how's this JFK Assassination scenario?

Question

Shot 1: Hits Kennedy in the throat (Grassy Knoll)

Shot 2: Hits Kennedy in the back (Dal-Tex Building)

Shot 3: Hits Connally in the back (Book Depository)

Shot 4: Hits curb & injures a bystander (Dal-Tex Building)

Shot 5: Hits Kennedy in the back of the head, but isn't a direct hit. The bullet goes on to strike the windshield. (Book Depository)

Shot 6: Hits Kennedy near the right temple and exits the right back of his head. (Grassy Knoll)

6 shots. 4 snipers. 5 hits, 1 miss(not counting the Connally hit).

I believe the Mafia was behind JFK's murder. Lee Harvey Oswald was the fall guy. J.D. Tippit was not involved. Lee Harvey Oswald may or may not have shot him. 2 bullet casings found at the crime scene didn't match Oswald's gun.

Answer 1

Well let's look at it point by point:

1. When the clothing of the president was examined by the FBI they learned that the fabric on Kennedy clothing was pushed INWARD in the back and OUTWARD in the front. Therefore a frontal shot did NOT strike Kennedy in the throat. The physical evidence doesn't support your first point. Second, the path through Kennedy's body was downward from back to front, and from right to left. Therefore even if a shot DID enter from the front, it could NOT have come from the grassy knoll, but would have to have been fired by someone lying on the ground in front and to the left of the limousine for the bullet to follow the path it is known to have traveled. SInce such a person would have been in full view of EVERYONE in Dealey Plaza, such a claim is ridiculous and without serious merit Therefore your first claim is not supported by ANY evidence or logical thought.

2. The shot that hit Kennedy in the upper back does NOT trace back to the Dal-Tex building. By back-tracking the wound from Connally's back to Kennedy's throat and out Kennedy's back the path of that bullet takes a direct-line path right back to the southeast-corner window of the Texas Schoolbook Depository. Nowhere else. And additionally, NO ONE saw any gunmen firing from the Dal-Tex Building anyway. So the second point you raise also is not supported by ANY of the known evidence. Additionally, the bullet that entered Kennedy's back traveled all the way through his body--it was NOT recovered in his body nor in the limousine.

3. This point is correct. But it was the same bullet that had just passed through Kennedy's body, not a separate one. That is why the entrance to Connally's back was NOT a neat round hole, but an enlongated wound (since the bullet was beginning to tumble after passing through Kennedy.) So while you point is correct about a bullet hitting Connally in the back it was only the second shot, NOT the third.

4. The fragment that struck the curb at James Tague's feet was most likely the FIRST shot which missed the limousine. The VAST majority of witnesses said they only heard three shots fired. And remember that only three casings have ever been recovered.

5. Your fifth and sixth shots have several problems. Less than 4% of ALL witnesses said that they heard shots coming from more than one direction. Yet YOU have shots coming from three different directions which NO WITNESSES agree with. Not a single one. Even trying to claim that the shots came from two different directions has a 96% likelihood of being wrong if you are comparing it with the earwitness testimony. And the Zapruder film does not support the claim that ANY shots hit Kennedy from the right front. The Zapruder film reveals only ONE shot striking Kennedy in the rear of the head and exiting the right front, blowing the skull to the right front. The autopsy also agreed with the Zapruder film in that it showed that the president was struck twice and ONLY twice. Both times from above and to the rear. There is NO medical evidence to support your claim of two bullets striking Kennedy in the head and certainly NO EVIDENCE supports you claim of a gunman to the right front of the motorcade. Now, of course if you are going to claim that the Zapruder film has been altered then you have clearly checked out of reality and are a lost cause. For the Zapruder film to have been altered it would have to had agreed perfectly with a falsified autopsy--yet the Zapruder film was not seen and studied until AFTER the autopsy was completed. Therefore there was no time for the so-called conspirators to compare their notes and make the necessary changes. Additionally careful study of the Zapruder film (as contained in the Zavala Report) revealed that expert examination of the film reveals NO EVIDENCE of ANY TYPE of TAMPERING.

So in summary. The only claim that you raise in your theory that has ANY evidentiary support is the one that states that Connally was shot from behind. All the rest fall flat.

But your theory is a typical one:

1. It involves multiple gunmen--none of which are seen or photographed or witnessed.
2. All of these gunmen are able to get away and they all used bullets that disappeared when the president and governor were examined.
3. They fired shots that no one heard and left no evidence of their bullets damaging the bodies of their intended victims
4. Your theory simply doesn't hold any water when looked at in light of the evidence.


However if you float this theory among people that haven't read much about the assassination, they will think it is a wonderful theory and they will think you've solved the case.

You, however made the mistake of asking a Kennedy assassination scholar (me) his opinion and your theory was exposed as impossible and ridiculous.


Keep at it though.

Answer 2

Nice theory... i doubt the Mafia were really THAT against JFK... Just think who was the tight with the FBI in its development phase... oh right.. the mafia...

Also.... did anyone consider perhaps a communist assasination? i mean the guy just stared down the mighty Red Empire.... and suddenly we find a man who by all evidence couldnt have done it... was it a scape goat to avoid public calls for vegence against a mighty enemy?

Answer 3

nice theory, dont think so. too many shots were fired. kennedy's throat and back were in the same shot along with connally. saw pictures online. look them up

Answer 4

Ah! First fantasy football, now fantasy history. No joke. Your scenario is just as plausible as the 'official' version.
Questions: Who gains from the death of JFK? What do they gain? What do they want? Did they succeed?
You want to be thinking money, power, and global control here. Keep going. You're on a roll. Great question.

Answer 5

Oswald was the lone shooter. All the evidence points to him. In fact, no other evidence points anywhere else. I could recommend a couple good books. I know it wouldn't make any difference to you though.

Answer 6

You may be on to something. It definitly wasn't a simple assination I won't know the real truth in my lifetime

Answer 7

sounds good, but I'm thinking it was his brother , for some reason it had to be rfk, (sibiling rivalry) I also think that rfk had a fling with Jackie,

so what i'm saying it is a soap oprea and will always be one.

Answer 8

this is too deep for yahoo answers, man.