JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

[MicahJava]

I already posted mine - earwitness reports are unreliable and subjective at best.

BStrong, when's the last time you read the Dealey Plaza witness statements? There's just too much of a consensus to say it's confusion. There were witnesses thinking the shot(s) came from the knoll no matter where they were standing.

Anyone that was located parallel to the trajectory of the projectiles could have heard the MSB and misidentified them as muzzle blast.

Oh ok, so I guess witness confusion isn't a good enough explanation for you (and rightly so). Like I said, there were knoll witnesses in every location of Dealey Plaza. If your assertion is true, the findings of the HSCA earshot experiment would have been more ambiguous. Rope off Dealey Plaza and do your own experiment that's even better than what the HSCA did, otherwise you can't argue acoustics. It's as simple as that.

 

[MicahJava]

You'll need to point out how denying a murderer a place in history constitutes fascism.

His solution is simply to remove fame from the equation for individuals (like LHO) with marginal personalities.

I concur with his opinion. LHO would be the happiest man alive to know folks like you are working to clear his good name in the 21st century.

What you are describing is something out of a dictatorship. Of course people should have every right to understand the case against a suspect or convict in a high-profile crime case. The right is self-evidence. I don't need to argue that any further besides repeating the word "freedom".

 

[Axxman300]

Some of you have been to Dealey Plaza, right? Or at least seen it on Google Maps street view? It's not a huge place, it's not a small place, it's a medium-sized place.

And?

The grassy knoll is a completely different location than the east side of the TSBD. So why are some of you totally content with thinking that shots somehow echoed and "bounced" around to sound exactly like a shot from the knoll area?

Because that's exactly what it did. Where you though the shots originated from depended on where you stood. The echo is that bad.

The HSCA earwitness report did note that firing shots in Dealey Plaza creates echoes, but their two observers reported data indicates that the noise of an unsuppressed rifle doesn't just "bounce around".

How do sound waves move through the air any differently when created by a suppressed weapon as opposed to an unsuppressed weapon? I would love to hear this one.

The HSCA experiment observers found it easy almost all of the time to tell where a shot originated.

The key word there is "almost".

Oliver Stone's sound man complained about how bad the echo was.

So any speculation about the acoustics of Dealey Plaza being like that is total discredited hogwash.

No, it just undermines your argument, and you can't deal with it. It's not speculation, the place has a nasty echo. Just a fact you can't ignore.

The burden of proof has been on the Lone Nutters since the 70's to show how ~40% of witnesses could think shot(s) came from the knoll area.

Nope.

The evidence points to Oswald.

What about the witnesses who claim to remember a Dallas motorcycle cop driving his bike up the Grassy Knoll? It didn't happen, but they swear it did.

It's the CT loons who have yet to prove there were more than 3 shots fired, and in any other direction than the TSBD. In 54 years they continue to come up dry.

I already proposed one idea: guns with noise-suppressors in conjunction with supersonic ammunition. What's yours?

1. - YOU didn't propose the silencers, you glommed onto another CTer's theory who was posting here about this time last year...and he left because we shot his work to pieces...from the 6th floor...

2. Your proposed idea makes no sense in any real-world operation. You are simply trying to rig the scenario to fit a second shooter...and you can't.

3. The ballistic evidence indicates only one weapon used. Take a wild guess which one.

 

[MicahJava]

Axxman300, read this: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0074b.htm


This is actual experimental evidence, not some crap like "Oliver Stone's sound man complained about how bad the echo was".

 

[HSienzant]

Although even Dale Meyers [sic] agrees that the wallet in the news channel footage is not Tippit's wallet, it does appear that the claim that it was an Oswald wallet began no earlier than the 90's.

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

I don't know, but with Bob Barrett shouting from the highest mountains that it was Oswald's wallet, I thought it deserved a forum post or two.

The claim that Barrett is shouting anything is all yours. It has no bearing in fact.

I don't have a copy of Dale Myers' book, but a review of his book on KennedysAndKing has a lengthy discussion of the wallet witnesses: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/61tjsb/germany_didnt_receive_nato_invoice_from_trump/

And you cite a conspiracy theorists' take on Myers argument. No surprise. No value, either.

One thing is that there was no "demand" for witnesses to an Oswald wallet, it's something that Barrett started.

You'd be amazed what a well-placed question can do to "refresh" someone's memory. I pointed this out before... that the verb in the question can cause people who saw a film of an automobile striking a sign to change their estimate of the speed of the automobile.

There is some speculation that the later ARRB witnesses to Kennedy's corpse being brought in a zippered bodybag was due to Paul O'Connor's recollections as publicized in the well-known book Best Evidence, and thus a "supply" of more bodybag witnesses were somehow created by garbled memories and stuff from Best Evidence.

This is a documented effect, see anything by Elizabeth Loftus. How you ask the question affects the answer you get.

But nobody can say there was any "demand" for the claim that an Oswald wallet was found at the scene of the Tippit shooting.

Until of course, well-meaning but misguided JFK conspiracy 'researchers' started interviewing witnesses about what they recalled about "Oswald's wallet being found at the scene of the Tippit shooting'.

I've pointed it out before... witness testimony from decades after the fact is meaningless.

When I see the Kennedy case, I'm so overwhelmed by the big stuff so I prefer to occasionally take small bites into little things like the wallets.

Big stuff, little stuff, you're typically wrong in your arguments, your facts, and your interpretations.

It's a tiny note I casually brought up, not a challenge to a rude, aggressive internet dispute.

Oh, so I'm a rude, aggressive, internet poster now, because I pointed out the flaws in your argument?

Hilarious.

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

Oops, Linked the wrong thing. Here is the KennedysAndKing page discussing the wallet issue in Dale Myers' book: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/myers-dale-with-malice-part-2

If there was no film of the wallet, I wouldn't even bother bringing it up. But we do have a film with a decent enough picture to see it's probably not Tippit's wallet.

 

[HSienzant]

Riding on this comment to post a reminder:

Some of you have been to Dealey Plaza, right? Or at least seen it on Google Maps street view? It's not a huge place, it's not a small place, it's a medium-sized place. The grassy knoll is a completely different location than the east side of the TSBD.

It's about 30 yards from the knoll to the closest corner of the TSBD.

So why are some of you totally content with thinking that shots somehow echoed and "bounced" around to sound exactly like a shot from the knoll area?

Because that's what numerous witnesses actually described about the assassination:

D.V. HARKNESS:
Mr. BELIN - Where were you when you heard the shots?
Mr. HARKNESS - I had started west on Main Street to the, I don't know what they call this area here.
Mr. BELIN - Plaza.
Mr. HARKNESS - On the plaza area with the crowd to observe the President as he went west on Elm Street.
Mr. BELIN - How many shots did you hear?
Mr. HARKNESS - Three.
Mr. BELIN - What did you do after you heard those noises? Did you know they were shots, by the way?
Mr. HARKNESS - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - What did you do?
Mr. HARKNESS - When I saw the first shot and the President's car slow down to almost a stop----
Mr. BELIN - When you saw the first shot, what do you mean by that?
Mr. HARKNESS - When I heard the first shot and saw the President's car almost come to a stop and some of the agents piling off the car, I went back to the intersection to get my motorcycle.
Mr. BELIN - You were in the process of doing that when you heard the second and third shots?
Mr. HARKNESS - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - Where did the shots sound like they came from?
Mr. HARKNESS - I couldn't tell. They were bouncing off the buildings down there. I couldn't tell.
Mr. BELIN - You mean the reverberations?
Mr. HARKNESS - Yes.

LEE BOWERS:
Mr. BALL - Were you in a position where you could see the corner of Elm and Houston from the tower?
Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not see the corner of Elm and Houston. I could see the corner of Main and Houston as they came down and turned on, then I couldn't see it for about half a block, and after they passed the corner of Elm and Houston the car came in sight again.
Mr. BALL - You saw the President's car coming out the Houston Street from Main, did you?
Mr. BOWERS - Yes; I saw that.
Mr. BALL - Then you lost sight of it?
Mr. BOWERS - Right. For a moment.
Mr. BALL - Then you saw it again where?
Mr. BOWERS - It came in sight after it had turned the corner of Elm and Houston.
Mr. BALL - Did you hear anything?
Mr. BOWERS - I heard three shots. One, then a slight pause, then two very close together. Also reverberation from the shots.
Mr. BELIN - And were you able to form an opinion as to the source of the sound or what direction it came from, I mean?
Mr. BOWERS - The sounds came either from up against the School Depository Building or near the mouth of the triple underpass.
Mr. BALL - Were you able to tell which?
Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not.
Mr. BALL - Well, now, had you had any experience before being in the tower as to sounds coming from those various places?
Mr. BOWERS - Yes; I had worked this same tower for some 10 or 12 years, and was there during the time they were renovating the School Depository Building, and had noticed at that time the similarity of sounds occurring in either of those two locations.
Mr. BALL - Can you tell me now whether or not it came, the sounds you heard, the three shots came from the direction of the Depository Building or the triple underpass?
Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not.
Mr. BALL - From your experience there, previous experience there in hearing sounds that originated at the Texas School Book Depository Building, did you notice that sometimes those sounds seem to come from the triple underpass? Is that what you told me a moment ago?
Mr. BOWERS - There is a similarity of sound, because there is a reverberation which takes place from either location.

The HSCA earwitness report did note that firing shots in Dealey Plaza creates echoes, but their two observers reported data indicates that the noise of an unsuppressed rifle doesn't just "bounce around". The HSCA experiment observers found it easy almost all of the time to tell where a shot originated.

Your problem is that you are ignoring the conclusions of the experts who conducted the very study you site. We dealt with this as recently as ten days ago, and other times in the past. You simply repeat YOUR opinion, ignore the experts' opinion, and pretend your opinion is somehow justified because of the study. It's not.

Here's where we discussed it on March 17th:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11760483&postcount=2538

Remember the conclusions of the experts you're ignoring?
The experts conclusion is that more than four witnesses would have reported shots from multiple directions if, indeed, there had been shots from multiple locations ("...a second shot from a different location should be distinctive and different enough to cause more than four witnesses to report multiple origins for the shots). They also concluded "It is hard to believe a rifle was fired from the knoll."
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0077b.htm

So any speculation about the acoustics of Dealey Plaza being like that is total discredited hogwash.

Tell that to the witnesses who were actually there like Lee Bowers and D.V.Harkness. Or the experts who conducted the study you like to site, but whose conclusions you ignore. Your opinion is valueless here. You're neither a witness nor an expert.

The burden of proof has been on the Lone Nutters since the 70's to show how ~40% of witnesses could think shot(s) came from the knoll area.

Well, isn't that precious.

Previously, you were claiming HALF the witnesses claimed the knoll.

Since we have half of all Dealey Plaza witnesses screaming from the highest mountains they heard shots from the Knoll area, we can't just say it was confusion or something like that.

Now it's approximately 40%. It's not.

I'm getting serious Robert Prey 40 + medical witnesses flashbacks. When challenged, he couldn't document his claims. I'm willing to bet you won't be able to come close to 40% of the witnesses claiming the knoll.

Previously, you were also claiming the witnesses were mistaken in their perceptions. You cannot salvage your argument by turning around and claiming they can't be mistaken in their perceptions.

Remember arguing for that misperception here?

Wouldn't your perception of the origin of the last shot you hear skew your perception of the other shots that came before?

I already proposed one idea: guns with noise-suppressors in conjunction with supersonic ammunition. What's yours?

The same thing some of the witnesses said. Echoes. Reverb.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

BStrong, when's the last time you read the Dealey Plaza witness statements?

Coming from you, that's hilarious. Remember claiming testimony is "boring" and making up answers instead of actually reading the testimony I cited for you?

There's just too much of a consensus to say it's confusion. There were witnesses thinking the shot(s) came from the knoll no matter where they were standing.

We KNOW the EARwitnesses who thought they heard shots from the Depository are correct because:
(a) Numerous EYEwitnesses saw a man with a rifle, or just a rifle in the sixth floor southeast corner window.
(b) A rifle was discovered in that building, on the sixth floor, about 42 minutes after the assassination.
(c) Three shells were found at the window that the EYEwitnesses pointed out as the shooter's location. Those shells were linked to the rifle found to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.
(d) Two large fragments were found in the limo by Secret Service agents on the evening of the assassination. Those fragments were linked to the rifle found to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.
(e) A nearly whole bullet was discovered in Parkland Hospital shortly after the victims arrived there. That bullet was linked to the rifle found to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.
(f) An autopsy conducted the night of the assassination concluded the only shots that struck JFK hit him from 'above and behind'. The Depository's sixth floor SE corner window was 'above and behind'. All the subsequent reviews of the extant autopsy material by qualified forensic pathologists reached the same conclusion.

See? The hard evidence confirms these Depository witnesses are correct. You understand what corroboration is?

Now, what corroboration is there for the EARwitnesses who claimed shots from the Knoll (can you name these witnesses, please, and detail the corroboration in the other evidence you found?)

Oh ok, so I guess witness confusion isn't a good enough explanation for you (and rightly so).

It was good enough for you a year ago. You were arguing for the misperception of the witnesses back in March of 2016:

Wouldn't your perception of the origin of the last shot you hear skew your perception of the other shots that came before?

You do remember arguing the witnesses might have misperceived the source of some of the shots back then, don't you? You can't salvage your argument by turning around and claiming the knoll witnesses could not be mistaken. You ALREADY admitted they could.

Like I said, there were knoll witnesses in every location of Dealey Plaza. If your assertion is true, the findings of the HSCA earshot experiment would have been more ambiguous. Rope off Dealey Plaza and do your own experiment that's even better than what the HSCA did, otherwise you can't argue acoustics. It's as simple as that.

You're the only one arguing with the witnesses and the conclusions of the experts who conducted the study you pretend to cite. But in reality, you ignore everything they said and just substitute your own opinion. Robert Harris did that a lot to add a "veneer of expertise" to his arguments -- citing some study, but ignoring the conclusions of the experts and substituting his own. You are doing the precise same thing.

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

I know that a couple or more witnesses suggested the knoll noises were only some kind of reverberation, but the HSCA earshot study provides clear evidence that 11/22/1963 was probably something other than a Carcano. I'm not even saying the knoll noises weren't some kind of reverberations, but not from a Carcano. Look at their raw data. Yes they padded their report with comments to make it sound more ambiguous, but look at the actual reporting the observers did. Yes it would be great if there was a new, similar experiment with more refinement, but as of now the best evidence for the issue of acoustics in Delaey Plaza is the HSCA report. It's written in plain English.

 

[HSienzant]

Axxman300, read this: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0074b.htm


This is actual experimental evidence, not some crap like "Oliver Stone's sound man complained about how bad the echo was".

Add here's their actual conclusions, not some layman's impression of what they should have concluded:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0077b.htm

And eyewitnesses to the assassination referenced how they couldn't tell where the shots came from.

D.V. HARKNESS:
Mr. BELIN - Where were you when you heard the shots?
Mr. HARKNESS - I had started west on Main Street to the, I don't know what they call this area here.
Mr. BELIN - Plaza.
Mr. HARKNESS - On the plaza area with the crowd to observe the President as he went west on Elm Street.
Mr. BELIN - How many shots did you hear?
Mr. HARKNESS - Three.
Mr. BELIN - What did you do after you heard those noises? Did you know they were shots, by the way?
Mr. HARKNESS - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - What did you do?
Mr. HARKNESS - When I saw the first shot and the President's car slow down to almost a stop----
Mr. BELIN - When you saw the first shot, what do you mean by that?
Mr. HARKNESS - When I heard the first shot and saw the President's car almost come to a stop and some of the agents piling off the car, I went back to the intersection to get my motorcycle.
Mr. BELIN - You were in the process of doing that when you heard the second and third shots?
Mr. HARKNESS - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - Where did the shots sound like they came from?
Mr. HARKNESS - I couldn't tell. They were bouncing off the buildings down there. I couldn't tell.
Mr. BELIN - You mean the reverberations?
Mr. HARKNESS - Yes.

LEE BOWERS:
Mr. BALL - Were you in a position where you could see the corner of Elm and Houston from the tower?
Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not see the corner of Elm and Houston. I could see the corner of Main and Houston as they came down and turned on, then I couldn't see it for about half a block, and after they passed the corner of Elm and Houston the car came in sight again.
Mr. BALL - You saw the President's car coming out the Houston Street from Main, did you?
Mr. BOWERS - Yes; I saw that.
Mr. BALL - Then you lost sight of it?
Mr. BOWERS - Right. For a moment.
Mr. BALL - Then you saw it again where?
Mr. BOWERS - It came in sight after it had turned the corner of Elm and Houston.
Mr. BALL - Did you hear anything?
Mr. BOWERS - I heard three shots. One, then a slight pause, then two very close together. Also reverberation from the shots.
Mr. BELIN - And were you able to form an opinion as to the source of the sound or what direction it came from, I mean?
Mr. BOWERS - The sounds came either from up against the School Depository Building or near the mouth of the triple underpass.
Mr. BALL - Were you able to tell which?
Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not.
Mr. BALL - Well, now, had you had any experience before being in the tower as to sounds coming from those various places?
Mr. BOWERS - Yes; I had worked this same tower for some 10 or 12 years, and was there during the time they were renovating the School Depository Building, and had noticed at that time the similarity of sounds occurring in either of those two locations.
Mr. BALL - Can you tell me now whether or not it came, the sounds you heard, the three shots came from the direction of the Depository Building or the triple underpass?
Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not.
Mr. BALL - From your experience there, previous experience there in hearing sounds that originated at the Texas School Book Depository Building, did you notice that sometimes those sounds seem to come from the triple underpass? Is that what you told me a moment ago?
Mr. BOWERS - There is a similarity of sound, because there is a reverberation which takes place from either location.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

I know that a couple or more witnesses suggested the knoll noises were only some kind of reverberation,

Sorry, you are misinformed. It was more than just a 'couple'.

... but the HSCA earshot study provides clear evidence that 11/22/1963 was probably something other than a Carcano.

That's not what the experts concluded.

I'm not even saying the knoll noises weren't some kind of reverberations, but not from a Carcano.

How would you know? What did the witnesses say? What corroboration is there for the EARwitnesses who you are claiming named the knoll? Please name these witnesses and cite the corroboration in the evidence.

Look at their raw data. Yes they padded their report with comments to make it sound more ambiguous, but look at the actual reporting the observers did.

Hilarious. You don't have the background to draw conclusions from data. You're not a recognized expert in the field, you couldn't get within 20 miles of testifying to your conclusions, and what are you citing? Why, your own NON-EXPERT conclusions. Nobody cares about what you concluded. Cite the experts conclusions.

Yes it would be great if there was a new, similar experiment with more refinement, but as of now the best evidence for the issue of acoustics in Delaey [sic] Plaza is the HSCA report. It's written in plain English.

Yep. And I already cited the conclusions of the experts. Ignore them all you want, it's your credibility at stake here.

The experts conclusion is that more than four witnesses would have reported shots from multiple directions if, indeed, there had been shots from multiple locations ("...a second shot from a different location should be distinctive and different enough to cause more than four witnesses to report multiple origins for the shots). They also concluded "It is hard to believe a rifle was fired from the knoll."
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0077b.htm

 

[Reheat]

What you are describing is something out of a dictatorship. Of course people should have every right to understand the case against a suspect or convict in a high-profile crime case. The right is self-evidence. I don't need to argue that any further besides repeating the word "freedom".

Since when does a mass murder or someone like Oswald who murdered a President have "freedom". Yes, they deserve a fair trial (of course), but does concealing their name have to do with fascism. Once they're convicted of a heinous crime they have no freedom.

Some news organizations already refuse to publish or say their name and I support that wholeheartedly. It denies them the notoriety they seek.

 

[HSienzant]

Oops, Linked the wrong thing. Here is the KennedysAndKing page discussing the wallet issue in Dale Myers' book: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/myers-dale-with-malice-part-2

If there was no film of the wallet, I wouldn't even bother bringing it up. But we do have a film with a decent enough picture to see it's probably not Tippit's wallet.

That doesn't make it Oswald's, either. Myers concluded it was probably the wallet of a witness.

Hank

 

[BStrong]

BStrong, when's the last time you read the Dealey Plaza witness statements? There's just too much of a consensus to say it's confusion. There were witnesses thinking the shot(s) came from the knoll no matter where they were standing.



Oh ok, so I guess witness confusion isn't a good enough explanation for you (and rightly so). Like I said, there were knoll witnesses in every location of Dealey Plaza. If your assertion is true, the findings of the HSCA earshot experiment would have been more ambiguous. Rope off Dealey Plaza and do your own experiment that's even better than what the HSCA did, otherwise you can't argue acoustics. It's as simple as that.

And they were wrong. Physical evidence (Rifle, bullets, LHO etc) beats earwitnesses every day of the week.

Not necessarily.

Audio, and I'm familiar with loud noises of every type, not just firearms:

3 of my four Gibson Les Paul guitars. I was practicing SRV's Riviera Paradise just before I signed on here tonight.

Sound and everything along with it is subjective. Take a group of ten people and expose them to sound w/o a visual clue of what they're listening to and in all likelihood you'll get 10 different answers.

Recording equipment is not a hell of a lot better. Produce a loud noise - the mic picks it up, an engineer can determine what the sound level was in Db's but the Db level isn't going to be a reliable tool to determine what the source of the sound was - take an empty 55 gallon metal drum and chuck it off the roof of a two story building. Sounds pretty close to a 12 gauge shotgun. Be inside a structure when a GluLam supporting the roof fails, it sounds like a big bore rifle shot. When a huge eucalyptus tree falls, it sounds like a Mk 82 500 lb'er detonating, and if you're close, the ground shakes pretty good too. I've witnessed two tree's fail and I've seen more than a few Mk82's detonate.

I know it serves your confirmation bias to buy into everything that might support the grand CT, but like your inexperience with the ballistic evidence and the mechanics of LHO's shooting, hanging your hat on something as subjective as what people thought they heard as opposed to what the hard evidence demonstrates isn't going to get you very far.

 

[turingtest]

...
[qimg]http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/923/OgrF42.jpg[/qimg]

3 of my four Gibson Les Paul guitars. I was practicing SRV's Riviera Paradise just before I signed on here tonight.
...

Not to ignore the rest of that excellent post, but...omg, omg, omg! And a Fulltone man too. MJ, you need to stop arguing acoustics issues with BStrong right now. (And I'm only about half joking)

 

[BStrong]

What you are describing is something out of a dictatorship. Of course people should have every right to understand the case against a suspect or convict in a high-profile crime case. The right is self-evidence. I don't need to argue that any further besides repeating the word "freedom".

Another concept that goes right over your head.

I and my buddy aren't exactly the folks that came up with the idea of denying criminal bad actors the notoriety they are looking for.

That well know right-wing propaganda organ Mother Jones published this:

"Since the 1980s, forensic investigators have found examples of mass killers emulating their most famous predecessors. Now, there is growing evidence that the copycat problem is far more serious than is generally understood. Ever since the 1999 massacre at Colorado's Columbine High School, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been studying what motivates people to carry out these crimes. Earlier this year, I met with supervisory special agent Andre Simons, who until recently led a team of agents and psychology experts who assist local authorities in heading off violent attacks around the country, using a strategy known as threat assessment. Since 2012, according to Simons, the FBI's unit has taken on more than 400 cases—and has found evidence of the copycat effect rippling through many of them."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/10/media-inspires-mass-shooters-copycats

Here's an actual campaign ( No Notoriety) to persuade the media to stop disseminating reports focusing on mass shooters:

"Recognize that the prospect of infamy could serve as a motivating factor for other individuals to kill others and could inspire copycat crimes. Keep this responsibility in mind when reporting."

https://nonotoriety.com/

L.A. Times weighs in:

"But Hanlin, who says he will not "glorify" the perpetrator's name by uttering it on national television, has suggested one factor driving the murderous actions of 26-year-old Chris Harper-Mercer: a quest for fame.

Hanlin's suspicion is shared by many who probe the minds of mass shooters. In a society saturated by firearms and preoccupied by celebrity, these experts say that those who perpetrate such armed mayhem often seek to break the bonds of their invisibility and achieve what they feel life has denied them:

Recognition. Glory. Respect.

On Friday, evidence mounted that Harper-Mercer was acutely attuned to the fame that comes to those who commit armed murder on a spectacular scale. Combing through the gunman's online comments for clues to his motives, investigators found Harper-Mercer recently extolled the benefits of armed mayhem.

"I have noticed that so many people like him are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are," Harper-Mercer wrote in a post about Vester Flanagan, who in August shot two news reporters on live television in Roanoke, Va.

"A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight," Mercer wrote.

University of Alabama criminologist Adam Lankford said that fame -- or infamy -- has emerged as a common thread in mass shootings since Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold predicted on videotapes left behind that their armed rampage at Columbine High School would be one for the history books."

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-mass-shooters-fame-infamy-20151002-story.html

Contrary to your opinion, there is -0- right to notoriety.

A suspect has rights recognized in the BoR. Nowhere will you find any right to have their picture in the paper or on TV.

And again, LHO would be the happiest man on earth if he knew people in the 21st century were discussing him.

Unfortunately the only way anybody would know that name is if he became famous or infamous and he wasn't smart enough or talented enough to be famous.

 

[BStrong]

Not to ignore the rest of that excellent post, but...omg, omg, omg! And a Fulltone man too. MJ, you need to stop arguing acoustics issues with BStrong right now. (And I'm only about half joking)

Not a Chibson in the bunch, and I've got a Fulltone Robin Trower overdrive coming in to fool around with.

I am suffering from Acute GAS*

*Gear Acquisition Syndrome.

 

[Tolls]

I'd like to thank you for getting me started on the right track. It's a long story which I'll condense. But, you didn't go far enough.
...
In conclusion, I am obligated to accept the Warren Commission conclusion that LHO acted along in the assassination of JFK.
.

I take my hat off to you.


Sorry if I seemed a bit rude initially. It was a bit of a shock, after having read your stuff on 9/11.

I can see where you would feel the plausibility of it all, with your view of LBJ. I've met one or two people who hold him in equally high esteem! I was hoping you'd come round, especially with the recommendations people here can give, as well as their breadth of knowledge (far beyond mine!), and you didn't disappoint.

 

[MicahJava]

In the interest of not having a particular subject last forever with infinite pointless forum comments, I will not answer responses that obviously have no interest in the truth. You can have your ideas, if they are truly your ideas.

I'm pretty disturbed by BStrong and Reheat thinking it would ever be ok to not release the name of a convict or even suspect in a high-profile crime case. I don't care about whatever hypothetical you pull out about copycats, or how the suspect/convict feels about what they did, people should have the freedom to know. I have a respect for people's freedom and the establishment of history. Lone Nutters don't respect history.

 

[HSienzant]

In the interest of not having a particular subject last forever with infinite pointless forum comments, I will not answer responses that obviously have no interest in the truth. You can have your ideas, if they are truly your ideas.

Translation: I'm all out of conspiratorial explanations for the evidence and can't come up with reasonable explanations for how the evidence got planted.

I'm pretty disturbed by BStrong and Reheat thinking it would ever be ok to not release the name of a convict or even suspect in a high-profile crime case.

Why are you disturbed by this?

I don't care about whatever hypothetical you pull out about copycats, or how the suspect/convict feels about what they did, people should have the freedom to know.

Is the "people's right to know' an absolute? Or does the constitution circumscribe some limits to this?

I have a respect for people's freedom and the establishment of history.

Neither of which has anything to do the JFK assassination or the people's right to know. What you have is, without realizing it perhaps, is a respect for the establishment of mythology. There is no factual evidence for a conspiracy. None. It's all bunkum.

Lone Nutters don't respect history.

Is the tar warm yet? The feathers are ready when you are.

Hank