Three things I don't get it

[Kees-Jan]

It is conspicuous that there were a lot of people on the streets before Elm Street to see JFK but not on the Elm Street. If you look the pictures or Zapruder / Moorman movie well, you don't see much people on Elm Street like the streets before. Imagine if Elm Street were very packed like the streets before, then you couldn't shoot from the Grassy Knoll well and maybe more people could be injured because of the lost bullets from the TBSD or somewhere else.I wonder why didn't Oswald get an lawyer? He really has the right to get one!Why weren't there any documentation of the interrogation of Oswald? It is against lawsuit if the police didn't documentation anything during the interroogation.When Ruby was terminally ill and he thought that somebody infected him to get cancer, why didn't he confess anything what was really his intention to kill Oswald and who are behind the assassination?

[Douglas 606]

Kees-Jan wrote:It is conspicuous that there were a lot of people on the streets before Elm Street to see JFK but not on the Elm Street. If you look the pictures or Zapruder / Moorman movie well, you don't see much people on Elm Street like the streets before. Imagine if Elm Street were very packed like the streets before, then you couldn't shoot from the Grassy Knoll well and maybe more people could be injured because of the lost bullets from the TBSD or somewhere else.I wonder why didn't Oswald get an lawyer? He really has the right to get one!Why weren't there any documentation of the interrogation of Oswald? It is against lawsuit if the police didn't documentation anything during the interroogation.When Ruby was terminally ill and he thought that somebody infected him to get cancer, why didn't he confess anything what was really his intention to kill Oswald and who are behind the assassination?Some possible answers:Elm street was the end of the parade. Few people are usually at the end of any parade.Oswald did make a phone call to contact a civil rights attorney. He was out of town on that weekend and Oswald was unable to contact him. I feel that Ruby did not ''spill the beans'' before he died because his sister's life had been threatened.

[Kees-Jan]

Douglas 606 wrote:Oswald did make a phone call to contact a civil rights attorney. He was out of town on that weekend and Oswald was unable to contact him. Are you sure? I saw on DVD that Oswald is asking for an attorney during the news conference. He said that he need an attorney.

[kenmurray]

http://forum.jfkmurdersolved.com/viewto ... f=1&t=2285

[Douglas 606]

Kees-Jan wrote:Douglas 606 wrote:Oswald did make a phone call to contact a civil rights attorney. He was out of town on that weekend and Oswald was unable to contact him. Are you sure? I saw on DVD that Oswald is asking for an attorney during the news conference. He said that he need an attorney.Yes I am sure. Either he tried to call or the jail clerk tried to call a NY civil rights attorney who had defended NY residents who were associated with left-wing organizations in the US. The attorney in question said that he would not have represented Oswald anyway because he did not specialize in criminal matters. I do not recall the name but I'm sure someone on this site does.Edit: His name was John J. Abt[Thanks. Ken Murray]

[Kees-Jan]

If Oswald indeed bought a rifle and Marina, Oswald's wife, took three picture of him with the rifle in the backyard, and Oswald took the rifle, in the wrapped paper, from the garage of Ruth's house, to TSBD on 22th of November, why wouldn't he have shot at JFK? Is it true that the first shot can be more simple than the second and third shot? Because the first shot you have time to aim and to shot. After the first shot, you have to reload, aim and shot again in no time, which is more difficult than the first shot.If the first shot is indeed more simple than the second and third shot, why was the first shot completely wide (hit Tague) and the second and third shot hit JFK?

[Slav]

the 3rd shot came from a different gun it was right after the second shot to close to reload.it was on top of the 2nd shot, Nicolletti took the second shot and files took the 3rd shot almost at the same time.

[Tom Bigg]

I followed Files' story too on how he says Nicoletti's shot hit simultaneously; I wonder how Bugliosi would react with that fantastic theory, two bullets fired from two different locations and trajectories hitting the same head at the same time??? Are there any other recorded records in history of something similar happening?

[Douglas 606]

Tom Bigg wrote:I followed Files' story too on how he says Nicoletti's shot hit simultaneously; I wonder how Bugliosi would react with that fantastic theory, two bullets fired from two different locations and trajectories hitting the same head at the same time??? Are there any other recorded records in history of something similar happening?Bugliosi is a disinformation agent. His book on JFK is useless unless you need a large heavy doorstop.

[Randy Bednorz]

I've come back to this Forum after at least a year's absence. If this is a "hobby," I'm not sure it is a healthy one. If it is an obsession, well -- obsessions in general aren't healthy. First, let me offer this link to a University of Pittsburgh web-site and a PDF pertaining to the Bethesda autopsy, its misleading interpretation by the HSCA and what is arguably altered photographic and X-ray artifacts:http://assassinationresearch.com/v2n2/p ... gh.pdfSome time ago, from this or that source, I'd come across and argument that the shot from the knoll had been made with a "frangible" or exploding bullet. With my limited experience with firearms (a Mossberg .22 semi-auto and a .457 Magnum Weatherby bolt-action elephant gun), I can explain how this is likely done. You would take a cartridge -- a bullet -- secure it with a clamp, drill a hole in the bullet from the top-dead center with an appropriately sized bit, and fill the hole with mercury. You might then add a drop of molten paraffin wax to seal the hole.The PDF argues several things. The autopsy photos had been altered. And the author -- based on damage to the skull and brain and other aspects -- argues that this was indeed the nature of the bullet that entered JFK's forehead in the forward temple and above the ear.As for the other evidence and the Mannlicher-Carcano. Oswald tested positive in a paraffin test on his hands, suggesting that he had fired a gun that day -- that is -- a pistol. This allows at least a deduction of a good chance that he shot the policeman. But the paraffin test of his face and upper body was negative. It would have been positive had he fired a rifle.I was also stunned in this "50th anniversary" frenzy that a contributor to LA Times (arguing for the lone-nut crowd) tried to cite the shell-casings, live round in the chamber and the smudged palm-print. Another thumb print had been found between the rifle barrel and the stock, and could only have been left there when someone (Oswald) had disassembled and cleaned the rifle.Jesse Ventura demonstrated a replication of the fabled shooting from the TSBD sixth floor in his popular TV series. He had rated as "Expert" -- a couple notches above Oswald -- at age 50 when he was Minnesota governor. He needed something over seven seconds to get off three rounds with the Carcano "piece-a-da-****." (In fact, you hear him under his breath calling the rifle a piece of ****). He was able to score only one head shot. The cartridge clip is some kind of open frame. In order to insert the clip into the breech and down into the clip housing, you would have to leave at least a thumb print on the last bullet inserted in the clip -- unless you were wearing gloves. But there are no prints on the three shell casings, no print on the live-round in the chamber, no print on the bolt-action knob, the clip housing -- and certainly not the trigger which isn't even mentioned in Officer Day's Warren testimony. This is totally inconsistent with someone trying to shoot the President from their place of work, after leaving prints all over the book boxes and various parts of the building on the sixth floor TSBD. If he were stupid enough to attempt shooting the President from his place of employment, and stupid enough to do such a thing when it has been shown that he loved his two small children, why would he be smart enough to avoid putting prints on the bullets and other aspects of the gun -- linking him to the shooting as being the last person to fire the rifle?As for the attorney -- yes -- I think his name was John Abt. But Oswald would soon be dead. He did make another phone call, which was to North Carolina near CAmp Lajeune -- a call to a "cut-out" or an intelligence asset to be contacted in an emergency. Obviously, the man who lived at the residence with that phone number denied everything, but he had been "in intelligence" during WWII.On the matter of the knoll. Gordon Arnold is probably one of the best of numerous knoll witnesses. He was so close that he could feel the bullet whiz by and heard the report. Arnold was an active duty soldier on leave, stopped over in Dallas on his way to Alaska. It had always been a part of early military training to have these guys crawl through ditches and mud with barbed wire, while firing an automatic rifle above their heads. If there were ever any sort of expert testimony ignored by the Warren Commission, Arnold was as good as it gets.