50 Years After JFK's Death: What Questions Are Unanswered?

[Brown]

The purpose of this thread is to discuss legitimate historical questions about JFK's assassination, by which I mean questions that pretty much everyone agrees have not been answered to a high degree of certainty.

This is not a thread for rambling about conspiracy theories. This is not a thread for questions like: "Why did LBJ order the destruction of all files related to Project Twilight, in which mafia-trained Cuban exiles were practiced shooting at alien-shaped moving targets from long range at a CIA assassins' school?" It is a thread in which we can identify questions that pretty much everyone can agree are still in dispute... and which may or may not indicate the presence of a multi-person plot. For example:

What was Oswald's motive? I don't think we really know for sure. Even most conspiracy theorists think Oswald played some role in the events, but then, why would he play any role at all? There have been several suggestions made as to why Oswald did what he did: to impress Castro, to revenge Castro, to impress his wife, to make a name for himself, etc. Some motivations are more plausible than others, and more than one may be in play; but we don't really know.

Did someone put Oswald up to it? Even if there was a single shooter, it is still possible that someone may have set Oswald to the task, or perhaps made him a "promise" in exchange.

Where was Oswald going? After departing Dealey Plaza, Oswald went to his residence to get his pistol and jacket. He then departed his residence, but where was he going? How did he plan to get out of the city? Where did he think he might hide?

What bullet hit Tague? There are lots of possibilities, but no one knows.

What happened to the missing bullet? At least one shot missed and there seems to be no trace of it. (In some theories, multiple shots missed, and all evidence of them vanished without a trace.) Where did the missing bullet go? And why did it miss everything? Again, there are lots of proposals, but no one knows.

What did Tippitt say to Oswald? Had Oswald kept his cool, he might have been let go, but something prompted him to shoot the officer. What happened? Can we ever know?

It is a fact of life that every major event leaves unanswered questions. The fact that there are unanswered questions does not necessarily imply that there is anything sinister going on. What other legitimate historical unanswered questions are there?

 

[Bikewer]

One of yesterday's NPR segments (I think it was Diane Rehm) went into this rather extensively.
The one fellow was pointing out all the "unsolved" bits, including the widely-held conspiracy notions revolving around Oswald's trip to Mexico prior to the assassination.
He maintained that the CIA and FBI had done a great deal of evidence destruction after the event.
However, they also had a Senator who had been part of the Select Committee that did the re-investigation of the assassination, and he refuted essentially everything the guy said....

If there was any consensus, it was to the effect that both the CIA and the FBI may have destroyed items which were embarrassing.... Evidence that should have led them to the conclusion that Oswald was a danger to the President and that Dallas was a particularly dangerous place, it being at the time a hotbed of radical right-wing activity.

 

[bynmdsue]

What does the radical right have to do with a dirty Red killing the president?

 

[Brainache]

I suspect the Mafia.

 

[pakeha]

How did Jackie endure wearing that suit stained with her husband's brains and blood until she arrived in DC?

 

[Mark6]

One of yesterday's NPR segments (I think it was Diane Rehm) went into this rather extensively.
The one fellow was pointing out all the "unsolved" bits, including the widely-held conspiracy notions revolving around Oswald's trip to Mexico prior to the assassination.
He maintained that the CIA and FBI had done a great deal of evidence destruction after the event.
However, they also had a Senator who had been part of the Select Committee that did the re-investigation of the assassination, and he refuted essentially everything the guy said....

If there was any consensus, it was to the effect that both the CIA and the FBI may have destroyed items which were embarrassing.... Evidence that should have led them to the conclusion that Oswald was a danger to the President and that Dallas was a particularly dangerous place, it being at the time a hotbed of radical right-wing activity.

Essentially, when seen from outside a conspiracy to cover up an assassination is indistinguishable from a conspiracy to cover up a security screw-up.

 

[bigred]

If "pretty much everyone agrees" it was just Oswald, why have the classified files remained classified after so many years? And of all the documents which were released - some as late as the 90s - what's with all the bits n pieces blanked out? If it was just Oswald, there should be no need for any of that, certainly not after all this time, if ever.

PS I am not per se implying it was a grandiose conspiracy or trying to digress to that. I can easily believe was just Oswald, or it wasn't. I'm just saying for something that is supposedly as cut and dry as most here and many elsewhere seem to think, there are still a lot of holes which IMO are either not explained at all or not very well, this being one.

 

[patchbunny]

What happened to the missing bullet? At least one shot missed and there seems to be no trace of it. (In some theories, multiple shots missed, and all evidence of them vanished without a trace.) Where did the missing bullet go? And why did it miss everything? Again, there are lots of proposals, but no one knows.

In the 1984 mass shooting in San Ysidro, the perpetrator, James Huberty, was killed by a SWAT sniper who shot James in the chest with a .308 rifle. The bullet passed completely through his body and was never found.

Not finding this particular bullet is nothing special.

 

[rcfieldz]

Why do we not pay as much attention to President Abraham Lincoln's death?

 

[pakeha]

Essentially, when seen from outside a conspiracy to cover up an assassination is indistinguishable from a conspiracy to cover up a security screw-up.

Yes.

 

[Brainache]

How did Jackie endure wearing that suit stained with her husband's brains and blood until she arrived in DC?

Tranquilizers. This was the sixties, they were popping those things like TicTacs.

 

[pakeha]

Good point.

 

[vtbub]

How did Jackie endure wearing that suit stained with her husband's brains and blood until she arrived in DC?

She wanted the world to see what they did to her husband.

Many on the flight back wanted her to change. She firmly declined.

 

[FramerDave]

Tranquilizers. This was the sixties, they were popping those things like TicTacs.

I would add to that tremendous emotional shock.

 

[vtbub]

If there was any consensus, it was to the effect that both the CIA and the FBI may have destroyed items which were embarrassing.... Evidence that should have led them to the conclusion that Oswald was a danger to the President and that Dallas was a particularly dangerous place, it being at the time a hotbed of radical right-wing activity.

Much like any other embarrassment to the Feds, it is considered best to not show how poorly different parts of the government work together. It happens all the time.

 

[SumDood]

Sadly, like many Americans, my knowledge of the events come mostly from the Oliver Stone movie. Around that time, there was a special on TV where Walter Cronkite (I think) went through, point by point, all the evidence in the movie, debunking them all. The only point he did not cover was why Oswald waited to take the shot when the motorcade was driving away from him when, according to the movie, he had a much easier shot when the cars were traveling towards him, minutes earlier in the route. Is this an atcutal point of contention in any of the 'theories'?

 

[Giz]

Dallas was a particularly dangerous place, it being at the time a hotbed of radical right-wing activity.

JFK - Killed by a Communist
RFK - Killed by Palestinian terrorist

Neither Kennedy was the victim of "right-wing activity".

 

[Soapy Sam]

A colleague , who came from Dallas, once said to me that it really did not matter whether or not it was Oswald who shot Kennedy, as the gunman at the next junction would have got him had LHO missed. Or the one after him. From the minute he got off the aircraft in Dallas, he was doomed.
I don't know if JFK truly was so unpopular in Texas, but there seems no way to know whether half a dozen disappointed would-be assassins went home that day, rifles unfired.

 

[BStrong]

LHO was a marginal personality that aspired to greatness, every door he opened closed on him, and he'd be thrilled to know that 50 years on we're still talking about him.

My .02 is that if he was a kid today, he'd be a cluster homicide shooter.

 

[I Ratant]

...
What bullet hit Tague? There are lots of possibilities, but no one knows.

.
Tippit was hit by a fragment of 1) the bullet that hit the signal light post or 2) the bullet that hit the windshield chrome. It was NOT a bullet that hit the curb and then bounced up. No bullet can do to a curb the damage the curb looked at after had. That is the result of a misdirected car which had a wheel rim hit the curb, with a wheel weight scrubbing some of its lead and antimony into the gouge. I took a piece of concrete and a piece of asphalt out back and shot both of them with a .357 Magnum revolver, copper jacketed and lead bullets, and a .22 Long Rifle with its lead bullet from 3 feet away, and didn't get anything resembling the damage to the piece of curb tested. I'll look for the photos.. Here they are...
The bullet that may have hit the signal light post could have fragmented and one of the fragments hit Tague, or the bullet that hit the windshield chrome and did fragment there may have had a small piece of lead fly to where Tague was standing and scratch his cheek.
The "freshness" of the damage to the curb is indeterminate. No one checked the curb for damage prior to the shooting. And I've tested the response of an abraded lead bullet to exposure to the atmosphere. Lead is inert, and the abrasion looked as "fresh" at 6 months as it did right after the sanding belt scratched the bullet.
.

What happened to the missing bullet? At least one shot missed and there seems to be no trace of it. (In some theories, multiple shots missed, and all evidence of them vanished without a trace.) Where did the missing bullet go? And why did it miss everything? Again, there are lots of proposals, but no one knows.

.
Hitting the signal light post is the most probable explanation, as the first shot has nothing to show for itself. LHOLN may have been concentrating on the sight picture tracking the car and fired just as the signal light post interfered with the bullet.
A miss behind the limo into the street is commonly postulated, but that would probably have fragmented and splattered against the underside of the limo.
There are any number of experiments that anyone can do in seeking answers for the questions about this, but NONE of the CTwits will do anything other than yak about it.

 

[I Ratant]

Sadly, like many Americans, my knowledge of the events come mostly from the Oliver Stone movie. Around that time, there was a special on TV where Walter Cronkite (I think) went through, point by point, all the evidence in the movie, debunking them all. The only point he did not cover was why Oswald waited to take the shot when the motorcade was driving away from him when, according to the movie, he had a much easier shot when the cars were traveling towards him, minutes earlier in the route. Is this an atcutal point of contention in any of the 'theories'?

.
With the motorcade approaching on Houston, all those beady Secret Service eyes with their guns would see the activity in that window and respond.
After the cars pass, the shots are easy. The target is moving slowly, almost directly away from the shooting point, and rising (relatively) in the shooter's field of view. Easy shots, all of them.
And in the approach, the car windshield and the Governor are more in the way.

 

[pakeha]

She wanted the world to see what they did to her husband.

Many on the flight back wanted her to change. She firmly declined.

That makes sense.
If memory serves me correctly, she wore that suit as she witnessed the signing in of LBJ as president.

I would add to that tremendous emotional shock.

Yes.

 

[BStrong]

A colleague , who came from Dallas, once said to me that it really did not matter whether or not it was Oswald who shot Kennedy, as the gunman at the next junction would have got him had LHO missed. Or the one after him. From the minute he got off the aircraft in Dallas, he was doomed.

I don't know if JFK truly was so unpopular in Texas, but there seems no way to know whether half a dozen disappointed would-be assassins went home that day, rifles unfired.

Texas I couldn't tell you, but in my house, this date was a date of joy as far as my father was concerned. He thought JFK sold the Cubans down the river, and for that reason alone thought JFK got what was coming to him.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Where was Oswald going? After departing Dealey Plaza, Oswald went to his residence to get his pistol and jacket. He then departed his residence, but where was he going? How did he plan to get out of the city? Where did he think he might hide?

Someone mentioned in one of the CT threads that Oswald might have been planning to attempt to kill General Edwin Walker^WP, whom he had failed to assassinate six months earlier. This strikes me as the most likely explanation for Oswald's actions.

 

[Bob001]

....
What was Oswald's motive? I don't think we really know for sure. Even most conspiracy theorists think Oswald played some role in the events, but then, why would he play any role at all? There have been several suggestions made as to why Oswald did what he did: to impress Castro, to revenge Castro, to impress his wife, to make a name for himself, etc. Some motivations are more plausible than others, and more than one may be in play; but we don't really know.
...

I think this is maybe the most interesting question. Most assassins seem to think they are attracting glory to themselves and some cause. John Wilkes Booth made a speech as he hobbled across the Ford's Theatre stage with a broken leg. But Oswald apparently expected to escape and might have if he had been smarter, and he consistently denied having anything to do with the murder. So if he wasn't trying to get famous, and he didn't proclaim a cause, what was he trying to do? That leads to all the questions about whether he was working for someone else, whether he was being paid, etc. On the other hand, he didn't make very good plans to escape, and obviously he didn't succeed. (I was astonished that the guy didn't drive and caught a city bus from the scene. Not very slick.) So if I could ask Oswald one question, it would be "What were you thinking?"

 

[marplots]

Did Oswald know he'd shot and killed Kennedy before he was arrested?

 

[vtbub]

Did Oswald know he'd shot and killed Kennedy before he was arrested?

He knew he hit JFK. Not sure about if he knew JFK was dead.

 

[DDWW]

LHO was a marginal personality that aspired to greatness, every door he opened closed on him, and he'd be thrilled to know that 50 years on we're still talking about him.

My .02 is that if he was a kid today, he'd be a cluster homicide shooter.

IMHO LHO was the most influential person on US politics in the last 50 years.

DDWW

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

50 Years After JFK's Death: What Questions Are Unanswered?

Why is the media and some of the pubic so enamored with reliving tragedies on round numbered anniversaries?

 

[GlennB]

50 Years After JFK's Death: What Questions Are Unanswered?

Why are my Google pages full of Daleks commemorating 50 years of Dr Who?

Do they know I'm a Brit they think is more interested in SF?

 

[smartcooky]

Oswald was supposed to have been a marksman of some ability.

Why did he wait until after the Presidential motorcade turned into Elm and was driving away from his position in on the 6th floor of the TSBD (where his view was partially obstructed by trees and the signal light thought to to have been struck by the missing bullet) when the easier, clearer shot was along Houston Street when the motorcade as driving directly towards him.

 

[I Ratant]

Post #21.
Good photos of the relation of JFK to the governor as might be seen relative to the 6th floor window are difficult to find.
Those showing the motorcade turning onto Houston from Main can be interpolated to present what might have been visible from the 6th floor.
Possibly Dale Myers' superb simulation (http://www.jfkfiles.com/index.html) has done this, but consider the shooting task on Houston.
The target is somewhat veiled by the Governor and the windshield, the view improving as the limo approaches, but the shooter has to raise his body to be able to depress the rifle to aim at JFK.
OTOH, going away along Elm, the shooter's position is improved by the need to point the rifle up at a target moving away slowly.

 

[AdMan]

What was Oswald's motive? I don't think we really know for sure. Even most conspiracy theorists think Oswald played some role in the events, but then, why would he play any role at all? There have been several suggestions made as to why Oswald did what he did: to impress Castro, to revenge Castro, to impress his wife, to make a name for himself, etc. Some motivations are more plausible than others, and more than one may be in play; but we don't really know.

Did someone put Oswald up to it? Even if there was a single shooter, it is still possible that someone may have set Oswald to the task, or perhaps made him a "promise" in exchange.

There is an interesting article in Slate about a new book on the Warren Commission that posits that Oswald's contacts with the Cubans and Cuban sympathizers during his mysterious trip to Mexico City (and indirectly JFK's attempts at assassinating Castro) may have been what put the idea into his head:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...cking_act_stunning_reporting_in_new_book.html

 

[John Jones]

Why do we not pay as much attention to President Abraham Lincoln's death?

Because there are no living 'witnesses', but Lincoln's death is a close second with CTers.

 

[angrysoba]

Perhaps the only potentially interesting question historically is the second one. The others only seem to be of importance because conspiracy theorists have...erm...conspired to make the bizarre minutiae of a murder seem important.

Does it usually matter when Person X shoots Person Y, which of the bullets did what?

 

[Rolfe]

Why are my Google pages full of Daleks commemorating 50 years of Dr Who?

Do they know I'm a Brit they think is more interested in SF?

Sweetie, it was my birthday the day before yesterday, and my Google pages were full of cake. This is seriously alarming.

I've got a procession of Doctors as well, today.

Rolfe.

 

[GlennB]

Sweetie, it was my birthday the day before yesterday, and my Google pages were full of cake. This is seriously alarming.

I've got a procession of Doctors as well, today.

Rolfe.

I have the Doctors too, but I don't think I told Google about my birthday. I got poisonous toads or Marie Curie, or something.

 

[Rolfe]

I didn't think I'd told Google about my birthday either. That's what's creeping me out.

Rolfe.

 

[Brown]

I fear that many have missed the point of the thread.

I did not post the questions with the expectation that people would offer their explanations (or guesses) about answers to them. Rather, I wanted to explore the notion that, even in an event of major historical significance, it may not be possible to know everything.

And this is not necessarily indicative of anything sinister. In almost every significant event, there are things that happened (or that didn't happen) that seem to have no clear explanation.

Are there any other questions that pretty much everyone agrees are unanswered about the events of 22 November 1963? THAT is what we should discuss.

 

[Rolfe]

Well, obviously we can't know everything. Did Oswald plan all along to take the shot when the motorcade was travelling away from him? Or was that plan B, but he was prevented from taking a shot when the car was coming towards him?

He might have preferred the shot from the back because none (or few) of the people in the cars would be facing him at the time. Or it might have offered a better sight line.

He might have planned on taking the shot from the front, but been prevented - maybe Governor Connolly interfered with his sight-line. Maybe he was distracted for some reason, thought he was about to be discovered. Maybe he was overwhelmed by the enormity of what he was about to do and couldn't take the shot the first time.

It doesn't matter. There are loads of perfectly possible explanations. People who have been there say the shot that was actually taken was remarkably easy, certainly for an experienced marksman. So why does it matter that there was an earlier opportunity that was apparently not taken? It's not inexplicable, by any manner of means.

Rolfe.