[Nick Principe]

It's been established JFK's throat wound was an entrance, and this is beyond dispute. But where did the shot come from? The shot was straight on, which means it did not come from the GK because, like the head shot, it would have had to come sideways, or at a diagonal angle. Having stood behind the fence, I don't believe it is possible to hit Kennedy in the front.

The only place for a sniper to stand in DP and hit Kennedy "straight on" would have been standing atop the Triple Underpass, or underneath it. Neither scenario is plausible based on DP's layout. What are others' perspective on this?

[Lee Abbott]

I was told the sewer drains were too small to adequately accommodate a shooter by someone who checked them many years after the assassination. The size of those drains on Nov 22nd, is unknown, however.

[Ben Holmes]

Nick Principe Wrote:It's been established JFK's throat wound was an entrance, and this is beyond dispute. But where did the shot come from? The shot was straight on, which means it did not come from the GK because, like the head shot, it would have had to come sideways, or at a diagonal angle. Having stood behind the fence, I don't believe it is possible to hit Kennedy in the front.

The only place for a sniper to stand in DP and hit Kennedy "straight on" would have been standing atop the Triple Underpass, or underneath it. Neither scenario is plausible based on DP's layout. What are others' perspective on this?

I accept the very strong evidence that JFK was shot in the front of his throat... I also accept the nearly inevitable conclusion, based on a number of eyewitnesses who stated that there was a through and through hole in the windshield - that a line can be drawn from JFK's throat to the windshield - in effect making a line that will end up back at the location of the shooter.

So let's take a look at Dealey Plaza - and see if there's any possible locations for a shooter... keeping in mind that 99.9% of critics accept that a shooter was hidden in the Grassy Knoll - let's see if there's any other possible hiding places for a shooter:


This is a photo from the 1950's showing Dealey Plaza - I've put two arrows... one pointing to the right at the traditionally accepted Grassy Knoll - but the other arrow is pointing at the 'Grassy Knoll' on the southwest side of Dealey Plaza. Lots of foliage to hide a shooter... and a parking lot for a quick getaway. Here's an overhead of Dealey Plaza with a yellow arrow pointing at the area I suspect a shooter fired from:


And just so you can get an idea of what viewpoint such a shooter at this other, lesser known 'Grassy Knoll' would have looked like, here's a photo from that angle looking toward where JFK's limo was traveling on Elm Street:


As you can see, such a location provides very close to a straight on view to JFK - and somewhat to the right... which is exactly where the hole in the windshield was located... on the right side of the limo coming from the front. Notice that I'm to the right of the Triple Overpass, not on it or under it... Which, I believe, the windshield location shows...

Not the Triple Overpass...

Not under the Triple Overpass...

But to the right of it (as you're looking toward the TSBD from ahead of the limo)

Now, were there eyewitnesses to such a shooter? Nope... none that I'm aware of. But I think that the ballistics evidence quite firmly places a shooter there.

Was he hiding in a culvert? Who knows... I'm just putting the shooter in the general area that the ballistics shows he must have been. The fact that no-one saw the shooter is, in my opinion, quite meaningless.

This is my opinion - and until or unless more evidence comes up - I think it's the best explanation for the frontal shot.

[Ben Holmes]

Lee Abbott Wrote:I was told the sewer drains were too small to adequately accommodate a shooter by someone who checked them many years after the assassination. The size of those drains on Nov 22nd, is unknown, however.

I'm guessing you mean the height of the drain slit at the street - not the inside. You can easily fit inside the drains:



The height of the drain slit itself has decreased over the years - every-time the road is re-asphalted, they simply lay new asphalt over the old street - so it builds up over time. You can see it in this photo:



I wouldn't trust what anyone said about the impossibility of using the storm drains... I'm not convinced that they were used by shooters on 11/22/63 - but I'm not convinced that they could not have been.

[Nick Principe]

BEN HOLMES SAYS [I’ll figure out how to reply with a direct quote at some point]:
“here's a photo from that angle looking toward where JFK's limo was traveling on Elm Street:
Not the Triple Overpass...

Not under the Triple Overpass...

But to the right of it (as you're looking toward the TSBD from ahead of the limo)”


This is also the approximate area that some believe shots were fired from. Critic Willy Whitten even believes the head shot was fired from this area. Trajectory-wise it lines up with the throat wound and windshield damage, however very few if any DP witnesses indicated they heard gunshots from the Commerce Street direction. Although I’m willing to accept that the Commerce Street vantage point was far enough away from where any earwitnesses were standing for anyone to pinpoint activity from there. To hit a target as small as a throat from that far away is also inhumanly remarkable!

Here is a photo I took from behind the fence when I went to DP back in 2004 (those dark triangles at the bottom of the photo are the tips of the fence slats, which I snapped in the foreground on purpose for scale). As you can see, it’s a perfect angle for the head shot, but a frontal shot from there is simply not possible, especially if Zapruder and the Stemmons sign were both standing in the way.


  POV behind the fence.jpg (Size: 96.03 KB / Downloads: 490)

Kennedy DID turn to the right just before approaching Stemmons, and one explanation is that a street-level sniper east of the knoll could have shot it from the pergola area. But Kennedy turns away again and looks straight at around Z203-206, and he does not appear injured at that time.

I also have a photo I took of the storm drain, which I can provide upon request. But due to the re-asphalting building up over time, my photo wouldn't shed much light on anything. Also, I snapped that photo as sort of a joke, because I don't really think anything happened there.

[Ben Holmes]

Nick Principe Wrote:BEN HOLMES SAYS [I’ll figure out how to reply with a direct quote at some point]:

It's easy:

Nick Principe Wrote:Although I’m willing to accept that the Commerce Street vantage point was far enough away from where any earwitnesses were standing for anyone to pinpoint activity from there. To hit a target as small as a throat from that far away is also inhumanly remarkable!

It was, at that point, probably less than 100 yards away. The Marine Corps' shortest rifle distance is 200 yards. While it was a great shot, technically speaking... the limo had very little lateral or vertical movement - so even though the limo was traveling, to a shooter at the south knoll, it would have been almost a stationary target.

I would have no difficulty at all hitting a stationary person's head at that distance, although the moving limo does make it quite a bit more challenging. Although I'd bet I could make the shot with a stationary target, I'd be less sure with the limo moving, even though it was not much movement from the shooters point of view.

Keep in mind that the shooter was undoubtedly aiming at JFK's head... so the shot was actually not that good compared to his aiming point.

Nick Principe Wrote:Here is a photo I took from behind the fence when I went to DP back in 2004 (those dark triangles at the bottom of the photo are the tips of the fence slats, which I snapped in the foreground on purpose for scale). As you can see, it’s a perfect angle for the head shot, but a frontal shot from there is simply not possible, especially if Zapruder and the Stemmons sign were both standing in the way.

Oh, I agree. I've never thought the throat wound was shot from there.

Although, interestingly enough, it would have been possible. I'm quite sure that the Parkland doctors were correct when they said that the bullet ranged downward... so if you can see the neck, you can hit the neck. With a bullet that doesn't exit, you don't have a trajectory to look at - you can't tell where it came from.

But, as I'm quite convinced that the throat wound was caused by a bullet that went through the windshield - I do have evidence for the trajectory - and it doesn't include any Grassy Knoll area...

[Patrick C]

If one accepts there was a hole and not a crack in the windscreen and that the neck wound was an entry I assume you have estimated the possible locations of the shooter....given that we know where the crack/hole is? even allowing for a deflection.....

It seems the likely location is the overpass, however that is problematical given that rail yard workers were up there.....

Why do you need the neck to be an entry.....? Because you want 2 shooters...? You can still have 2 shooters at the rear for a conspiracy.

As I have stated on Amazon, the whole notion of the neck wound being an entry is IMO plain silly.

[Patrick C]

"It's been established JFK's throat wound was an entrance, and this is beyond dispute."

No it has not. It is a theory based on conjecture.

This is a great example of making stuff up.....what is the point of addressing this subject in all seriousness if you make that kind of blatantly erroneous statement?

Tony Summers would not agree with you, nor would Henry Hurt and nor would Mary Ferrell to name but three heavy weight researchers.

On what basis do you make that claim....?

Your statement is also logically fallacious because it IS in dispute. I am disputing it....so therefore it is in dispute. And around 40% of the adult population of the USA over 40 years of age would also dispute it.

[Patrick C]

I did not see the comment below -

"Not the Triple Overpass...

Not under the Triple Overpass...

But to the right of it (as you're looking toward the TSBD from ahead of the limo)

Now, were there eyewitnesses to such a shooter? Nope... none that I'm aware of. But I think that the ballistics evidence quite firmly places a shooter there."

Was he hiding in a culvert? Who knows... I'm just putting the shooter in the general area that the ballistics shows he must have been. The fact that no-one saw the shooter is, in my opinion, quite meaningless.

This is my opinion - and until or unless more evidence comes up - I think it's the best explanation for the frontal shot.[/quote]

IF there was a frontal shot I would agree it is a location worth considering, however it is not one from which an assassin could make an easy exit and neither does it afford a good view.

Assuming the seating arrangements were known to this alleged "assassin" it would seem an odd choice of location.

Another major issue is that you now introduce three locations left front, right front and rear high up.....this is not a sound pattern reflected at all in the witness testimony.

[Ben Holmes]

Patrick C Wrote:If one accepts there was a hole and not a crack in the windscreen and that the neck wound was an entry I assume you have estimated the possible locations of the shooter....given that we know where the crack/hole is? even allowing for a deflection.....

It seems the likely location is the overpass, however that is problematical given that rail yard workers were up there.....

I'm sure that you want the location to be the overpass - but as the windshield hole is clearly to the right (looking from the front) then the shooter too, is not straight at the overpass - but to the right of it. This is merely what the evidence shows. Do you deny that the hole was to the right?

Here, for example, is the trajectory of the throat wound:

Now, I don't claim any great accuracy - I'm obviously limited by the graphics I have available - but there isn't the SLIGHTEST doubt that the trajectory came from the right side of the limo (as seen from the front)

Now all we need to do is project it on to an overhead of Dealey Plaza... again, I don't claim any great accuracy, but the trajectory clearly DOES NOT emanate from where you need it to be - the overpass.

The limo is oversized to show the angles involved. Now, this location is quite perfect for the following reasons:

• It's a hidden location in Dealey Plaza
  
• It has an easy 'getaway' from the area (jump in the car and drive away)
  
• It even has ballistic evidence (The 'Lester' bullet, see HSCA 7, pg 357-358)

Patrick C Wrote:Why do you need the neck to be an entry.....? Because you want 2 shooters...? You can still have 2 shooters at the rear for a conspiracy.

As I have stated on Amazon, the whole notion of the neck wound being an entry is IMO plain silly.

It's a logical fallacy that we "need the neck to be an entry". The evidence is what demonstrates that it is. The EARLIEST and uncontested evidence... Do you deny that the FBI & Secret Service did their best to force the Parkland doctors to "change" their minds on this issue?