By far, the most difficult part of
this article is the beginning, where I should be
telling you what this is all about. But there is just
no way I can make this sound sane or logical, until
you let me show you some facts and evidence, so I'm
going to defer some of my conclusions until I can
present that to you. I promise however, that although
you might not be aware of this evidence, every piece
of it will be verifiable and most of it will come from
the files of the Warren Commission and the HSCA (House
Select Committee on Assassinations), or from reports
by the FBI and Dallas police department. I will also
be citing two of the nation's top physicists, both of
whom analyzed the Zapruder film and worked for the
federal government. I will also promise that this
article will be different than anything you have read
or seen before. That said, I intend to demonstrate
that Lee Harvey Oswald, though probably guilty of
participation in this crime, did not act alone. I
believe I can prove that beyond any reasonable doubt.
The only request I will make of my
readers, is that they study this evidence carefully.
Some of the things I write about might not seem
important at first, but they will, I promise. I would
also ask that you be as open minded as you can. Most
Americans have very strong opinions on the JFK case,
to the point where their beliefs become more like a
religion than an exercise in criminology. Like any
other controversial issue, this one demands
uncompromising objectivity. And any significant
conclusions require verifiable, indisputable evidence.
Carl Sagan said it best, "An
extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof.".
In this article, I intend to show you that
Over the decades that I studied this crime, I arrived
at numerous conclusions which were identical with
those of Gerald Posner, Vincent Bugliosi, and other
advocates of the "lone nut" theory. I saw hard,
verifiable evidence, which convinced me that Lee
Harvey Oswald was almost certainly guilty, that the
fatal headshot did indeed come from the rear as the
Warren Commission claimed, and that a single bullet
passed through President Kennedy and Governor
Connally. I also examined theories and arguments put
forward by conspiracy theorists, which were simply
ridiculous. "Badgeman", "the driver did it", and even
the theory that a shot was fired from the grassy
knoll, to name a few, made no sense at all to me.
Grassy knoll theory, which has always been standard
fare among conspiracy theorists, simply doesn't work,
because a shot from anywhere in that area would have
exited out the left side of the President's head,
where there was no damage at all.
To rebut all of the bad conspiracy theories
would be beyond the province of this article.
Bugliosi's massive, "Reclaiming History" is by far the
greatest repository of conspiracy debunkings, and
provides an excellent reference for such
analyses. But impressive as it is, all of this
evidence does not resolve what is actually, the most
important question of all.
Did Oswald act alone or
did he have accomplices?
At first glance, that question seems easy. Most
witnesses reported hearing three shots that day, and
three shells were found in the alleged sniper's nest.
So, it would seem
reasonable to conclude that Oswald was the only one to
fire at the President. And there is no doubt that
based on numerous tests, Oswald could have fired the
alleged murder weapon, an Italian Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle, rapidly enough to have gotten off three shots
during the eight seconds between Zapruder frame 160,
when most researchers believe the first shot was fired
and frame 313, when the President was killed by a shot
to the back of his head.
In addition to that, the FBI presented the Warren
Commission with a whole bullet which was alleged to
have fallen from a stretcher at Parkland hospital, and
was proven to have been fired from Oswald's rifle, to
the exclusion of all others. They also found smaller
fragments in the limousine, which also appeared to
have come from that weapon. As we will see a bit later
however, there is a good deal more to this story.
As the owner of a rifle identical to Oswald's, I can
also confirm that the weapon is not as bad as some
conspiracy advocates have claimed. It is reasonably
accurate and in the hands of a moderately competent
sniper, certainly could have been used to fire the
kill shot that day. But it does have one rather
important deficiency. The mechanism to recycle the
ammunition is stiff and awkward to operate.
Time required to reload,
aim and fire Oswald's rifle
The FBI tested Oswald's weapon thoroughly, and in
their original tests, each of their experts required
three or more seconds to reload, acquire their target,
and fire. Months later, FBI expert Robert Frazier
returned to the firing range and after repeated
attempts, was able to bring his time down to 2.3
seconds, stating in his Warren Commission testimony,
that he was, "firing this weapon as fast as the
bolt can be operated.."
Years later, in 1978, the House Select Committee on
Assassinations, recruited eight sharpshooters from the
Washington D.C. police department, who along with two
committee staffers, repeatedly attempted to
corroborate their theory (based on their discredited
dictabelt analysis) that Oswald fired shots 1.66
second apart. After numerous attempts, they failed
every time. To the best of my knowledge, and after
more than fifty years, no one has beaten Frazier's 2.3
I should point out that HSCA testers were able to get
considerably faster times by firing blindly, without
attempting to acquire a target. But it would be
extremely unlikely that a sniper could have fired the
fatal headshot, from almost the length of a football
field (90 yards), without aiming. It also makes
no sense that Oswald or whoever fired that shot, was
rushing. Unlike the first shot, which seems to have
missed and the next, which struck the President in the
back, far below the center of the head, the shot at
313 was perfect. It is hard to imagine a sniper not
having taken the time to aim carefully. And there was
no need to rush, since according to Dr. Luis Alvarez,
who did a frame-by-frame analysis of the velocity of
the Presidential limousine, it had slowed to
about 8 MPH at that point.
And yet, the Warren Commission, in it's final report
majority of the witnesses stated that the
shots were not evenly spaced. Most
witnesses recalled that the second and third
shots were bunched together."
At one point during the
hearings, Warren Commissioner Allen Dulles noted
the overwhelming consistency of these witnesses,
when he described the ratio of those confirming
that shooting scenario in comparison with
"There has been a
certain amount of testimony indicating there
was a longer pause between the report of the
first shot... and the second and third shots,
that is not absolutely unanimous but I would
say it is something like 5 to 1 or something
of that kind.."
Of course, witnesses are notoriously prone to error,
though it is questionable that so many would make
exactly the same mistake. In fact, most "lone nut"
advocates, including Posner and Bugliosi, believe
exactly the opposite - that the first two shots were
closer together than the last two. More specifically,
they saw convincing visual evidence of shots being
fired at Zapruder frames 223 and (approximately) 160.
My own research is in full agreement with them. I have
also come to believe that one bullet did indeed, pass
through President Kennedy and Governor Connally.
The Single Bullet Theory
If we carefully study the reactions of the two victims
at Zapruder frame 223 and immediately after, it is
easy to see that a bullet struck Governor Connally,
blowing open his jacket and causing his tie, to flip
to his left. The President reacted within a scant
sixth of one second later, as his hands and arms began
to rise. So, they were either hit by the same bullet,
or by improbable coincidence, simultaneously, by two
different bullets. This brief animation should make
The Shot at
(approximately) Frame 160
It is a bit more difficult to pinpoint the shot prior
to that, which was explained in detail in Posner's
book, "Case Closed", but there is no serious doubt
that it occurred. Posner based much of his analysis on
the reactions and statements of Rosemary Willis who
was then a young girl, running along the south side of
the street, and then came to an abrupt halt shortly
after frame 160. In her interview with Posner, she
agreed that she stopped in reaction to that shot.
Posner also cited a witness account of sparks flying
up from the pavement when the shot which apparently
missed the President, struck the Elm St. pavement.
I came to the same conclusion but differently - based
on the reactions of Mrs. Kennedy and the President
himself. Jackie, who was turned toward the crowd on
her left, suddenly began to turn toward the President,
beginning at frame 169 and was fully facing him, a
fraction of a second later. In her testimony, she made
it clear that she was still looking to her left when
that shot was fired.
"You know, there is always noise in a
motorcade and there are always motorcycles beside
us, a lot of them backfiring. So I was looking to
the left. I guess there was a noise.."
Phil Willis, who was photographing the limo at the
time, from the south side of the street, confirmed
that she began that turn from left-to-right,
immediately following a gunshot. This is from his
Warren Commission testimony,
"In slide No. 4 he was looking pretty
much toward--straight ahead, and she was looking
more to the left, which would be my side of the
street. Then when the first shot was fired, she
turned to the right, toward him."
At the same time, President Kennedy also twisted
sharply to his right and by frame 193 (see below), was
shielding his face with his right hand, probably
because he had been struck by debris from the bullet
that hit the pavement. This still does not pinpoint
when that shot was fired, but it obviously
occurred shortly before the reactions of the
President, his wife, and Rosemary Willis.
If a shot was indeed fired at frame 160, it and
the one at 223 were 3.4 seconds apart. The FBI
tested Zapruder's camera and concluded that it ran
at 18.3 frames per second, so (223-160)/18.3=3.44
seconds, while the shots at 223 and 313 were
separated by almost 5 seconds (4.93 to be
exact). So, why was there no consensus of
witnesses who recognized that the first shots were
noticeably closer together than the final ones?
Why did almost all of the relevant witnesses
report exactly the opposite?
More Witness Accounts
Reading through the Warren Commission testimonies
of witnesses who commented on the spacing of the
shots, I found only a few who thought the early
shots were closer together than than the final
ones. Among the Secret Service agents, police
officers, Sheriff's deputies and other law
enforcement professionals, there were none.
The Secret Service agents who rode in the
Presidential limousine were no exception. This is
from the WC testimony of Special Agent, Bill
Greer, who drive the limousine,
Mr. SPECTER. To the best of your
ability to recollect and estimate, how much time
elapsed from the first noise which you have
described as being similar to the backfire of a
motor vehicle until you heard the second noise?
Mr. GREER. It seems a matter of seconds, I
really couldn't say. Three or four seconds.
Mr. SPECTER. How much time elapsed, to the best
of your ability to estimate and recollect,
between the time of the second noise and the
time of the third noise?
Mr. GREER. The last two seemed to be just
simultaneously, one behind the other..
SAIC, Roy Kellerman, who rode in the front,
passenger seat, stated that he heard a single
"firecracker" sound, a delay and then, "a flurry
of shells come into the car.".
Mr. SPECTER.. Was there any timespan
which you could discern between the first and
second shots and what you have described as the
Mr. KELLERMAN. I will estimate 5 seconds, if
Representative FORD. You don't recall precisely
a second shot and a third shot such as you did
in the case of the first?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Let me give you an illustration,
sir, before I can give you an answer. You have
heard the sound barrier, of a plane breaking the
sound barrier, bang, bang? That is it.
Representative FORD. This is for the second and
the third, or the flurry as you described it?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right; that is right,
There were countless others who echoed Greer and
Kellerman's testimonies that they heard only a single
noise or shot, followed by a delay, and then closely
bunched shots at the end. For example, Motorcycle officer Clyde Haygood,
Mr. Belin. Were
the three spaced equally distant?
Mr. Haygood. No..
Mr. Belin. Was one more close than the other
Mr. Haygood. The last two
were closer than the first. In other words, it
was the first, and then a pause, and then the
other two were real close.
Dallas Morning News reporter, Mary Woodward,
I heard a very
loud noise. And I wasn't sure what it was at
that point, and I turned to my friends and
asked "what was that? Is some jerk shooting
off firecrackers?' And then I heard the second
one, and this time I knew what had happened,
because I saw the president's motion, and then
the third shot came very, very quickly, on
top of the second one.
Secret Service agent George
Hickey, riding in the followup car immediately
behind the President, heard a single noise, a delay and
"At the moment he
was almost sitting erect I heard two reports
which... were in such rapid succession that
there seemed to be practically no time
element between them."
This creates a perplexing dilemma. Clearly, there were
two shots fired circa frames 160 and 223 and another
at 313, yet there was an almost unanimous consensus of
witnesses hearing only one early report and then
closely bunched shots at the very end of the attack.
Could that many witnesses have made exactly the same
Two critical questions arise from this puzzle. Why
weren't both of the early shots heard by most
witnesses, and why did most of the witnesses hear
closely bunched shots at the end of the attack? We
will deal with the first of those questions a bit
later. The answer to the second, was provided by one
of the most brilliant scientists of the 20th century,
Dr. Luis Alvarez. In addition to his Nobel prize
winning work in particle physics, Alvarez was
the youngest scientist on the Manhattan Project and
over the years, filed more than one hundred patents.
In his spare time, he and his son discovered what is
widely accepted to be the cause of the extinction of
was also a consultant for the Bell & Howell
company, the manufacturer of Abraham Zapruder's
camera, and had done studies in Africa, of the effects
of high powered rifle shots on camera operators, who
blurred frames in reaction to the shots. Alvarez
noticed that this only happened when the cameras were
handheld and never when they were mounted on a tripod.
His conclusion was that the blurred frames were
the result of the cameramen being startled by the
shots, causing them to jiggle the camera. He later
patented a device for Bell & Howell, which would
cushion the blurring effects of such reactions.
Dr. Alvarez decided to apply his knowledge to a study
of the Zapruder film, by examining the frames which
were published in Life magazine. He searched for a
certain type of streaking which he knew, could be
caused by startle reactions, calling them "angular
accelerations". In 1976, he published an article
in the American Journal of Physics, in which he
explained his analysis and conclusions. His paper can
be found here,
In that paper, Alvarez said there was a loud and
startling noise at Zapruder frame 285, which resulted
in heavily blurred frames a fraction of a second
later, at frames 290-291.
He also did a frame-by-frame
analysis of the velocity of the limousine in
relation to people in the background, and confirmed
that the driver, Bill Greer, who had been criticized
for slowing the limo at that time, did so in
reaction to that same noise. And in fact, if
we study those frames carefully, it is easy to see
that at the same time he was slowing the limo, Greer
spun around to the front at enormous speed. In fact,
some conspiracy advocates have claimed (falsely, as
I was able to confirm), that his turn was impossible
and evidence that the film was altered.
It is unfortunate that Alvarez did not have access to
of the Zapruder film and could only work with the
stills from Life magazine. If he had access to the
film, he undoubtedly, would have noticed that Greer
and Zapruder were not the only ones to react to that
What Alvarez didn't realize was that at the precise
instant in which he identified Zapruder's reaction at
290-291, three of the limo passengers - Secret Service
agent Roy Kellerman, Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Connally
all began to duck, dropping their heads in almost
perfect unison. (See the segment to the left.) Their
reactions were simultaneous with Greer beginning to
spin around to the front, and heavily blurred frames,
which Alvarez identified as a startle reaction by
Governor Connally also turned at the same time, but
perhaps because of his wounds, only about 90 degrees.
Each of these highly visible reactions began in the
same three frames, or 1/6th of a second, at frames
would seem that Dr. Alvarez was right. There was
indeed, a loud and startling noise at frame 285, which
simultaneously startled and provoked visible
reactions, not only by Zapruder and Greer, but every
passenger in the limousine except JFK, who seems to
have been immobilized by the bullet which struck near
vertebrae in his back. The next and most important
question then becomes, what was that noise?
Alvarez, a staunch Warren Commission defender,
suggested that it might have been a siren rather than
a gunshot - first, because only 1.5 seconds separated
it from the fatal headshot at frame 313, which was too
close for Oswald to have fired both. And second,
because Zapruder's reaction following 313 was more
pronounced than his reaction to 285. Of course, a
simple, alternative explanation would be that the 313
shot was louder than the one at 285. And in fact, if
we look at the limo passengers' reactions to
Slow motion segment capturing the
and then 313, we see the same thing
them. The reactions to 313 were more
Another highly qualified Physicist analyzed the
Zapruder film and Alvarez's paper years later, and
wrote articles which addressed these same issues. That
was Dr. Michael Stroscio, who holds a Phd in physics
from Yale University. Stroscio had also won awards and
had chaired Presidential science commissions. In his
paper, he agreed with Alvarez on pretty much
everything, except for Alvarez's speculation that the
loud noise at 285 was a siren.
"The association of the blast of a siren
with the angular-acceleration episode that begins at
frame 290 was made by Alvarez but he stated clearly
that he was not sure this assignment was correct.
Indeed, as correctly pointed out by Alvarez, most
eyewitnesses claimed that siren sounded after the
fatal wound to President Kennedy's head. These
witnesses held that the siren first sounded well
after frame 313 and the siren could not be
responsible for the angular-acceleration episode
that began at frame 290. Alvarez points out that
eyewitnesses frequently have flawed memories of
stressful events, but it is difficult, indeed, to
understand why many witnesses would make the same
At this point, it would be useful to do some simple
arithmetic. The limo passengers and Zapruder, all
began to react at frames 290-292. As Alvarez pointed
out in his paper, startle reactions must begin within
no more than one third of a second, following the
noise. That would suggest that the noise occurred at
284-286, or 285 as Alvarez suggested. In reality
however, reactions usually begin a bit faster than
that. This passage is from the HSCA report,
times in response to the sound of gunshots
were measured in the experimental work of
Landis and Hunt in 1939. For "head movement:'
"movement of neck muscles,” and "initiation of
arm movement,” Landis and Hunt found that the
reaction time was 0.06 to 0.2 second (i.e.,
1.1 to 3.7 frames).
So, we can think of one third of a second (6 Zapruder
frames) as the maximum possible time between the
stimulus and the reactions, although we can reasonably
suspect that the noise was heard as late at 287 or
288, but no earlier than 285.
As we have seen, there is immense support among the
witnesses, for Stroscio's suggestion that this was a
gunshot rather than a siren. Obviously, shots at 285
and 313, 1.5 seconds apart, were consistent with the
Warren Commission's conclusion that, "Most witnesses recalled that the
second and third shots were bunched together.
If Stroscio is correct, then the shot at 285 would
have been the second of three that was heard that day.
And there is compelling evidence that this shot did
indeed miss the President.
The Second (audible)
In his Warren Commission testimony, Greer made an
"The second one didn't sound any different
much than the first one but I kind of got, by
turning around, I don't know whether I got a little
concussion of it, maybe when it hit something or
not, I may have gotten a little concussion that made
me think there was something different to it.."
Keeping in mind that he also stated, "The last two
seemed to be just simultaneously, one behind the
other.", it is hard to think of this being anything
other than a gunshot at frame 285, and that the
"concussion" Greer felt, was caused by the shock wave
of the passing bullet. It is also informative, that he
said he felt that concussion when he was turned
around. He was certainly, not turned to the rear at
frames 160 or 223. He was however, at 285.
studying the frames around 285, I saw no evidence of
anyone being hit then. Initially, I saw that as cause
for doubt, but as it turned out, a missed second shot
actually provides a perfect resolution to a longtime,
unresolved controversy. Greer's recollection that he
felt a "concussion" from the second shot, does indeed,
suggest a passing bullet. If that is true, then
another important witness comes into the
picture. That was James Tague.
Tague's case is interesting and provides an important
clue. As students of the case know, he was nicked by a
tiny piece of shrapnel or debris, which caused a
trickle of blood to run down his cheek. Sheriff's
deputies and the FBI, also found a fresh smear of lead
on the Main St. curbing near where Tague was standing,
just below the overpass at the west end of Dealey
This is from a paper by Dr. Stroscio, dated
12/13/1994, discussing Tague,
..it may be that the jerking episode
starting at frame 290 is associated with the bullet
which caused the fragment that struck James Tague in
the cheek. In fact, since James Tague was standing
near the triple underpass on the west side of Dealey
Plaza, it is certain that he was struck by an object
traveling west on Elm Street.
Although he expressed some uncertainty, Tague told the
Warren Commission that he was nicked as the result of
the second shot he heard. If that was at 285, then the
bullet, which seems to have missed the President, went
on to strike the pavement some distance west,
shattering and causing a tiny piece of debris to nick
Tague, and a larger piece of lead to smear on the Main
St. curbing. This is from his Warren Commission
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you hear any more shots
after you felt yourself get hit in the face?
Mr. TAGUE. I believe I did.
Mr. LIEBELER. You think you did?
Mr. TAGUE. I believe I did.
Mr. LIEBELER. How many?
Mr. TAGUE. I believe that it was the second shot, so
I heard the third shot afterwards.
The evidence is compelling that this was a gunshot,
rather than a siren. In addition to the large
consensus of witnesses that the final shots were
closely bunched, and the simultaneous reactions of the
limo passengers and Abraham Zapruder, only a bullet
could have created the shock wave that Greer described
as "the concussion" he felt. And James Tague's
recollection that the second shot was associated with
his minor wound, are consistent with this having been
a gunshot and very much in contradiction to the notion
that it was a siren.
But there is even stronger evidence. It comes from
Mrs. Nellie Connally, the wife of Governor John
Connally. It was my study of her testimony, combined
with her visible actions in the Zapruder film, which
convinced me to a virtual certainty, that a shot was
fired in the range of frame 285-288. In other
articles, I have referred to her as the Rosetta stone
of the assassination.
Mrs. Connally's recollection that her husband was
struck by a different bullet than the one that hit the
President has long been cited by conspiracy theorists
as a refutation to the single bullet theory. But when
we look closely at her actions in the Zapruder film,
in conjunction with her visible actions, a much
different story emerges.
Let's first look at the sequence of events that she
recalled. This is from her Warren Commission
testimony, as she describes the "frightening noise”
she heard that day, and then the shot that she
believed, wounded Governor Connally.
Mrs. CONNALLY. ..I heard a noise, and not
being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it
was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it
came from the right. I turned over my right shoulder
and looked back, and saw the President as he had
both hands at his neck.
A revealing controversy arose
between the Connallys, in their Warren
Commission testimonies. Mrs.
Mr. SPECTER. And you are indicating with your own
hands, two hands crossing over gripping your own
Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes; and it seemed to me there was -
he made no utterance, no cry. I saw no blood, no
anything. It was just sort of nothing, the
expression on his face, and he just sort of slumped
down. Then very soon there was the second shot that
I recall John saying "Oh,
no, no, no, no". Then there was a second
shot, and it hit John...
But as the victim, Governor
Connally knew better. He remembered that he
shouted after he was wounded. He
when I was hit, I said, "Oh, no, no, no"
Mrs. Connally heard a single noise, which provoked her
to turn to her right, to check the President, who was
clearly in distress with his arms having risen upward.
It is sometime after that, that she hears the second
of three shots, which she mistakenly believed, wounded
her husband. There is a simple but very powerful
method for determining what happened then. We simply
follow her in the Zapruder film and match up her
actions with her testimony.
In the Zapruder film, we see her begin to turn to her
right at about, frame 230. But before turning
completely toward the President, she stops briefly, to
examine her husband. From the Zapruder side of Elm St.
we can see Governor Connally's contorted face and
pained reactions to his wounds, but during those
critical seconds, his wife could only see his back.
Unaware that he has been wounded, she continues her
turn to the rear, to check on the President. I believe
this annotated animation makes all of this quite
study it carefully. It really is
At frame 246, Mrs. Connally glances
briefly at her husband, but can only see his
back. She was unaware that he has been wounded,
and will later testify that she thought he was
turning to inspect the President,
had turned to his right also when we
heard that first noise and shouted, 'no,
no, no', and in the process of turning
back around so that he could look back
and see the President..the second shot
was fired and hit him."
She continues her turn to
the rear at about 249, and can probably see JFK
by about frame 258. Of course, his arms have
risen, exactly as she described in her
So, the shot she heard which she believed, wounded her
husband, was fired sometime after frame 258 when she
looked back at JFK. Studying her in the film, it is
easy to determine when she finally realized that her
husband was wounded. Her reaction, turning back toward
him and dropping her head, was simultaneous with the
other limo passengers and Abraham Zapruder, beginning
at approximately frame 291. Like the others, she heard
the gunshot at 285-288, no more than 1.5 seconds prior
to the fatal head shot.
So, it seems that like most other witnesses that day,
Mrs. Connally only heard one early shot, and then two
more at the very end of the attack. As we discussed
earlier, the shot at 223, which appears to have hit
both the President and Governor Connally was the
actual, second shot. But why didn't anyone hear that
shot? An important clue comes from the Governor's
Warren Commission testimony,
Mr. SPECTER. In your view, which bullet
caused the injury to your chest, Governor Connally?
Governor CONNALLY. The second one.
Mr. SPECTER. And what is your reason for that
Governor CONNALLY. ..It is not
conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the
first bullet, and then I felt the blow from
something which was obviously a bullet, which I
assumed was a bullet, and I never heard the second
shot, didn't hear it.
And this is from his testimony before the HSCA,
Mr. DODD. And did I understand your
testimony correctly when you stated that you didn't
actually hear a second shot but rather you felt the
impact as if someone had punched you almost in the
back, a sharp blow to your back?
Mr. CONNALLY. That is absolutely correct.
Mr. DODD. But you did not hear that?
Mr. CONNALLY. I was not conscious of hearing the
Connally also stated that he did not lose
consciousness at that time, and clearly remembered
hearing people around him speaking. And yet, he never
heard the shot that caused his wounds. If he had been
the only one who didn't hear that shot, perhaps we
could write his perception off for other reasons. But
all he was really doing, was mimicking the large
consensus of others, who likewise, only heard one of
the early shots. Over the years, it has been argued
that some of the gunshots were drowned out by the
motorcycles and the crowd noise. To understand the
absurdity of that argument, we need to first
understand exactly how loud Oswald's rifle is.
In 1978, acoustics experts
for the HSCA conducted tests on the rifle using
microphones and decibel meters. One of those
experts, Dr. James E. Barger, explained that
they positioned microphones at varying distances
from the alleged sniper's nest and measured both
the shock wave and the muzzle blast it produced.
This is from his HSCA testimony,
..the shock wave
was measured by a microphone 10 feet from the
trajectory of the bullet and the muzzle blast
was measured by the same microphone which was
at the same time 30 feet from the muzzle...
The shockwave has an intensity of 130
decibels. The muzzle blast at 30 feet is more
intense. It has an intensity of 137 decibels
Of course, the muzzle blast diminishes with distance,
and by the time of the fatal head shot at frame 313,
would have been heard by the limo passengers as about
115 decibels. The shock wave however, emanates from
the bullet itself and would have exposed everyone
within ten feet of it, to 130 or more decibels.
Experts have confirmed that sound levels of 90
decibels, will provoke involuntary startle reactions.
Since levels double, every 10db, we can conclude that
Oswald's rifle generated sound levels, which to people
within 10 feet of the bullet, were 16 times louder
than the level at which involuntary startle reactions
The following chart, from the Australian government,
does a good job explaining how loud various db levels
are and how they affect people. I found it at the
Members of the HSCA, who conducted tests of the rifle
in Dealey Plaza, corroborated the fact that the
motorcycles were not nearly as loud as the gunshots.
This is from their report,
All observers rated the rifle shots as
very, very loud, and they were unable to understand
how they could have been described as a firecracker
We requested three motorcycles to be
running during the test that would approximate the
original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. But
the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of
background noise woud have been low in comparison
with the shots themselves.
So how is it possible, that almost no one reported
hearing more than one of the early shots? Equally
perplexing is the total absence of startle reactions,
prior to frame 290. Certainly, we see people reacting
to the first shot, by turning or looking around, but
no one is ducking or spinning around at enormous
speed, as they did following 285 and 313. And unlike
the reactions following 285 and 313, which all began
in the same 1/6th of one second, we see reactions
prior to 285, spread out over approximately 100
frames, from Mrs. Kennedy at 169, to the reaction of
Roy Kellerman turning to the rear at about 270.
As I said in the first paragraph, There is just no
way I can make this sound sane or logical, at least
until you let me show you some evidence.
Having shown you some of that evidence, I would
suggest several conclusions which I believe are
indisputable, once the evidence is understood:
1. Shots were fired at the beginning of the attack
which could not have come from an unsuppressed, high
2. Shots were fired at the end of the attack which
were too close to one another for Oswald to have fired
3. Since Oswald could not have fired all the shots,
this crime was by definition, a conspiracy.
But wait a minute! If you are a serious student of the
case, #1 should be setting off all kinds of alarms,
since the bullet which allegedly passed through
Kennedy and Connally, and labelled CE399, was proven
to have been fired from Oswald's rifle, to the
exclusion of all others. But how could that be, since
the shot was heard by almost no one?? The answer to
that question is presented in great detail in the
following article. Please read it all. The most
important issues are covered, toward the end.
Over the past twenty years since I have been seriously
researching this case, I have come to other
conclusions, some of which I believe are certain, and
some which I believe are highly probable. I describe
them in detail, along with a great deal of supporting
evidence in the following video presentation,
Thank you for your consideration.