On Jan 28, 8:01=A0pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > Bull****!
>
> > > > SS agent Bennett description is perfectly in sync with Posner/
Bugli=
osi.
>
> BTW, your example, does not meet the challenge I presented, since you
> offer no photographic evidence to sup****t your interpretation of
Bennett's=
> testimony.
>
Who made you arbiter of the rules of evidence? No photographic
evidence is needed to sup****t what Bennett said he saw. The fact that
Bennett do***ented his observation of a bullet strike high on JFK's
back before that wound was discovered at autopsy is a powerful
indication he saw that bullet hit. This is an argument you continue to
conveniently dodge.
>
> > > > After hearing the first shot, he turned his attention toward JFK
and=
saw
> > > > the second shot strike him high on the back and then the third
shot
> > > > strike
> > > > him in the head. He wrote these observations down on Air Force One
o=
n the
> > > > way back to Wa****ngton. The WC committed to no scenario because
they=
> > > > could
> > > > not determine which of the three shots missed.
>
> > > Below,is my 1998 article on Bennett.
>
> > > The link to the Altgens blowup is no longer up, but I will try to
make=
> > > the image available to you, today or tomorrow.
>
> > > Our first clue about this lies in his recollection that the
explosive
> > > headshot came "immediately" after the shot that he believed, caused
th=
e
> > > back wound. Does that sound like the five seconds between 223 and
313 =
to
> > > you?
>
> > > Obviously, there is no way he could have seen the actual bullet
strike=
> > > and looking at JFK's back, he should not have seen blood appear
right
> > > away. But Bennett was still looking to his right at frame 224, when
JF=
K
> > > was hit in the back, but like everyone else, he never heard it.
>
> > > He then turned toward JFK, as the shot at Z285 was fired, which
missed=
> > > and went on to cause Tague's minor wound. By then, the blood would
hav=
e
> > > been visible, so seeing the wound for the first time, Bennett
thought
> > > that was the shot that hit him.
>
> > > This is the old article - I only changed the frame number for the
firs=
t
> > > shot, which back then, I thought was at 177:
>
> > > SA Glen Bennett used to be one of those rare witnesses who
apparently,=
> > > could be quoted in defense of Posner's theory that shots were fired
at=
> > > Z160, 224, and 312. He was in fact, cited in Case Closed. But a
little=
> > > common sense and a look at a key photograph dispels that notion
entire=
ly.
> > > As it turns out, Bennett was really just one more in a long line of
Z2=
85
> > > witnesses. This is from Bennett's original Treasury Dept. re****t,
>
> > > "..the motorcade continued down this grade enroute to the Trade
Mart. =
At
> > > this point I heard what_sounded like a fire-cracker. I immediately
loo=
ked
> > > from the =A0right/crowd/physical =A0area/and looked towards the
Presid=
ent who
> > > was seated in the right rear seat of his limousine open convertible.
A=
t
> > > the moment I looked at the back of the President I heard another
> > > fire-cracker noise and saw the shot hit the President about four
inche=
s
> > > down from the right shoulder. A second shot followed immediately and
h=
it
> > > the right rear high of the President's head."
>
> > > At first glance, Glenn seems to be suggesting that the first shot
miss=
ed,
> > > as Posner theorized. The shot then, that hit "four inches down" was
th=
e
> > > Z224 shot, and of course, the head shot came at Z312.
>
> > > But, Bennett's claim that "a second shot followed immediately",
after =
the
> > > one that hit the President's back, has always suggested a somewhat
> > > different scenario to me. =A0Humor me for a moment and let's suppose
t=
hat
> > > there were three audible shots fired at say, Z160, Z285 and Z312.
>
> > Then what caused the visible reaction by JFK at Z225 and the equally
> > obvious reaction by JBC beginning at Z226?
>
> That's because they were both shot then.. duh.
>
> > There is no evidence of a
> > shot at Z285.
>
> Why do you waste time, posting unsup****ted assertions, Bigdog?
>
> Why don't you instead, challenge me to prove my claim, or at the very
> least, offer something to sup****t your denial?
>
Who's making unsup****ted assertions. You are the one who claims a shot
at Z285. Where is your sup****t for that. You made it up.
> > There is ample visual evidence of shot just prior to
> > Z225. There is some disagreement among LNs as to precisely when the
> > single bullet struck but there is consensus it was in the Z221-224
> > time frame. We are quibbling about a quarter of a second.
>
> Well, what LNs "believe" is not exactly evidence, but in this case, I
> fully agree, as I have for the last 13 years.
>
>
>
> > > What if Bennett, who said he was looking off to the right at the
time =
at
> > > the time of the first shot, did what most of the other SA's did
after
> > > hearing that noise, and first glanced about, =A0to see if he could
spo=
t
> > > it's
> > > source?
>
> > What if? As the old saying goes, put IF in one hand and **** in the
> > other and see if you can tell them apart. Bennett did not look
> > elsewhere after hearing the first shot.
>
> But the first noise didn't sound like a "shot". As numerous witnesses,
> including many of the secret service people confirmed, it sounded much
> different than the shots that came later, and more like a firecracker
than=
> anything else.
>
Many did not recognize the first one as a gunshot because they were
caught off guard. Some thought it was a firecracker and some a
backfire. When the sound of the second shot was heard and JFK raised
his hands to his throat, people began to understand what it was that
they were hearing.
> That's because the only sound that missed shot generated was as it hit
the=
> pavement and shattered.
>
> > He immediately turned his
> > attention toward the man who he was duty bound to protect.
>
> If the secret service people really believed they heard a rifle shot
then,=
> they would have sprung into action immediately.
>
> HSCA experts measured the sound level of MC rifle shots, at street
level,
> up and down Elm. The muzzle blast generated a sound that ranged from 115
> db at the furthest point, to 130 db at the closest. The shock wave was
> measured at 130 db inside a radius of 10 feet from the path of the
bullet.=
>
> So, the shot at 160 would have been the loudest of the day. The second
> shot would have been the second loudest. All of them, had they all come
> from Oswald, would have been ear shattering. Had they continued for a
few
> seconds longer than they did, they would have caused permanent damage to
> the limo passengers ear drums.
>
> And yet, almost none of the witnesses in DP that day, even heard a
second
> shot. The overwhelming
>
The overwhelming consensus of the witnesses was they heard three
shots, exactly the number of shells found in Oswald's sniper's nest.
> read more =BB- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -...
|
