to the Warren Commission and the WC had Declined the offer! So much for the Warren Commission being the definitive investigation into the assassination...

Be back in a few days to check in.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 06:20 PM
link   
The following is the best I can do on a space aliens connection in the murder of President Kennedy.

Kennedy was not necessarily killed by aliens directly, but possibly by someone not wishing the truth about their existence revealed. The timing of his being killed 10 days after making a memo demanding release of this information is an odd coincidence to say the least. deusnexus.wordpress.com... Not saying it was a conspiracy, or if so whether Oswald was in on it or being used by those who were, just, again, that it worked out luckily for people who wanted Kennedy dead and might have killed him anyway had Oswald not acted first. Aliens themselves are participating in the coverup along with government officials.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: CornShucker

I'm still keeping an open mind on all counts. What Dan Rather said he'd seen was almost certainly true. Also, early in Volume I I saw another reference to a back-left entrance would with the comment it would be covered in detail later.

The amount of totally unexpected stuff I've turned up in the last couple of months has kinda shaken me up. Even after you've sorted out what you consider to believe to be dead ends or deliberate distraction, the amount of Machiavellian crap surrounding the assassination is mind boggling.

Btw, you appear to have figured out that the brain was one of the items the HSCA assumed RFK had destroyed. The other took a short paragraph to describe because, while listed in the Secret Service Inventory was labeled as Item 9, it was actually one item with multiple copies.

We are in agreement about hoping the brain still exists. Short of an exhumation that proved otherwise, I'm positive the rush to complete the sectioning and photos in time to bury his brain with his body is true.


The more I learn about how much of a fool and a liar Dan Rather really is, the less likely I am to take his word for anything, but I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt here, as far as, the film was shown to the reporters only once, everything happened very fast, everyone was under a lot of stress, and it's hard to describe exactly what you see even after multiple viewings--we all might say different things even given all the resources we have now, such as slow motion and still images, which they didn't have then. Some item among my searches last night said the images from the Zapruder film were shown to the public at the time--yes, they were, but it was only selected stills printed in Life magazine. The actual film did not appear on TV until 1975--I still remember the warnings before it was first aired! And trust me, I can't remember 1963! Dan was right about the "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" incident, about which he took abuse for years. Yes, the guy was a psycho who was homicidally dangerous and much crazier than Dan who is just more of an unstable jerk. I also felt some connection with Dan in his appearance on the Letterman show following September 11. I do believe he has human feelings and is not all bad, he is just sort of off and does crazy-ass things sometimes.

The HSCA documents, including the one describing the fate of the brain and other items with it, are quoted extensively on that mcadams site. I really don't know if there is a problem with quoting, but I mostly haven't been, just posting links to it. By the way, this is the same document stating that John Metzler, the superintendent of Arlington National Cemetery who oversaw every aspect of the exhumation and reinterment, was expressly asked and answered that nothing went into either the old or the new grave other than the vault. mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

No, I don't agree with two things: for one, that the brain was destroyed. (The document doesn't go so far as to say anything was destroyed, just that it is believed to be inaccessible at this point.) Even if it was buried, it was probably buried in the stainless steel container preserved in fluid--no way would Bobby do anything so gross as to just dump it out or treat it in any other disrespectful manner! If it was not buried, I don't necessarily believe Bobby was rushing any tests in time for a burial. The brain went missing (last transferred from Evelyn Lincoln to Angie Novello who was acting for Bobby Kennedy) in April 1965, the reinterment was not until March 1967. Bobby did not announce his candidacy for president till March 1968. If he was planning to reopen the investigation once elected, it means he placed the brain someplace secret until such time...possibly so secret his own family members don't know where! Do I hope it still exists in accessible and usable form? Hell, yes!!!


As you say, catch you in a few days. It will take me some time to examine all your posts.
edit on 27-12-2014 by CoriSCapnSkip because: Add a link.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: CornShucker
The amount of totally unexpected stuff I've turned up in the last couple of months has kinda shaken me up. Even after you've sorted out what you consider to believe to be dead ends or deliberate distraction, the amount of Machiavellian crap surrounding the assassination is mind boggling.


You have hit the nail on the head as to possibly the most troubling aspect of the whole sad and sorry case and why I firmly side with the 70%-90% of people who don't fully accept the Warren Commission's crummy excuse for a report or swallow the official story (which you'll notice members of the Kennedy family themselves did not accept--John Jr. had a chance to dismiss conspiracy theorists when asked, and his answer suggested nothing of the kind. In explaining why he chose not to pursue the subject, his exact words were, "whatever they decide or whatever they find is not going to change the one fundamental fact in my life, which is that it won't bring him back." Gee, where does it say, "The Warren Commission in their all-seeing, all-knowing wisdom explained everything. All conspiracy theorists are crackpots who should get a life"? Don't see it)! If this was a simple, straightforward, open-and-shut case of a lone nut with a gun, why all the unbelievable screwups (a few, maybe--but so many? Particularly botching the autopsy and then losing half of what material there was from it? Including the most valuable and necessary part?), the lies, the coverups, the reams and reams of documents still suppressed?

According to some, the official story is merely hard to accept because people look at the insignificance of Oswald on the one hand, the significance of Kennedy on the other, and try to balance it out with all sorts of other factors, but I don't agree. Look at John Lennon, who arguably influenced more people even than JFK. Why are there few to no conspiracy theories surrounding his death? Why few to no conspiracy theories regarding the shooting of President Ronald Reagan only a few months later? Uh, maybe because in those cases it was well-demonstrated to have actually been a lone nut with a gun! Add Presidents Garfield and McKinley to this category.

The lone nut with a gun theory has been tried and woefully failed in the case of President Kennedy and even in the case of his brother, whose assailant was caught on the spot, gun in hand! (But the lone shooter theory in that case was never made to agree with the evidence regardless of the amount of manipulation tried.) I'm not saying, "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit"...not going so far as to suggest acquitting Oswald, just saying a whole lot is going on here besides what the official story suggests.
edit on 27-12-2014 by CoriSCapnSkip because: Add a quote.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Please take care cornshucker .

Although some of you may have already conducted your research on the following; I hope to provide some information some may not be aware of.

When the authorities ask witnesses how many shots they heard the witnesses reported two to as many as 6 or more shots. Most reported 3 shots. I can understand why some reported more than 3 shots. I'll try to explain why some heard more than 3 shots.

During my military training one training session dealt with weapon shots. Our company sat on bleachers facing towards where an M16 and AK 47 would be shot. Each weapon shot one round. The shots were fired towards us and slightly above our heads. There was two goals to this training exercise. One was for us to learn the differing sound each weapon shot made. The other was to teach us when an enemy was shooting directly at us when we were in thick jungle. When the weapon fires a single shot you actually hear two shot sounds. One is from the muzzle and the other is from the bullet traveling at high velocity creating a sound cone wave.

So, in the case of the witnesses hearing more shots than other witnesses it may have been caused by their location in relation to the rifle direction of fire. Some may have heard two shots when in fact it was only one shot. So if 3 shots were fired they heard 6 shot sounds.

Another contributing factor is shots echoing of the nearby buildings.

Anyway food for thought.

a reply to: CornShucker






top topics



 
13
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join