JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

[Robert Harris]

This thread is a continuation from here. The cut-off point was arbitrary and you may freely quote from earlier posts. The thread remains on moderated status for the time being. All modboxes from Part III remain in effect. Thank you.

Posted By: Loss Leader

So, how about providing some evidence that a gunshot caused the reactions?
Your claim, your burden of proof.

That's an excellent question, Zooterin. I will try to answer it for you.

1. They were in the middle of a shooting. That alone, might not constitute a 100% proof, but it certainly makes a gunshot, the most probable explanation.

2. The large consensus of witnesses was that they heard two closely bunched gunshots at the end of the attack. That is a perfect match with shots at 285 and 313, 1.5 seconds apart.

3. Bill Greer, the driver of the limo, stated that the second shot, which he described as almost simultaneous with the third, caused him to feel it's "concussion", which is exactly what we would expect him to have felt from the shock wave of a passing, high powered rifle shot.

4. The absence of plausible, alternative explanations. The most common of these has been that the reactions were caused by the driver slamming on the brakes, but the evidence proves that the reactions preceded the slowdown. That fact was confirmed by the Nobel prize winning physicist, Dr. Luis Alvarez, who I corroborated in this brief presentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDAg5c4x5U

The only other alternative which has been suggested, is that the noise at 285 was a motorcycle backfiring. But the witnesses confirmed that this backfiring was heard repeatedly all throughout the motorcades, but no similar reactions can be seen, either prior to frame 285 in the Zapruder film, or during movies taken prior to the limo's arrival in Dealey Plaza.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GleA2BHxGcM

In fact, reactions like those following frame 285, can ONLY be seen, following the fatal headshot at frame 313.

http://jfkhistory.com/duckstwice.gif

And finally, the HSCA confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle, where much louder than motorcycle backfires. This is from their report,

All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud, and they were unable to understand how they could have been described as a firecracker or backfire..

We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test that would approximate the original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. But the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise woud have been low in comparison with the shots themselves.


5. Each of the nonvictims in the limousine, who we see reacting, stated that what they heard at the end of attack, were gunshots.

The facts and evidence prove beyond any reasonable doubt, that those reactions were caused by exactly what the people who reacted, said it was - a high powered rifle shot.

Oswald might have fired that shot or he might have fired the one that followed, but he couldn't have fired both.

 

[Robert Harris]

These debunk conspiracy theories which proves yours wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7TbB4uxJEk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufFa5xBYPd0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeXMoWmu0TU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBfPKIN__SI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxmsyWSQj0A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYiyKtx9Y68

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBXW1-VGmM

I can especially recommend the ABC presentation but they all do a good job.

I have many more links to YouTube videos if you'd like.

None of them even attempt to refute my analysis. They address issues like the direction the 313 headshot came from, and are in full agreement with me, that it came from the rear.

The ABC documentary also agrees with me, that one bullet passed through both John Kennedy and Governor Connally.

None of the documentaries you listed, address the fact that shots were fired at frames 285 and 313, which were too close together for both to have been fired by Oswald.

And none of them address the fact that only one of the early shots was loud enough to be audible to most witness and neither was loud enough to provoke the kind of startle responses we see, following 285 and 313. It is ridiculously obvious, that all the shots did not come from the same rifle.

The final shots were much too close together and the early shots were not nearly as loud as the ones at the end. Those facts are indisputable and will never be refuted.

 

[Axxman300]

Well of course. The top experts on the mob and its relationship to the JFK assassination, just formed their conclusions on a Ouiji board.

Probably the most reliable of sources for this CT subject.

Never mind the many hundreds of sourced footnotes in their books, or the minor fact that Marcello swore that he would kill JFK and then confessed to doing so, to an FBI informant, mafia attorney Frank Ragano, and others.

Swearing he was going to kill someone and actually doing so are entirely different things.

Never mind the fact that Sam Giancana was murdered exactly 5 days before he was supposed to testify about the mob's connections to the CIA,

Giancana was murdered because he was going to talk - period. They didn't know what he was going to say and they weren't going to take the chance. At that time his mind was going, so he was a risk. There was a long list of KNOWN reasons to shut him up.

or that Johnny Roselli's dismembered body was found floating in an oil drum, shortly after telling the Washington Post that the mob ordered Ruby to kill Oswald.

He'd already tesitfied before the Church Commission and the HSCA. He had his chance to come clean and he didn't. He reveal much about the CIA and Mafia connections too.

Gosh, how could anyone be suspicious about those little details

Not one changes the fact that Oswald was the lone shooter in Dallas that day.

And finally, the HSCA confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle, where much louder than motorcycle backfires.]

The HSCA was not conclusive, presented no solid evidence, and is hardly the last word on the subject.

2. The large consensus of witnesses was that they heard two closely bunched gunshots at the end of the attack. That is a perfect match with shots at 285 and 313, 1.5 seconds apart.

Again, you're ignoring the massive echo in the plaza that makes your sound theory worthless. You are arguing sound using silent film, and testimony of terrified people in the target vehicle.

This is foolish.

You have no objective data point to anchor your case.

Just because some guy says the MC was a certain Db doesn't tell us how sound traveled in Dealey Plaza, and does not tell us how sound traveled on that day. What does the the MC sound like 6 floors up? How does the shock wave move through the air conditions of that day?

Then you throw the word "Involuntary" around as if it is universal, and it is not. You assume everyone would react to a loud noise the same and this claim has NEVER been true.

 

[Tomtomkent]

So no evidence for there being reactions to gunshots. Just your opinion.

 

[RoboTimbo]

None of them even attempt to refute my analysis. They address issues like the direction the 313 headshot came from, and are in full agreement with me, that it came from the rear.

Well, no, they actually agree with each other on their disagreement with you. Sorry but they show your opinions to be incorrect.

The ABC documentary also agrees with me, that one bullet passed through both John Kennedy and Governor Connally.

Well, no. You actually agree with them.

None of the documentaries you listed, address the fact that shots were fired at frames 285 and 313, which were too close together for both to have been fired by Oswald.

Correct, they show that your opinion of unevidenced phantom shots being fired when they weren't from where they weren't is incorrect.

And none of them address the fact that only one of the early shots was loud enough to be audible to most witness and neither was loud enough to provoke the kind of startle responses we see, following 285 and 313. It is ridiculously obvious, that all the shots did not come from the same rifle.

Incorrect, they all agree that all of the shots did come from Oswald's M/C and that your imagined shots didn't happen at all. They also agree that your imagined startle reactions are fabrications supporting a house of cards.

The final shots were much too close together and the early shots were not nearly as loud as the ones at the end.

Which of the three total shots, all fired by Oswald, are you referring to as the "early" ones?

Those facts are indisputable and will never be refuted.

Correct, you are unable to refute the facts of the conventional narrative which is based on the evidence, not opinions like your phantom shots from phantom rifles by phantom gunmen from phantom locations.

The videos I posted are conclusive. Your misperceived "startle reactions" aren't, therefore magical thinking to invent phantom shooters with phantom weapons firing from phantom locations with phantom bullets which didn't hit anything in Texas isn't required.

What more can you tell me about your opinion of someone firing from the storm drain? Maybe that will be better able to withstand scrutiny.

 

[Robert Harris]

So no evidence for there being reactions to gunshots. Just your opinion.

Did you overlook my reply to Zooterkin?

Perhaps it would be better to address the evidence I presented, before declaring that I didn't post any evidence.

1. They were in the middle of a shooting. That alone, might not constitute a 100% proof, but it certainly makes a gunshot, the most probable explanation.

2. The large consensus of witnesses was that they heard two closely bunched gunshots at the end of the attack. That is a perfect match with shots at 285 and 313, 1.5 seconds apart.

3. Bill Greer, the driver of the limo, stated that the second shot, which he described as almost simultaneous with the third, caused him to feel it's "concussion", which is exactly what we would expect him to have felt from the shock wave of a passing, high powered rifle shot.

4. The absence of plausible, alternative explanations. The most common of these has been that the reactions were caused by the driver slamming on the brakes, but the evidence proves that the reactions preceded the slowdown. That fact was confirmed by the Nobel prize winning physicist, Dr. Luis Alvarez, who I corroborated in this brief presentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDAg5c4x5U

The only other alternative which has been suggested, is that the noise at 285 was a motorcycle backfiring. But the witnesses confirmed that this backfiring was heard repeatedly all throughout the motorcades, but no similar reactions can be seen, either prior to frame 285 in the Zapruder film, or during movies taken prior to the limo's arrival in Dealey Plaza.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GleA2BHxGcM

In fact, reactions like those following frame 285, can ONLY be seen, following the fatal headshot at frame 313.

http://jfkhistory.com/duckstwice.gif

And finally, the HSCA confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle, where much louder than motorcycle backfires. This is from their report,

All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud, and they were unable to understand how they could have been described as a firecracker or backfire..

We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test that would approximate the original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. But the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise woud have been low in comparison with the shots themselves.


5. Each of the nonvictims in the limousine, who we see reacting, stated that what they heard at the end of attack, were gunshots.

The facts and evidence prove beyond any reasonable doubt, that those reactions were caused by exactly what the people who reacted, said it was - a high powered rifle shot.

Oswald might have fired that shot or he might have fired the one that followed, but he couldn't have fired both.

 

[Robert Harris]

Probably the most reliable of sources for this CT subject.

Let's review. You stated your subjective opinion that the mob would not have been involved in the assassination. I pointed out that some of the nation's top experts on the mob said they were, and that the three of them wrote books on the subject which referenced a great deal of evidence.

I think we should go with them rather than settle for your or my opinions, don't you?

Swearing he was going to kill someone and actually doing so are entirely different things.

Except that he also stated that he did it. Doesn't it make you a bit suspicious that Jack Ruby met with Marcello lieutenant Campisi the night before the assassination and that Campisi was the first man to visit him after he murdered Oswald?

Giancana was murdered because he was going to talk - period. They didn't know what he was going to say and they weren't going to take the chance. At that time his mind was going, so he was a risk. There was a long list of KNOWN reasons to shut him up.

I think you are correct, that Marcello was afraid that Giancana was going to talk.

He'd already tesitfied before the Church Commission and the HSCA. He had his chance to come clean and he didn't. He reveal much about the CIA and Mafia connections too.

Giancana was very much in the thick of the assassination. He even shared a girlfriend with JFK. It would have been surprising if Marcello hadn't had him killed.

The HSCA was not conclusive, presented no solid evidence, and is hardly the last word on the subject.

They are when it comes to judging how loud the rifle was. They also confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle generated a sound level of 130 decibels, within 10 feet of the bullet's path. That is 16 times louder than 90db which is the level at which involuntary startle reactions will occur.

Can you find another source that disputes their measurements?

Again, you're ignoring the massive echo in the plaza that makes your sound theory worthless.

Is that why most of the witnesses only heard one shot, prior to the end of the attack? Your theory asserts that two were fired at app. 160 and 224. Why didn't all those witnesses hear four early shots? Why did they only hear ONE?

Just because some guy says the MC was a certain Db doesn't tell us how sound traveled in Dealey Plaza

The HSCA people had no problem differentiating the gunshots from the echoes, and neither did the witnesses. If they had, they would have heard more than one of the early shots.

Furthermore, the reactions following 285, PRECEDED 313, so it couldn't have been an echo of that shot. The 223 shot was 3.44 seconds prior to 285 and obviously, was not nearly as loud, since most people never heard it and it provoked no visible startle reactions.

The "echo" theory fails on all counts.

and does not tell us how sound traveled on that day. What does the the MC sound like 6 floors up? How does the shock wave move through the air conditions of that day?

The people who reacted, were in the limousine, not the depository and the shock wave only had to travel a few feet to get to them.

Then you throw the word "Involuntary" around as if it is universal, and it is not.

Startle reactions can take different forms and it is possible, that in isolated instances, a person might not react at all. But that's irrelevant in this case, since with the exception of JFK, all of them reacted in perfect unison with one another.

http://jfkhistory.com/ducking.gif

You assume everyone would react to a loud noise the same and this claim has NEVER been true.

That is untrue. I never said that. Some of the passengers ducked, while some spun around at high speed. Kellerman shielded his ear and raised his shoulders for a fraction of a second - a classic, textbook startle reaction, as confirmed by Hunt and Landis.

Drs. Alvarez and Stroscio were correct that there was a loud and startling noise at precisely frame 285. They identified Zapruder's reaction as the heavily blurred frames at 290-291, while the limo passengers reacted at 290-292.

They were also correct that this same noise caused Greer to inadvertently lift his foot from the gas, causing the limo to slow down. His turn from rear to front then, was so rapid that some people claimed it was humanly impossible. That was the same shot that Greer said, caused him to feel its "concussion".

The evidence is overwhelming. This was a gunshot.

 

[Robert Harris]

This article by Howard Kohn, the Pulitzer prize winning editor of Rolling Stone magazine, goes into great detail about the mob's connection to the JFK assassination and the HSCA investigation.

It was written prior to Carlos Marcello's confession to an FBI informant, but even then, the mafia's role in the case was quite obvious. Robert Blakey, the head of the HSCA, wrote a book on the case, stating his belief that Marcello was behind the assassination - also before Marcello confessed.

http://jfkhistory.com/mobsters/Nicoletti.html

 

[Tomtomkent]

Did you overlook my reply to Zooterkin?

Perhaps it would be better to address the evidence I presented, before declaring that I didn't post any evidence.

1. They were in the middle of a shooting. That alone, might not constitute a 100% proof, but it certainly makes a gunshot, the most probable explanation.

2. The large consensus of witnesses was that they heard two closely bunched gunshots at the end of the attack. That is a perfect match with shots at 285 and 313, 1.5 seconds apart.

3. Bill Greer, the driver of the limo, stated that the second shot, which he described as almost simultaneous with the third, caused him to feel it's "concussion", which is exactly what we would expect him to have felt from the shock wave of a passing, high powered rifle shot.

4. The absence of plausible, alternative explanations. The most common of these has been that the reactions were caused by the driver slamming on the brakes, but the evidence proves that the reactions preceded the slowdown. That fact was confirmed by the Nobel prize winning physicist, Dr. Luis Alvarez, who I corroborated in this brief presentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDAg5c4x5U

The only other alternative which has been suggested, is that the noise at 285 was a motorcycle backfiring. But the witnesses confirmed that this backfiring was heard repeatedly all throughout the motorcades, but no similar reactions can be seen, either prior to frame 285 in the Zapruder film, or during movies taken prior to the limo's arrival in Dealey Plaza.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GleA2BHxGcM

In fact, reactions like those following frame 285, can ONLY be seen, following the fatal headshot at frame 313.

http://jfkhistory.com/duckstwice.gif

And finally, the HSCA confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle, where much louder than motorcycle backfires. This is from their report,

All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud, and they were unable to understand how they could have been described as a firecracker or backfire..

We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test that would approximate the original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. But the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise woud have been low in comparison with the shots themselves.


5. Each of the nonvictims in the limousine, who we see reacting, stated that what they heard at the end of attack, were gunshots.

The facts and evidence prove beyond any reasonable doubt, that those reactions were caused by exactly what the people who reacted, said it was - a high powered rifle shot.

Oswald might have fired that shot or he might have fired the one that followed, but he couldn't have fired both.

That is still not actual evidence. It is all just your interpretation. You can blather on all you like, but you are not supplying any EVIDENCE to support your claims. Simply repeating what you think people react to, is not evidence.

You offer no reason to believe you can read more into silent film footage than anybody else.

If you want me to look at evidence, please consider including some!

 

[Robert Harris]

Well, no, they actually agree with each other on their disagreement with you.

Which one of them disagreed with me, and on what specific issues?

Verbatim please.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Which one of them disagreed with me, and on what specific issues?

Verbatim please.

Didn't you watch all of the videos? Are you saying that you don't disagree with them?

 

[Robert Harris]

Resolving the conspiracy question is easy. You don't need me and you don't need Gerald Posner to do if for you. You can do it by yourself, without anyone's help.

Just get a good quality copy of the Zapruder film and watch the reactions by the people closest to JFK. Watch them react to the early shots and then watch them react at the end, following frames 285 and then 313.

Then ask yourself whether all of those shots came from the same kind of rifle.

 

[Axxman300]

Is that why most of the witnesses only heard one shot, prior to the end of the attack? Your theory asserts that two were fired at app. 160 and 224. Why didn't all those witnesses hear four early shots? Why did they only hear ONE?

They heard three, they only remember one. It's called hysteria.

The President of the United States is murdered right in front of them. They were there to see a parade, not scientific observation.

The "echo" theory fails on all counts.

No. It explains why different people heard different things. You've ignored the motorcycles, which were loud in 1963, and there were four of them right next to the President's car (2 on each side). The folks in the car would have been mostly unable to hear anything very well.

It was written prior to Carlos Marcello's confession to an FBI informant,

Except he didn't confess. This one has been repeatedly debunked as was his second "confession" to a guy who was also clearly lying.

Doesn't it make you a bit suspicious that Jack Ruby met with Marcello lieutenant Campisi the night before the assassination and that Campisi was the first man to visit him after he murdered Oswald?

Wait, what? A mob guy was in the best strip club in Dallas the night before the assassination? I'd be more shocked if he hadn't been there. I love this part of the failed argument, CTers make it sound suspicious that mafia guys frequented a high class strip club, and then go on to talk about being "mob experts". Ruby is always described as a nightclub owner, but let's face it, the place was an upscale nudie bar. Ruby would have known lots of mob guys, he also knew a lot of Dallas PD. It's where you went to look at mostly naked women dance.

Not sure why this needs to be explained.

If Campisi visited him it was to see if he needed a lawyer, and to reinforce that Ruby was not to cut any deals with the Feds to get a lighter sentence. Then again they might just have been friends.

 

[JayUtah]

Resolving the conspiracy question is easy. You don't need me and you don't need Gerald Posner to do if for you. You can do it by yourself, without anyone's help.

Just get a good quality copy of the Zapruder film and watch the reactions by the people closest to JFK. Watch them react to the early shots and then watch them react at the end, following frames 285 and then 313.

Then ask yourself whether all of those shots came from the same kind of rifle.

How is this not simply begging the question?

 

[RoboTimbo]

Resolving the conspiracy question is easy. You don't need me and you don't need Gerald Posner to do if for you. You can do it by yourself, without anyone's help.

And yet you clearly feel the need to "help" others to see your interpretation of evidence since nobody but you sees startle reactions.

Edited by Agatha: 

Removed minor aside not suited to moderated thread

Just get a good quality copy of the Zapruder film and watch the reactions by the people closest to JFK. Watch them react to the early shots and then watch them react at the end, following frames 285 and then 313.

I've seen it numerous times. You obviously haven't made a case for any additional shots other than Oswald's three. You're making a classical mistake of assuming what you're trying to prove.

Then ask yourself whether all of those shots came from the same kind of rifle.

Yes, all three of the proven shots came from Oswald's rifle. No phantom shots other than those has been shown to have been taken.

The videos I've posted definitively debunk your subjective interpretations of movement. If you've posted somewhere your credentials of expertise in such interpretations, I may have overlooked them. Can you post them again, please?

 

[Robert Harris]

Didn't you watch all of the videos? Are you saying that you don't disagree with them?

Please do not shift the burden of proof.

You asserted that they refuted me. Prove it.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Resolving the conspiracy question is easy. You don't need me and you don't need Gerald Posner to do if for you. You can do it by yourself, without anyone's help.

Just get a good quality copy of the Zapruder film and watch the reactions by the people closest to JFK. Watch them react to the early shots and then watch them react at the end, following frames 285 and then 313.

Then ask yourself whether all of those shots came from the same kind of rifle.

How about this.

How about we watch the film.

Then we ask the more important question: ARE ALL THOSE REACTIONS TO GUNSHOTS?


There is no reason to believe all the reactions you identify are to gunshots. Only YOU claim they are. You keep arguing as though as you HAVE to be correct. There is no evidence to support your claim. All your 'evidence' is based on a flawed assumption.

Not having your psychic ability to discern thoughts from movements on film, and ken what people had just heard, or what they thought the noise was.


If there is no reason to believe the reactions are to gunshots, there is no reason to ask where additional gunshots came from.

 

[Robert Harris]

They heard three, they only remember one.

That is untrue. They heard three and remembered three - a single, early shot and then two closely bunched shots at the end. Those were the only audible shots.

And there was no hysteria prior to the very end of the attack. Show me one person ducking or diving to the ground, prior to frame 285. Furthermore, none of the Secret Service agents did more than look around, prior to frame 285. Hill jumped within about one second following that shot. Before that, they heard nothing they believed was a gunshot.

Check out all the smiling faces in the Altgens photo, taken at the equivalent of frame 255, after YOUR theory alleges that two 130 decibel, high powered rifle shots have been fired. Look at Dave Powers grinning ear to ear.

http://jfkhistory.com/altgens.jpg

The early shots were fired from low caliber, suppressed weapons. The ones following 285 and 313, were hugely louder and provoked, clear startle reactions.

The President of the United States is murdered right in front of them. They were there to see a parade, not scientific observation.

Strange, isn't it, that in all this "hysteria", there weren't people hearing 4 early shots and 2 at the end, or 3/3 or 6/2 etc. etc?

Don't you find it amazing that such a large consensus reported exactly the same pattern of 1/2?

And don't you find it even stranger that the reactions following 285 and 313 were a perfect match with their description of two closely bunched shots at the end?

http://jfkhistory.com/duckstwice.gif

No. It explains why different people heard different things.

The fallacy in your statement is that you are claiming that all those witnesses were fooled by hearing an extra shot at the end, while ONLY hearing one at the beginning of the attack.

This wasn't "different people". It is the same people.

I have read every relevant WC testimony, and I could not find a single law enforcement professional, including police officers, Secret Service, Sheriff's deputies, and even Hwy patrolmen who were there that day, who testified or reported that they heard early shots that were closer together than the ones at the end.

Have you?

Obviously, they weren't fooled by echoes either. Most of them, who commented on the spacing of the shots, were in full agreement with the other witnesses and the people we see reacting in the limo.

You've ignored the motorcycles, which were loud in 1963, and there were four of them right next to the President's car (2 on each side). The folks in the car would have been mostly unable to hear anything very well.

I did not ignore the motorcycles. This is from a recent post:

The only other alternative which has been suggested, is that the noise at 285 was a motorcycle backfiring. But the witnesses confirmed that this backfiring was heard repeatedly all throughout the motorcades, but no similar reactions can be seen, either prior to frame 285 in the Zapruder film, or during movies taken prior to the limo's arrival in Dealey Plaza.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GleA2BHxGcM

In fact, reactions like those following frame 285, can ONLY be seen, following the fatal headshot at frame 313.

And finally, the HSCA confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle, where much louder than motorcycle backfires. This is from their report,

All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud, and they were unable to understand how they could have been described as a firecracker or backfire..

We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test that would approximate the original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. But the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise woud have been low in comparison with the shots themselves.

Except he didn't confess. This one has been repeatedly debunked as was his second "confession" to a guy who was also clearly lying.

That is flatly untrue. Post a verbatim citation, with source, please.

Wait, what? A mob guy was in the best strip club in Dallas the night before the assassination?

Sigh... No sir. Ruby went to Campisi's place. Perhaps you were thinking of Jim Braden who also had connections to Marcello, who was at the Cabana hotel the night before the assassination, where Ruby was meeting with Lawrence Meyers, who the HSCA connected to David Ferrie.

I'd be more shocked if he hadn't been there.

Did you mean that you would have been more shocked if Ruby hadn't been meeting with a Marcello lieutenant the night before the assassination? If so, we are in full agreement.

This is how Campisi was described in the PBS Frontline investigation:

In 1963, Sam and Joe Campisi were leading figures in the Dallas underworld. Jack knew the Campisis and had been seen with them on many occasions. The Campisis were lieutenants of Carlos Marcello, the Mafia boss who had reportedly talked of killing the President.

I love this part of the failed argument, CTers make it sound suspicious that mafia guys frequented a high class strip club, and then go on to talk about being "mob experts".

The part that I don't love is when ridiculously improbable coincidences are claimed.

Ruby is always described as a nightclub owner, but let's face it, the place was an upscale nudie bar. Ruby would have known lots of mob guys, he also knew a lot of Dallas PD. It's where you went to look at mostly naked women dance.

Ruby came to him, not visa versa, but I'm sure it will be no more difficult to fabricate that "coincidence" than the other.

If Campisi visited him it was to see if he needed a lawyer, and to reinforce that Ruby was not to cut any deals with the Feds to get a lighter sentence. Then again they might just have been friends.

Well of course it was

It was just a "coincidence" that Ruby was connecting with Marcello's boys immediately before and after the assassination, just like it was a "coincidence" that he was rubbing elbows with Jim Braden the night before, and with a guy in Chicago who called by David Ferrie.

If this were any other crime in history, we would be laughing at the concept that all this was a coincidence.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Please do not shift the burden of proof.

You asserted that they refuted me. Prove it.

Watch the videos again and listen for where they talk about startle reactions and phantom bullets.

And thank you for reminding me about the burden of proof. You've not proved your case so you still have it. The null hypothesis hasn't been disproven.

 

[BStrong]

That is untrue. They heard three and remembered three - a single, early shot and then two closely bunched shots at the end. Those were the only audible shots.

And there was no hysteria prior to the very end of the attack. Show me one person ducking or diving to the ground, prior to frame 285. Furthermore, none of the Secret Service agents did more than look around, prior to frame 285. Hill jumped within about one second following that shot. Before that, they heard nothing they believed was a gunshot.

Check out all the smiling faces in the Altgens photo, taken at the equivalent of frame 255, after YOUR theory alleges that two 130 decibel, high powered rifle shots have been fired. Look at Dave Powers grinning ear to ear.

http://jfkhistory.com/altgens.jpg

The early shots were fired from low caliber, suppressed weapons. The ones following 285 and 313, were hugely louder and provoked, clear startle reactions.



Strange, isn't it, that in all this "hysteria", there weren't people hearing 4 early shots and 2 at the end, or 3/3 or 6/2 etc. etc?

Don't you find it amazing that such a large consensus reported exactly the same pattern of 1/2?

And don't you find it even stranger that the reactions following 285 and 313 were a perfect match with their description of two closely bunched shots at the end?

http://jfkhistory.com/duckstwice.gif



The fallacy in your statement is that you are claiming that all those witnesses were fooled by hearing an extra shot at the end, while ONLY hearing one at the beginning of the attack.

This wasn't "different people". It is the same people.

I have read every relevant WC testimony, and I could not find a single law enforcement professional, including police officers, Secret Service, Sheriff's deputies, and even Hwy patrolmen who were there that day, who testified or reported that they heard early shots that were closer together than the ones at the end.

Have you?

Obviously, they weren't fooled by echoes either. Most of them, who commented on the spacing of the shots, were in full agreement with the other witnesses and the people we see reacting in the limo.



I did not ignore the motorcycles. This is from a recent post:

The only other alternative which has been suggested, is that the noise at 285 was a motorcycle backfiring. But the witnesses confirmed that this backfiring was heard repeatedly all throughout the motorcades, but no similar reactions can be seen, either prior to frame 285 in the Zapruder film, or during movies taken prior to the limo's arrival in Dealey Plaza.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GleA2BHxGcM

In fact, reactions like those following frame 285, can ONLY be seen, following the fatal headshot at frame 313.

And finally, the HSCA confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle, where much louder than motorcycle backfires. This is from their report,

All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud, and they were unable to understand how they could have been described as a firecracker or backfire..

We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test that would approximate the original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. But the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise woud have been low in comparison with the shots themselves.





That is flatly untrue. Post a verbatim citation, with source, please.



Sigh... No sir. Ruby went to Campisi's place. Perhaps you were thinking of Jim Braden who also had connections to Marcello, who was at the Cabana hotel the night before the assassination, where Ruby was meeting with Lawrence Meyers, who the HSCA connected to David Ferrie.



Did you mean that you would have been more shocked if Ruby hadn't been meeting with a Marcello lieutenant the night before the assassination? If so, we are in full agreement.

This is how Campisi was described in the PBS Frontline investigation:

In 1963, Sam and Joe Campisi were leading figures in the Dallas underworld. Jack knew the Campisis and had been seen with them on many occasions. The Campisis were lieutenants of Carlos Marcello, the Mafia boss who had reportedly talked of killing the President.



The part that I don't love is when ridiculously improbable coincidences are claimed.



Ruby came to him, not visa versa, but I'm sure it will be no more difficult to fabricate that "coincidence" than the other.



Well of course it was

It was just a "coincidence" that Ruby was connecting with Marcello's boys immediately before and after the assassination, just like it was a "coincidence" that he was rubbing elbows with Jim Braden the night before, and with a guy in Chicago who called by David Ferrie.

If this were any other crime in history, we would be laughing at the concept that all this was a coincidence.

Your presumption isn't true. We can account for the rounds fired by LHO, the rifle was recovered at the TSBD and the actual evidence in hand (please note, what you assert is evidence, isn't) supports the conclusion that LHO was the shooter.

Please also consider the fact that microphones, then and now, can produce a "spike" simply from impact against any hard surface and can also produce a "spike" if the mic is shut off and on.