[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?