Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

New scientific evidence about JFK's assassination

By imperium in MLP
Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 01:14:46 PM EST
Tags: News (all tags)

I do not want to be a Lone Gunman. I do not believe in a Global Conspiracy. However, a new examination of the audio tapes from Dallas show more shots fired, and "one of the sounds matches the echo pattern of a test shot fired from the grassy knoll."

So that's that, then.

But who did it? And why? (see poll!)


Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure


Who killed JFK, and why?
o Cuban gangsters, for the Bay of Pigs fiasco 10%
o Arthur Miller, because JFK fucked his wife 19%
o Aliens, for reasons beyond our understanding 25%
o Lee Harvey Oswald, you fool, 'cos he was a Red 17%
o The Warren Commission, to make some work 28%

Votes: 128
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o examinatio n of the audio tapes
o Also by imperium

Display: Sort:
New scientific evidence about JFK's assassination | 46 comments (30 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden)
But who did it? And why? (3.50 / 4) (#1)
by eLuddite on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 07:20:10 AM EST

I dont know but I am in their debt for the most successful pick up line ever: Didnt I see you on the grassy knoll?

God hates human rights.

Jack Ruby (4.00 / 3) (#2)
by DesiredUsername on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 08:27:34 AM EST

The only data I've ever really gotten on the JFK thing is that show that was made some time in the 80's (I'm sure we've all seen it). It's a good show, but it leaves out what seems to me to be the biggest loose thread: Jack Ruby.

Oswald was clearly involved, whether or not he fired the fatal shot. But Ruby is just as obviously involved. Why did he kill Oswald? I think the answer to this would be a big clue to answering the whole mystery.

Play 囲碁
Ruby's role is certainly important (4.50 / 2) (#11)
by imperium on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 10:49:19 AM EST

And killing the alleged killer seems an obvious (if crude) way to close off some avenues of investigation into the assassination.

So blatant, you almost have to admire it..

[ Parent ]

JFK Sounds (3.33 / 3) (#4)
by MrAcheson on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 08:44:51 AM EST

There are a few problems with this theory. This analysis only works for one audio recording of the event. IIRC the audio recordings of the shooting made by various police patrolmen, etc conflict pretty badly. Some record 2 shots, some 3, others more. Furthermore none of the real witnesses are sure what they heard and are as conflicted as the recordings. Plus, judging from the recording gear that was used, I wouldn't really expect the quality to be good enough to make a definitive determination. Most of the recordings were made accidentally over police radios and such. The audio quality isn't good enough. Basically what I'm saying is that this is not conclusive proof.

Right now I'm ok with the Ozwald theory. Why? Because its the simplest and it fits the usual trend for presidential assassins. Ozwald was a lone nut and presidents are usually shot by lone nuts. I could be wrong and I really haven't studied the evidence personally so thats a distinct possibility.

These opinions do not represent those of the US Army, DoD, or US Government.

Simple(ton) (2.25 / 12) (#7)
by DeHans on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 09:09:57 AM EST

IIRC the audio recordings of the shooting made by various police patrolmen, etc conflict pretty badly
That's the beauty of this report. This is a report of a scientist who has reexamined the "recordings of radio channels used by police in the Texas city of Dallas". So you do not have to try to recall anything, You only have to *read*.

Right now I'm ok with the Ozwald theory. Why? Because its the simplest and it fits the usual trend for presidential assassins
Yes, of course. In stead of arguing about this new evidence, let's hold on to our preformed opinions because they are "simple". Truly the sign of a great mind at work.

[ Parent ]
I'm rubber your glue :) (3.33 / 3) (#22)
by MrAcheson on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 03:23:02 PM EST

They used only one of the many recordings, read the article. Why? Because this audio fingerprint of the gunshot doesn't show up on the others. So they picked the one that worked to fit their hypothesis, big f***ing deal. Since the evidence in this case is so badly muddled I am using Occam's razor, simple solutions are most often the truth.

These opinions do not represent those of the US Army, DoD, or US Government.

[ Parent ]
ummm, "Simple(ton) "? (none / 0) (#45)
by el_guapo on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 06:49:25 PM EST

I would think the person who resorted to a personal insult when someone disagreed with them would be the simpleton. There ARE ways to politely disagree, ya know?
mas cerveza, por favor mirrors, manifestos, etc.
[ Parent ]
Fishy (3.00 / 1) (#6)
by retinaburn on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 09:02:51 AM EST

This looks like a good way for Imperium to cast aside the blame :)

I think that we are a young species that often fucks with things we don't know how to unfuck. -- Tycho

I deny everything (none / 0) (#12)
by imperium on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 10:53:03 AM EST

This message has been sent by autoresponder from my secret bunker under Guantanamo Naval Base. Any attempt to trace IP addresses, DNA profiles, or other would-be protocol violations will be pursued with extreme prejudice. Your cooperation is appreciated.

[ Parent ]

Conspiracy! (4.00 / 1) (#9)
by dze27 on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 10:20:35 AM EST

It's nice to see some scientific proof for what most conspiracists (like me) have suspected for a long time.

Some entertaining reading on the topic for those interested include:

  • "Best Evidence" (a slightly crazy but extremely compelling book suggesting Kennedy's body was surgically altered before the military autopsy)
  • "Reasonable Doubt" (out of print, but a great overview of the assassination)
  • "High Treason" (a fine work that explores the Mafia connection and many other angles)

My theory is a "double conspiracy". Basically, a small group of plotters (either Cubans or Mafia) to kill JFK, and then an unrelated conspiracy of federal agents to cover-up a plot that they couldn't solve and to convince the public it was a seemingly less scary lone gunman.

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

So what about Princess Diana? (none / 0) (#13)
by imperium on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 11:06:04 AM EST

I don't know if you've come across this one. It's a conspiracy theory put about by Mohammed Al Fayed, whose son Dodi died in the same car crash in Paris. In short, her death was no accident. He believes it was an assassination carried out by the British establishment (including the Royal Family, infuriated with Diana for speaking against them and, Al Fayed believes, for being about to have a baby with a Muslim). How exactly they're supposed to have made it happen, I don't know.

footnote:He's also known for being the chairman of London football club Fulham, owner of Harrods, London's poshest store, and one of the people responsible for the downfall of the last Conservative government here. He's tried everything to get a British passport, and has finally decided simply to bring down an Egyptian curse on his enemies. Life is so much more interesting with him around!

[ Parent ]

One more Book (none / 0) (#38)
by bmasel on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 12:54:06 PM EST

Coup d'etat In America by AJ Webberman and Mike Canfield focuses on the 3 "bums" led away from a boxcar behind the Grassy Knoll, 2 of whom bear at least an uncanny resemblance to Watergate Burglars E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturges.
I am not currently Licensed to Practice in this State.
[ Parent ]
Double Conspiracy, Indeed! (4.00 / 1) (#41)
by minusp on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 03:08:29 PM EST

The best reasoned workup I've seen to date is espoused in "Mortal Error" by Bonar Menninger. (St. Martins's Press) The basic scenario is this;

1. Oswald's first shot is wide due to faulty scope, hits curb, tiny fragment catches JFK in head, who says "I'm hit." Connally begins to turn to right.
2. Oswald's second shot, using iron sights, passes through JFK neck, crunching first thoracic vertebra, through Connally.
3. Devastating head wound to JFK comes from left rear, from AR-15 carried by Secret Service.

The wound type, and extreme fragmentation found in the head wound are completely consistent with close range AR-15 damage. The author only makes the case that it was accidental, as the Secret Service had only /just/ been issued AR-15's, and nearly /no/ time handling them.

Of course, they could never admit to it....
Remember, regime change begins at home.
[ Parent ]
This is always fun (4.60 / 5) (#17)
by weirdling on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 12:46:45 PM EST

Note that the scientist said echo patterns match a shot fired from the grassy knoll. Two questions: what kind of weapon did they test with, and how? Downtown Dallas is significantly different these days, and I doubt that echo patterns would necessarily be considered conclusive.
Now for the counter-evidence. Ballistic scientists have demonstrated rather conclusively that .220 Swift is, indeed, capable of doing everything the 'magic bullet' did. .220 Swift was, as its name implies, one of the first 'high velocity' rounds, whose ballistics were not well understood at the time of the shooting. Two odd facts about .220 Swift, ballistically speaking: Energy is high. What this means is that it bounces around all over the place. Second, it tends to cause a reverse wound pattern when going through a skull or other hard surface. In other words, the round punctures the skull, cracking it, and subsequently causes an actual explosion in the brain matter, which exits the only way it knows how, back through the skull-puncture just formed. This backblast happens before the slug exits, creating a much larger entry hole than exit hole, and looking exactly like the bullet went the wrong way. This is easily observable when shooting a 2 liter bottle filled with water with any hyper-velocity modern round.
Now, as for the echo pattern. The odds are that echos did happen. This is a highly built-up area. Echos would come back from the grassy knoll, from everywhere. This is a reason I have trouble believing that analysis of forty-year-old tape of a highly chaotic event is considered conclusive. Anyway, it will be fun to see what the peer-review does to this...

I'm not doing this again; last time no one believed it.
Magic bullet (4.00 / 3) (#27)
by Miniluv on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 06:33:17 PM EST

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the magic bullet theory involve a u-turn in empty air?
For the record, I'd love to see the ballistic analysis of a .220 Swift round in relation to the magic bullet theory, if only because ballistics is a damn cool science and art.

"Its like someone opened my mouth and stuck a fistful of herbs in it." - Tamio Kageyama, Iron Chef 'Battle Eggplant'
[ Parent ]
Ballistics is great (none / 0) (#28)
by weirdling on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 06:42:23 PM EST

The u-turn idea involved the fact that many people are convinced the wound-channel Kennedy suffered is indicative he was shot in the front, not the back (or the other way around, can't remember too well), but the .220 Swift, the .223, the .243, the .270, the .300 Weatherby, etc, all can create in the right conditions, a backblast effect that creates a larger entry hole than exit hole. So can .357 magnum. The bullet did ricochet a lot, which is a low-probability event, but not an impossibility, as it ricocheted off of a metal door handle for the first ricochet, and then a bunch of other stuff I can't remember. Anyway, it would be nice to actually examine the car for ricochet marks, which would be considerably more conclusive.
The ballistics analysis I saw was on PBS a while ago and was done on a Cray, essentially doing a ray-trace style bounce check with the orientation of the car and the location of the shooter and target both exactly mapped. It was rather thorough, and their conclusion was that the .220 Swift round was easily capable of the entire assasination.

I'm not doing this again; last time no one believed it.
[ Parent ]
Cool (3.00 / 1) (#30)
by Miniluv on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 08:38:27 PM EST

Alright...my memory was rather hazy, though I do remember that the Zapruder film provides correlational evidence of a front of the head being thrown back and to the left.

Thanks though for the explanation of the ballistic theory. I'll have to try and track down that special. Anytime scientists and such can recreate past events with such interesting results I'm fascinated. Criminologists especially.

"Its like someone opened my mouth and stuck a fistful of herbs in it." - Tamio Kageyama, Iron Chef 'Battle Eggplant'
[ Parent ]

Come to think of it (none / 0) (#35)
by weirdling on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 12:51:06 AM EST

Ok, I'm no ballistics professor, but the following idea makes sense: Actually, the primary mover in a persons movement with a non-hollowpoint would not be the round itself, whose actual power is relatively small (1100 ft.lbs. at 100 yards, only about 30% of which would be absorbed by the head, primarily as 'pink mist' effect, the explosive destruction I was talking about(sorry for the queasy)) compared to the strength of the muscles in the back of the neck, which are based on the weight of the body, rather than around 55 grains of lead. Now, if I remember right, constrictus is common in death, particularly where the brain stem is damaged. If this happened, the erectors on the back are much stronger than the muscles on the front, so if that happened, the head would snap back rather violently.
Anyway, just a thought, but if anyone out there knows more about the subject than I do...
Anyway, actual shootings even under ultra-fast cameras, are terribly hard to analyse due to the fact that they are chaotic. This far removed from the event, it's going to be extremely hard to nail anything down. I really would have liked a good look at that car...

I'm not doing this again; last time no one believed it.
[ Parent ]
Never been shot... (none / 0) (#44)
by cryosis on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 04:29:05 PM EST

But I figure that using a hyper-velocity round, you might not actually feel like you got shot. It could feel like you got hit with a small rock or something of like weight. Some peoples first instinct would be to look at the direction from where they felt to object came from. So JFK could have been hit with a .220 Swift of like round, been turning to see what the hell just happened and then been hit again. Just a thought on current thread. I'm digging this one.

[ Parent ]
magic bullets... (4.00 / 1) (#40)
by trhurler on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 02:47:37 PM EST

The real question, though, is this: is it more likely that this bullet did these weird things, or that there was a second shooter? Given the relative ease of getting a weapon to the scene(that's changed since then, but back then, security, to be frank, sucked the big one,) there's no real reason to believe a second shooter is improbable except that it is not the "usual" pattern in such shootings. On the other hand, the reason not to believe in the magic bullet is that, while possible, it is highly improbable.

Now, as for the usual pattern in assassinations, why should it be followed? This is not a valid example of induction; previous cases create precisely zero additional likelihood that the next case will follow the pattern, because they have no causal connection.

I'm not coming to any conclusions, because there are none to be drawn for any reasonable person; there are so many irregularities in the way this was handled at the time and so many things that just weren't properly recorded at all that it is hopeless. However, whatever actually happened that day, I am suspicious of the motives of people who advocate one theory(regardless of which one) as a means of discrediting others without actually examining them sufficiently, which is what practically ALL interested people do in the JFK case.

'God dammit, your posts make me hard.' --LilDebbie

[ Parent ]
Isn't this Dead Yet? (3.00 / 3) (#29)
by SPrintF on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 08:08:52 PM EST

The dictabelt evidence has already been thoroughly discredited, due largely to evidence that indicates that:

(a) the motorcycle with the open transmitter switch was not part of the motorcade;

(b) the internal evidence of the transmissions shows that the audio "traces" appear at least a minute after the actual shooting.

Sorry. Wrong answer. Try again.

(Also, try reading Gerald Posner's "Case Closed" before placing your faith in any of the extant conspiracy theories.)

Conspiracy (4.50 / 2) (#31)
by gbd on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 11:19:10 PM EST

I think it's pretty clear that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK.

Now, I'm not talking about an Oliver Stone-style conspiracy where the entire federal government from LBJ on down was involved. I'm just talking about a good, old-fashioned vanilla conspiracy, defined loosely as "the act of conspiring together", which means implies more than one. Specifically, I think it's pretty obvious that there was a second shooter, most likely on the Grassy Knoll.

My primary reason for this is that I find the "magic bullet" theory to be a ludicrous, childish fantasy, one that induces bellowing peals of laughter that threaten to wake my neighbors. Bullets do not perform U-turns and hang suspended in mid-air. Yes, I am aware that analyses have been done to demonstrate that it is at least theoretically possible for the "magic bullet" to do what the Warren Commission said it did. But watching Kennedy's head snap backwards in that graphic Zapruder video leaves me wondering how any sane person can claim that the final head shot came from anywhere but in front of the motorcade.

Plenty of witnesses claim to have heard shots from the Grass Knoll. A woman named Mary Moorman took a famous photograph at the moment of the head shot that M.I.T. experts concluded that "without question" depicted a man firing a gun. We are meant to believe that Oswald's best shot is his final (third) shot, after he had already fired two .. seems that the first shot should have been the most accurate. But no .. it was the third and final shot, the one with the least preparation time, the one through foliage, that managed to be perfect.


Now, I'm not a conspiracy nut. I don't spend a lot of time researching this stuff. I just don't buy the official Warren Commission story. For what it's worth, neither did the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations, who in 1979 stated:

The Committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that president John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy.
(Click here for the entire report.)

Gunter glieben glauchen globen.
Best Evidence (none / 0) (#32)
by SPrintF on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 11:43:05 PM EST

But watching Kennedy's head snap backwards in that graphic Zapruder video leaves me wondering how any sane person can claim that the final head shot came from anywhere but in front of the motorcade.

Actually, this is the best evidence that the shot was from the rear. Head and bullets are not billard balls. When they meet, they do not produce an inelastic collision.

Physics predicts that, in the case of head shot like this, the victim's head will snap back towards the shooter. Experimental trials have been done repeatedly that demonstrate this is the case.

[ Parent ]
I wonder how much extra credit... (none / 0) (#33)
by skim123 on Tue Mar 27, 2001 at 11:53:31 PM EST

Physics predicts that, in the case of head shot like this, the victim's head will snap back towards the shooter. Experimental trials have been done repeatedly that demonstrate this is the case

I wonder how much extra credit physics professors would have to offer for students to volunteer for that experiment!

Money is in some respects like fire; it is a very excellent servant but a terrible master.
PT Barnum

[ Parent ]
Backwards is death blow .sig (none / 0) (#34)
by Sheepdot on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 12:05:39 AM EST

I've actually heard that no matter what direction a person is shot from if it is a distance of more than 20 feet the body with instantly tense as nerve endings fire. It has to be a fatal shot that hits nerve central, but a death blow to the head would certainly do it.

Regardless of the other conspirators, it is over and done with and even if it reached into the highest levels of government I don't care. I never trust the government anyway. Hell, I don't trust anyone that says they can take care of me.

[ Parent ]
Comment on marksmanship (none / 0) (#36)
by briandunbar on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 01:08:49 AM EST

Speaking only to your comment on third shot producing the magic bullet.

I don't believe much of what I see, and little of what I hear, but I *was* in the Marine Corps for eight years, and have have a fair bit of time on the firing range.

His third shot could have been his best - first shot always surprises you, and it's usually accurate (the break of the trigger is, they say, supposed to come as a surprise, kills the flinch reflex) second shot anticipated (anticipated, that is, the *bang* and a slight flinch throws off the round) and the third shot you're back on target.

Having said that, I've never fired a bolt action rifle - it could make a difference.

Feed the poor, eat the rich!
[ Parent ]

Conspiracy and Assassination Research Project (4.00 / 2) (#39)
by wiredog on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 01:10:14 PM EST

The Conspiracy and Assassination Research Project (CARP) has its latest report up today.

The idea of a global village is wrong, it's more like a gazillion pub bars.

stupid poll (1.50 / 4) (#42)
by crazycanuck on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 03:10:55 PM EST

your poll options are dumb. How about the REAL suspects? KGB, FBI, CIA, US Army black Ops etc.

Oswald was just a scapegoat.

Not a .220 Swift (4.00 / 1) (#43)
by Ratnik on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 03:43:45 PM EST

The weapon in question was a 6.5mm Mannlicher not a .220 Swift caliber weapon.

Red Dwarf Theory (3.00 / 1) (#46)
by Teehmar on Wed Mar 28, 2001 at 10:30:34 PM EST

Personally, I like the Red Dwarf Theory. This claims that JFK shot himself from the grassy knoll.

New scientific evidence about JFK's assassination | 46 comments (30 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!