Quote:THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY THAT THERE ARE NO MAJOR VARIATIONS BETWEEN THE FILMS AND THE ARTIST'S DRAWINGS. Commission Exhibits Nos. 385, 386, and 388 were made from the recollections of the autopsy surgeons as told to the artist. Some day someone may compare the films with the artist's drawings and find a significant error which might substantially affect the essential testimony and the Commission's conclusions. In any event, the Commission should not rely on hazy recollections, especially in view of the statement in the autopsy report (Commission Exhibit 387) that: "The complexity of those fractures and the fragments thus produced tax satisfactory verbal description and are better appreciated in the photographs and roentgenograms which are prepared" - part of a memo from Assistant Counsel Arlen Spector to General Counsel J. Lee Rankin on April 30th, 1964.
And indeed, it's come to pass. The autopsy photos
have been compared to the Rydberg drawings, and it's
quite obvious to everyone that the drawings were incorrect.
Yet believers still think that the conclusions the Warren Commission came to were still accurate.
Times were different. Mistakes were made.
Kennedy was shot in the back and in the back of the head. No question about it.
The precise location of the fatal head shot entry should have been cast in stone for all. That Humes seemed somewhat vague on it is probably indicative of the fact that it was the POTUS and not much more.
You pro C folks just grasp at any little discrepancy...and blow it out of all proportion.
Keep on dreaming Ben.
JFK - killed by a sniper to the rear. Two shots and maybe a missed shot. Period.
(09-06-2016, 08:07 PM)Patrick C Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2016, 06:23 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY THAT THERE ARE NO MAJOR VARIATIONS BETWEEN THE FILMS AND THE ARTIST'S DRAWINGS. Commission Exhibits Nos. 385, 386, and 388 were made from the recollections of the autopsy surgeons as told to the artist. Some day someone may compare the films with the artist's drawings and find a significant error which might substantially affect the essential testimony and the Commission's conclusions. In any event, the Commission should not rely on hazy recollections, especially in view of the statement in the autopsy report (Commission Exhibit 387) that: "The complexity of those fractures and the fragments thus produced tax satisfactory verbal description and are better appreciated in the photographs and roentgenograms which are prepared" - part of a memo from Assistant Counsel Arlen Spector to General Counsel J. Lee Rankin on April 30th, 1964.
And indeed, it's come to pass. The autopsy photos have been compared to the Rydberg drawings, and it's quite obvious to everyone that the drawings were incorrect.
Yet believers still think that the conclusions the Warren Commission came to were still accurate.
Times were different. Mistakes were made.
Kennedy was shot in the back and in the back of the head. No question about it.
Actually no... there
IS a question about it. And Spector knew back then that they needed to double-check that we wouldn't discover what he suspected... that the evidence the Warren Commission relied on was wrong.
(09-06-2016, 08:07 PM)Patrick C Wrote: [ -> ]The precise location of the fatal head shot entry should have been cast in stone for all. That Humes seemed somewhat vague on it is probably indicative of the fact that it was the POTUS and not much more.
You pro C folks just grasp at any little discrepancy...and blow it out of all proportion.
Keep on dreaming Ben.
JFK - killed by a sniper to the rear. Two shots and maybe a missed shot. Period.
You don't need lies to support the truth, Patrick.
Such as your lie about Majerus refuting Mark Lane on a topic he never mentioned in his book...
Or, for that matter; your constant uncited claims...
(09-06-2016, 11:54 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: [ -> ]"Such as your lie about Majerus refuting Mark Lane on a topic he never mentioned in his book..."
Again, you seem to have an English comprehension problem.
Mike Majerus did not refute Mark Lane on that topic.
I merely stated that Mike Majerus makes the simple point that initially more people thought there were only two shots than now on record because they changed their minds due to media reports.
This is an important point - and his theory may be correct in terms of what actually happened. The strength of his argument of course is that Oswald took 5 to 6 seconds to get off the two shots that struck and not three shots as widely proposed by conspiracy theorists and frankly many lone gunman supporters.
In fact the WC favoured the three shot / 5.5 second approx scenario - a huge gaff in my opinion.
Had they taken a stronger stance on the other possible scenarios we would not have had years and years of doubt and we lone gunman supporters would not have to put up with day dreaming conspiracy fantasists like you, Mr Healy and Mr Abbot who frankly live in fairy tale land with this open and shut case.
(09-08-2016, 01:33 PM)Patrick C Wrote: [ -> ] (09-06-2016, 11:54 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: [ -> ]"Such as your lie about Majerus refuting Mark Lane on a topic he never mentioned in his book..."
Again, you seem to have an English comprehension problem.
Mike Majerus did not refute Mark Lane on that topic.
I know he didn't... YOU know he didn't...
yet you lied about it, and STILL REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT FACT!
Here it is again:
Patrick C Wrote:Ben Holmes Wrote:But, as Mark Lane pointed out many years ago - the witnesses who were on the record in the first two days, 11/22 and 11/23 - quite overwhelmingly pointed to the Grassy Knoll.
Bull shit - no they did not.
Ben Holmes Wrote:No believer has been able to refute that simple fact.
Oh, if I could be bothered I could easily do that. Mike Majerus certainly has. It's just a question of homework and application.
Now, you know that I'm simply going to keep quoting this lie on your part until you acknowledge and retract it.
(09-08-2016, 01:33 PM)Patrick C Wrote: [ -> ]I merely stated that Mike Majerus makes the simple point that initially more people thought there were only two shots than now on record because they changed their minds due to media reports.
No Patrick, you're
LYING AGAIN. You stated that Mike Majerus has refuted "that simple fact"... the fact that "the witnesses who were on the record in the first two days, 11/22 and 11/23 - quite overwhelmingly pointed to the Grassy Knoll." Everyone can read the quote that I provided above.
Stop lying, and start telling the truth, and you won't look so bad in this forum.
(09-08-2016, 01:33 PM)Patrick C Wrote: [ -> ]This is an important point - and his theory may be correct in terms of what actually happened. The strength of his argument of course is that Oswald took 5 to 6 seconds to get off the two shots that struck and not three shots as widely proposed by conspiracy theorists and frankly many lone gunman supporters.
In fact the WC favoured the three shot / 5.5 second approx scenario - a huge gaff in my opinion.
Had they taken a stronger stance on the other possible scenarios we would not have had years and years of doubt and we lone gunman supporters would not have to put up with day dreaming conspiracy fantasists like you, Mr Healy and Mr Abbot who frankly live in fairy tale land with this open and shut case.
And yet, the witnesses who were on the record in the first two days, 11/22 and 11/23 - quite overwhelmingly pointed to the Grassy Knoll... a fact you cannot refute, and Mike Majerus certainly never even addressed.