Discussion:
How could Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
(too old to reply)
bigdog
2019-03-21 12:37:54 UTC
Permalink
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.

I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
BT George
2019-03-22 16:31:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
I've never read it either, but agree that this argument alone crushes the
theory as I understand it. Also destroying it is that not only did a
large number of his fellow SS agents testify before the WC and no one
mentioned a shot by him, but Kennedy personal aid and friend Dave Powers
was within a foot of Hickey and heard no such gunshot.

And while I will admit the Bronson pick is murky, I sure do see a man and
(less clearly) what appears to a rifle being held more or less skyward.
But for sure, if that man is Hickey, nothing that can be gleaned from the
picture looks like he had just fired an accidental head shot while losing
his balance. And the worst part of this theory is that not only does it
blame yet another innocent person and impugn the honesty of the SS men,
but it is predicated on questionable medical and ballistics
interpretations.

Why anyone would believe the evidence against Oswald, but embrace this
silly CT is beyond me.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 14:10:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
I've never read it either, but agree that this argument alone crushes the
theory as I understand it. Also destroying it is that not only did a
large number of his fellow SS agents testify before the WC and no one
mentioned a shot by him, but Kennedy personal aid and friend Dave Powers
was within a foot of Hickey and heard no such gunshot.
Unfortunately I am a serious researcher so I've had to read all these
ridiculous books. It fails right away because the angles are wrong and the
bullet can not get over the windshield and then down to hit JFK in the
head. Then the type of bullet would leave fragments of hardened lead and
only unhardened lead was found. Other than that it's fun.
Post by BT George
And while I will admit the Bronson pick is murky, I sure do see a man and
(less clearly) what appears to a rifle being held more or less skyward.
But for sure, if that man is Hickey, nothing that can be gleaned from the
picture looks like he had just fired an accidental head shot while losing
his balance. And the worst part of this theory is that not only does it
blame yet another innocent person and impugn the honesty of the SS men,
but it is predicated on questionable medical and ballistics
interpretations.
Why anyone would believe the evidence against Oswald, but embrace this
silly CT is beyond me.
claviger
2019-03-22 16:45:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Post by bigdog
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Donahue assumed as I would that SSA Hickey had both hands on the rifle as
he attempted to twist to the right to maintain eye contact with the
acquired target. It is possible SSA Hickey placed his left hand on the
seat-back in front of him to steady himself as he tried to turn right with
the rifle in his right hand.
Post by bigdog
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
Post by bigdog
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head.
Is it your hobby to critique books you've never read, then take
bets on what's in them?
Post by bigdog
I'll bet none of the proponents of this theory could present such
a diagram either. It just isn't feasible.
There was a diagram in the book you didn't read. The original
book "Mortal Error" had several illustrations.
donald willis
2019-03-23 13:29:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO
Let's say, "spotted a weapon"--the shooter, most probably Oswald, would
not have had to be seen while shooting. Witnesses such as Fischer saw the
antics up there of someone trying to draw attention to the area, BEFORE
the shooting. And some witnesses--such as the 12:37 "second window"
witness (on the police radio)--saw only Bonnie Ray Williams AFTER the
shooting and jumped to a conclusion....

But I also have to add that most of the SS agents in the cars seemed to be
looking towards the BOTTOM of the depository (in the Altgens). Why would
Hickey alone be looking UP?

dcw
bigdog
2019-03-23 13:33:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
The barrel of the rifle would be above the windshield under two
circumstances. One is if it is pointing upward which would be the proper
way to hold the rifle until a target was identified. This picture was
cropped from one taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland. I should
have included it in the OP.

Loading Image...

I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible unless
he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
He is standing in the photo I provided and the rifle is not at shoulder
level which is where it would have to be in order to shoot downward at
JFK. What reason would you have to believe that Hickey would have
shouldered the rifle without a definite target?
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward at
JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
If that were the case, he would turn in that direction and the rifle would
be pointing away from JFK. If the Queen Mary slowed or stopped suddenly
with Hickey facing the TSBD, that would cause him to fall backward from
his position which would point cause the muzzle to point farther upward,
not down toward JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
See earlier in this post.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Even if that had happened, it wouldn't result in Hickey raising the rifle
to shoulder level and pointing it downward toward JFK. That is the only
position the rifle could be in for Hickey to shoot JFK without firing
through the windshield. There is no way he would achieve that position
accidentally. It is preposterous.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Donahue assumed as I would that SSA Hickey had both hands on the rifle as
he attempted to twist to the right to maintain eye contact with the
acquired target. It is possible SSA Hickey placed his left hand on the
seat-back in front of him to steady himself as he tried to turn right with
the rifle in his right hand.
Still doesn't raise the rifle to his shoulder which is where it would have
to be to fire downward at JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
If the Queen Mary stopped or slowed, Hickey's momentum would have thrown
him forward and that would have caused the barrel of the rifle to lower.
It would then be pointing at the windshield, not over it which is what
Donahue's theory requires.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head.
Is it your hobby to critique books you've never read, then take
bets on what's in them?
I don't read books unless I have reason to believe they are proposing
something that is credible. If what is being proposed is preposterous on
the surface, I see no reason to waste my time delving any further into
it.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I'll bet none of the proponents of this theory could present such
a diagram either. It just isn't feasible.
There was a diagram in the book you didn't read. The original
book "Mortal Error" had several illustrations.
Does it have a profile diagram showing Hickey's position at the time of
the alleged discharge and how he could have accidentally fired downward
into the back of JFK's head. If so, why don't you post it for us. There is
no way Hickey could achieve such a position by accident. It would have to
be an intentional act which is a whole different ballgame. Don Willis
suggested that as a possibility. While I find that ludicrous, it actually
makes more sense than what Donahue proposes because it is at least
physically possible.
bigdog
2019-03-24 03:49:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Does it have a profile diagram showing Hickey's position at the time of
the alleged discharge and how he could have accidentally fired downward
into the back of JFK's head. If so, why don't you post it for us. There is
no way Hickey could achieve such a position by accident. It would have to
be an intentional act which is a whole different ballgame. Don Willis
suggested that as a possibility. While I find that ludicrous, it actually
makes more sense than what Donahue proposes because it is at least
physically possible.
Since I submitted this post, Grizzlie Antagonist has posted just such a
diagram as shown below.

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg

This diagram serves to show how ludicrous the theory is. Compare the
position of the agent on the running board with the Hickey position. Both
of these men would have had their feet at floor level yet to get Hickey
high enough to shoot downward at JFK, he has to raise him up well above
the agent on the running board. It almost looks like he is proposing
Hickey was standing with his feet on the rear seat rather than the floor.
Why in the hell would he do that? Put Hickey's feet on the floor in that
diagram and the shot is going to go through the windshield to get at JFK.
Sorry, but the geometry is all wrong for this theory to be plausible.
claviger
2019-03-24 03:50:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
The barrel of the rifle would be above the windshield under two
circumstances. One is if it is pointing upward which would be the proper
way to hold the rifle until a target was identified. This picture was
cropped from one taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland. I should
have included it in the OP.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Hickey-ar-15_jfk.jpg
Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4tI4MCJuwDw/VKZdwOFKuqI/AAAAAAABCWQ/cEiR8Mc-osQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade.jpg

Loading Image...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMi1_6QSkI/AAAAAAAAGs0/8jwVenBofgQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-4.jpg

Loading Image...
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible unless
he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window. He attempted to position himself to
fire back by standing up and pointing his rifle at the sniper.

As he tried to twist around to make that shot he lost balance when
the two cars suddenly slowed down.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
No one we know about took a photo but there may be a frame
in the Bronson Film.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
He is standing in the photo I provided and the rifle is not at shoulder
level which is where it would have to be in order to shoot downward
at JFK. What reason would you have to believe that Hickey would have
shouldered the rifle without a definite target?
All possible targets were on the right side of the car he was riding in.
To fire at any of them he would need to stand up and point his rifle in
that direction. If the TSBD will allow closer inspection of the Bronson
film we might be able to answer your questions.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward
at JFK.
To make such a definitive statement like that we would need precise
measurements.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
If that were the case, he would turn in that direction and the rifle would
be pointing away from JFK. If the Queen Mary slowed or stopped suddenly
with Hickey facing the TSBD, that would cause him to fall backward from
his position which would point cause the muzzle to point farther upward,
not down toward JFK.
Again, SSA Hickey was a tall bodyguard who was right handed.
It was an awkward move to twist around and fire at a target six
stories tall to his right.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
See earlier in this post.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Even if that had happened, it wouldn't result in Hickey raising the rifle
to shoulder level and pointing it downward toward JFK. That is the only
position the rifle could be in for Hickey to shoot JFK without firing
through the windshield. There is no way he would achieve that position
accidentally. It is preposterous.
The Bronson Film holds the final answer.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Donahue assumed as I would that SSA Hickey had both hands on the rifle as
he attempted to twist to the right to maintain eye contact with the
acquired target. It is possible SSA Hickey placed his left hand on the
seat-back in front of him to steady himself as he tried to turn right with
the rifle in his right hand.
Still doesn't raise the rifle to his shoulder which is where it would have
to be to fire downward at JFK.
If he was holding it chest high that could be enough.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
If the Queen Mary stopped or slowed, Hickey's momentum would have
thrown him forward and that would have caused the barrel of the rifle to
lower. It would then be pointing at the windshield, not over it which is
what Donahue's theory requires.
If SSA Hickey was holding the rifle chest high that might be enough
to clear the windshield. A family member claimed a relative saw the
accident happen and the bodyguard fell forward.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head.
Is it your hobby to critique books you've never read, then take
bets on what's in them?
I don't read books unless I have reason to believe they are proposing
something that is credible. If what is being proposed is preposterous
on the surface, I see no reason to waste my time delving any further
into it.
A senior Detective in Australia read the book and found the ballistic
evidence convincing. Maybe you should do the same.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I'll bet none of the proponents of this theory could present such
a diagram either. It just isn't feasible.
There was a diagram in the book you didn't read. The original
book "Mortal Error" had several illustrations.
Does it have a profile diagram showing Hickey's position at the time of
the alleged discharge and how he could have accidentally fired downward
into the back of JFK's head. If so, why don't you post it for us. There is
no way Hickey could achieve such a position by accident. It would have
to be an intentional act which is a whole different ballgame. Don Willis
suggested that as a possibility. While I find that ludicrous, it actually
makes more sense than what Donahue proposes because it is at least
physically possible.
Howard Donahue was convinced it was a freak accident and impossible
to do intentionally. I agree with that opinion.
bigdog
2019-03-25 00:41:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
The barrel of the rifle would be above the windshield under two
circumstances. One is if it is pointing upward which would be the proper
way to hold the rifle until a target was identified. This picture was
cropped from one taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland. I should
have included it in the OP.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Hickey-ar-15_jfk.jpg
https://vincepalamara.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/1743633_10202682499879178_1562261881_n.jpg
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s680/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMe1NiZf3I/AAAAAAAAGsc/IqaIHX9AVRQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-Hawaii.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4tI4MCJuwDw/VKZdwOFKuqI/AAAAAAABCWQ/cEiR8Mc-osQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMi1_6QSkI/AAAAAAAAGs0/8jwVenBofgQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-4.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9oqweQOoDzQ/VTWZsn57qaI/AAAAAAABFxI/OSUD2H6O9gw/s530/JFK-The-Final-Hours-22.png
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4tI4MCJuwDw/VKZdwOFKuqI/AAAAAAABCWQ/cEiR8Mc-osQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vFs5R-l9qRc/T3_Z6oRyc5I/AAAAAAAAHSM/_YzhME8ZTq8/s530/Washington-Motorcade-10-4-61.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMi1_6QSkI/AAAAAAAAGs0/8jwVenBofgQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-4.jpg
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4e3gLIt_8NU/WAPemw9A-zI/AAAAAAABKuo/mnOTXseZ1sE8MQ6jvGsVcXUP5QmAyB5DQCLcB/s1600/JFK-At-Love-Field-11-22-63.png
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible unless
he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window.
Even though he never said he did.
Post by claviger
He attempted to position himself to
fire back by standing up and pointing his rifle at the sniper.
Which would be away from JFK.
Post by claviger
As he tried to twist around to make that shot he lost balance when
the two cars suddenly slowed down.
If he was turned toward the TSBD when the car slowed, that would cause him
to tumble backward which would be toward the front of the car since he was
facing to the rear. Tumbling backward would throw the barrel skyward, not
toward JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
No one we know about took a photo but there may be a frame
in the Bronson Film.
Let us know when you find it.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
He is standing in the photo I provided and the rifle is not at shoulder
level which is where it would have to be in order to shoot downward
at JFK. What reason would you have to believe that Hickey would have
shouldered the rifle without a definite target?
All possible targets were on the right side of the car he was riding in.
To fire at any of them he would need to stand up and point his rifle in
that direction. If the TSBD will allow closer inspection of the Bronson
film we might be able to answer your questions.
No one trained in firearms is going to point a rifle in a direction until
he had identified a target. Also, no one trained in firearms would put his
finger on the trigger until he is prepared to fire just to prevent the
kind of accidental discharge Donahue has hypothesized.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward
at JFK.
To make such a definitive statement like that we would need precise
measurements.
No, all you have to do is look at the various photos to realize the only
way to get the rifle above the windshield and firing at a downward angle
is to raise it to shoulder level while standing straight up.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
If that were the case, he would turn in that direction and the rifle would
be pointing away from JFK. If the Queen Mary slowed or stopped suddenly
with Hickey facing the TSBD, that would cause him to fall backward from
his position which would point cause the muzzle to point farther upward,
not down toward JFK.
Again, SSA Hickey was a tall bodyguard who was right handed.
It was an awkward move to twist around and fire at a target six
stories tall to his right.
How does that bring the weapon into position to shoot JFK?
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
See earlier in this post.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Even if that had happened, it wouldn't result in Hickey raising the rifle
to shoulder level and pointing it downward toward JFK. That is the only
position the rifle could be in for Hickey to shoot JFK without firing
through the windshield. There is no way he would achieve that position
accidentally. It is preposterous.
The Bronson Film holds the final answer.
Good luck. I've seen the Bronson film. Taken from over a block away
without a zoom lens it has nowhere near the resolution you need.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Donahue assumed as I would that SSA Hickey had both hands on the rifle as
he attempted to twist to the right to maintain eye contact with the
acquired target. It is possible SSA Hickey placed his left hand on the
seat-back in front of him to steady himself as he tried to turn right with
the rifle in his right hand.
Still doesn't raise the rifle to his shoulder which is where it would have
to be to fire downward at JFK.
If he was holding it chest high that could be enough.
Not even close.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
If the Queen Mary stopped or slowed, Hickey's momentum would have
thrown him forward and that would have caused the barrel of the rifle to
lower. It would then be pointing at the windshield, not over it which is
what Donahue's theory requires.
If SSA Hickey was holding the rifle chest high that might be enough
to clear the windshield.
It not only has to clear the windshield, it has to be firing at a downward
angle. You can't do both with the rifle held chest high.
Post by claviger
A family member claimed a relative saw the
accident happen and the bodyguard fell forward.
Did he say the bodyguard fired his gun? Your problem is that you need
Hickey to be standing tall and falling down at the same time.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head.
Is it your hobby to critique books you've never read, then take
bets on what's in them?
I don't read books unless I have reason to believe they are proposing
something that is credible. If what is being proposed is preposterous
on the surface, I see no reason to waste my time delving any further
into it.
A senior Detective in Australia read the book and found the ballistic
evidence convincing. Maybe you should do the same.
Why would when simple geometry tells me what Donahue proposes is not
possible. The Menninger diagram posted by Grizzlie Antagonist shows the
geometry doesn't work. To get Hickey high enough to fire downward, the
diagram has him standing on the backseat.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I'll bet none of the proponents of this theory could present such
a diagram either. It just isn't feasible.
There was a diagram in the book you didn't read. The original
book "Mortal Error" had several illustrations.
Does it have a profile diagram showing Hickey's position at the time of
the alleged discharge and how he could have accidentally fired downward
into the back of JFK's head. If so, why don't you post it for us. There is
no way Hickey could achieve such a position by accident. It would have
to be an intentional act which is a whole different ballgame. Don Willis
suggested that as a possibility. While I find that ludicrous, it actually
makes more sense than what Donahue proposes because it is at least
physically possible.
Howard Donahue was convinced it was a freak accident and impossible
to do intentionally. I agree with that opinion.
Howard Donahue is wrong. So are you. It could not have happened that way.
claviger
2019-03-26 18:29:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible
unless he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window.
Even though he never said he did.
Much of what we all deal with in this case is conjecture. There is a photo
of SSA Hickey turned to the right looking at the TSBD and we know there is
sniper on the 6th floor of that building. All those SSA are reacting by
turning toward the TSBD after the 2nd shot. SSA Hickey sitting taller may
have glanced up and noticed the barrel pointing at the street for another
shot. If he can get a burst into that window he can disrupt the sniper and
possibly wound him.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
He attempted to position himself to fire back by standing up and
pointing his rifle at the sniper.
Which would be away from JFK.
Yes, if he is able to wheel the rifle around and fire a steady shot.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
As he tried to twist around to make that shot he lost balance when
the two cars suddenly slowed down.
If he was turned toward the TSBD when the car slowed, that would cause
him to tumble backward which would be toward the front of the car since
he was facing to the rear. Tumbling backward would throw the barrel
skyward, not toward JFK.
Yes, if he could make that awkward move while the Limousine is rolling
smoothly down the street. A sudden stop would cause a problem.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
No one we know about took a photo but there may be a frame
in the Bronson Film.
Let us know when you find it.
Will do.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
All possible targets were on the right side of the car he was riding in.
To fire at any of them he would need to stand up and point his rifle in
that direction. If the TSBD will allow closer inspection of the Bronson
film we might be able to answer your questions.
No one trained in firearms is going to point a rifle in a direction until
he had identified a target.
Agreed.
Post by bigdog
Also, no one trained in firearms would put his finger on the trigger until
he is prepared to fire just to prevent the kind of accidental discharge
Donahue has hypothesized.
The AR-15 was a new concept in military rifles, made with new materials
and new type of gun powder. This prototype was not fully perfected at the
time of this incident. There were a few modifications made before it was
finally approved for US Army and USMC use.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward
at JFK.
To make such a definitive statement like that we would need precise
measurements.
No, all you have to do is look at the various photos to realize the only
way to get the rifle above the windshield and firing at a downward angle
is to raise it to shoulder level while standing straight up.
I have posted several photos with SSA and Dave Powers standing up in
the backseat easily pointing his camera down at the Limousine in front.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Again, SSA Hickey was a tall bodyguard who was right handed.
It was an awkward move to twist around and fire at a target six
stories tall to his right.
How does that bring the weapon into position to shoot JFK?
He was taller than Dave Powers.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
The Bronson Film holds the final answer.
Good luck. I've seen the Bronson film. Taken from over a block away
without a zoom lens it has nowhere near the resolution you need.
Depends on your computer. Mine has a 4x magnification function
to examine frames provided on the Robin Unger Website.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
If he was holding it chest high that could be enough.
Not even close.
Remember the motorcade was going downhill. The highest point in the
follow-up car would be the backseat, like a see-saw.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
If SSA Hickey was holding the rifle chest high that might be enough
to clear the windshield.
It not only has to clear the windshield, it has to be firing at a downward
angle. You can't do both with the rifle held chest high.
Donahue thought the trajectory was flat or rising a degree.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
A family member claimed a relative saw the
accident happen and the bodyguard fell forward.
Did he say the bodyguard fired his gun? Your problem is that you
need Hickey to be standing tall and falling down at the same time.
A witness saw a SSA do exactly that.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
A senior Detective in Australia read the book and found the ballistic
evidence convincing. Maybe you should do the same.
Why would when simple geometry tells me what Donahue proposes is not
possible. The Menninger diagram posted by Grizzlie Antagonist shows the
geometry doesn't work. To get Hickey high enough to fire downward, the
diagram has him standing on the backseat.
I feel sure SSA Hickey was standing on the floorboard making him him
higher than the windshield. That means a 6ft tall SSA standing inside the
car would be approx 24" higher than the windshield. If he was 6'3" tall
he would be 27" above the windshield.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Howard Donahue was convinced it was a freak accident and impossible
to do intentionally. I agree with that opinion.
Howard Donahue is wrong. So are you. It could not have happened that way.
Logic compels me to believe two experts in their field of expertise
studied this case for several years before writing a book about their
conclusions. I feel sure the first measurement they would confirm is
clearance over the windshield for a possible rifle shot from the back
seat.
Mark
2019-03-27 19:48:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible
unless he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window.
Even though he never said he did.
Much of what we all deal with in this case is conjecture. There is a photo
of SSA Hickey turned to the right looking at the TSBD and we know there is
sniper on the 6th floor of that building. All those SSA are reacting by
turning toward the TSBD after the 2nd shot. SSA Hickey sitting taller may
have glanced up and noticed the barrel pointing at the street for another
shot. If he can get a burst into that window he can disrupt the sniper and
possibly wound him.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
He attempted to position himself to fire back by standing up and
pointing his rifle at the sniper.
Which would be away from JFK.
Yes, if he is able to wheel the rifle around and fire a steady shot.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
As he tried to twist around to make that shot he lost balance when
the two cars suddenly slowed down.
If he was turned toward the TSBD when the car slowed, that would cause
him to tumble backward which would be toward the front of the car since
he was facing to the rear. Tumbling backward would throw the barrel
skyward, not toward JFK.
Yes, if he could make that awkward move while the Limousine is rolling
smoothly down the street. A sudden stop would cause a problem.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
No one we know about took a photo but there may be a frame
in the Bronson Film.
Let us know when you find it.
Will do.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
All possible targets were on the right side of the car he was riding in.
To fire at any of them he would need to stand up and point his rifle in
that direction. If the TSBD will allow closer inspection of the Bronson
film we might be able to answer your questions.
No one trained in firearms is going to point a rifle in a direction until
he had identified a target.
Agreed.
Post by bigdog
Also, no one trained in firearms would put his finger on the trigger until
he is prepared to fire just to prevent the kind of accidental discharge
Donahue has hypothesized.
The AR-15 was a new concept in military rifles, made with new materials
and new type of gun powder. This prototype was not fully perfected at the
time of this incident. There were a few modifications made before it was
finally approved for US Army and USMC use.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward
at JFK.
To make such a definitive statement like that we would need precise
measurements.
No, all you have to do is look at the various photos to realize the only
way to get the rifle above the windshield and firing at a downward angle
is to raise it to shoulder level while standing straight up.
I have posted several photos with SSA and Dave Powers standing up in
the backseat easily pointing his camera down at the Limousine in front.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Again, SSA Hickey was a tall bodyguard who was right handed.
It was an awkward move to twist around and fire at a target six
stories tall to his right.
How does that bring the weapon into position to shoot JFK?
He was taller than Dave Powers.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
The Bronson Film holds the final answer.
Good luck. I've seen the Bronson film. Taken from over a block away
without a zoom lens it has nowhere near the resolution you need.
Depends on your computer. Mine has a 4x magnification function
to examine frames provided on the Robin Unger Website.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
If he was holding it chest high that could be enough.
Not even close.
Remember the motorcade was going downhill. The highest point in the
follow-up car would be the backseat, like a see-saw.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
If SSA Hickey was holding the rifle chest high that might be enough
to clear the windshield.
It not only has to clear the windshield, it has to be firing at a downward
angle. You can't do both with the rifle held chest high.
Donahue thought the trajectory was flat or rising a degree.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
A family member claimed a relative saw the
accident happen and the bodyguard fell forward.
Did he say the bodyguard fired his gun? Your problem is that you
need Hickey to be standing tall and falling down at the same time.
A witness saw a SSA do exactly that.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
A senior Detective in Australia read the book and found the ballistic
evidence convincing. Maybe you should do the same.
Why would when simple geometry tells me what Donahue proposes is not
possible. The Menninger diagram posted by Grizzlie Antagonist shows the
geometry doesn't work. To get Hickey high enough to fire downward, the
diagram has him standing on the backseat.
I feel sure SSA Hickey was standing on the floorboard making him him
higher than the windshield. That means a 6ft tall SSA standing inside the
car would be approx 24" higher than the windshield. If he was 6'3" tall
he would be 27" above the windshield.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Howard Donahue was convinced it was a freak accident and impossible
to do intentionally. I agree with that opinion.
Howard Donahue is wrong. So are you. It could not have happened that way.
Logic compels me to believe two experts in their field of expertise
studied this case for several years before writing a book about their
conclusions. I feel sure the first measurement they would confirm is
clearance over the windshield for a possible rifle shot from the back
seat.
Did they discuss such a measurement in the book? Mark
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-30 17:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible
unless he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window.
Even though he never said he did.
Much of what we all deal with in this case is conjecture. There is a photo
of SSA Hickey turned to the right looking at the TSBD and we know there is
No there is NOT. If you are thinking of the Altgens photo you jumped to
a false conclusion. You see Kenny O'Donnel not Hickey.
Post by claviger
sniper on the 6th floor of that building. All those SSA are reacting by
turning toward the TSBD after the 2nd shot. SSA Hickey sitting taller may
have glanced up and noticed the barrel pointing at the street for another
shot. If he can get a burst into that window he can disrupt the sniper and
possibly wound him.
None of them could see a shooter.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
He attempted to position himself to fire back by standing up and
pointing his rifle at the sniper.
Which would be away from JFK.
Yes, if he is able to wheel the rifle around and fire a steady shot.
At what? The three black men in the window?
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
As he tried to twist around to make that shot he lost balance when
the two cars suddenly slowed down.
The rifle would be ponted down towards the floor.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
If he was turned toward the TSBD when the car slowed, that would cause
him to tumble backward which would be toward the front of the car since
he was facing to the rear. Tumbling backward would throw the barrel
skyward, not toward JFK.
If he falls backwards the barrel woul be lower than tht top of the
windshield.
Post by claviger
Yes, if he could make that awkward move while the Limousine is rolling
smoothly down the street. A sudden stop would cause a problem.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
No one we know about took a photo but there may be a frame
in the Bronson Film.
Let us know when you find it.
Will do.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
All possible targets were on the right side of the car he was riding in.
To fire at any of them he would need to stand up and point his rifle in
that direction. If the TSBD will allow closer inspection of the Bronson
film we might be able to answer your questions.
No one trained in firearms is going to point a rifle in a direction until
he had identified a target.
Agreed.
Post by bigdog
Also, no one trained in firearms would put his finger on the trigger until
he is prepared to fire just to prevent the kind of accidental discharge
Donahue has hypothesized.
The AR-15 was a new concept in military rifles, made with new materials
and new type of gun powder. This prototype was not fully perfected at the
time of this incident. There were a few modifications made before it was
finally approved for US Army and USMC use.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward
at JFK.
To make such a definitive statement like that we would need precise
measurements.
No, all you have to do is look at the various photos to realize the only
way to get the rifle above the windshield and firing at a downward angle
is to raise it to shoulder level while standing straight up.
I have posted several photos with SSA and Dave Powers standing up in
the backseat easily pointing his camera down at the Limousine in front.
He id CLOSER to the Windsshield.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Again, SSA Hickey was a tall bodyguard who was right handed.
It was an awkward move to twist around and fire at a target six
stories tall to his right.
How does that bring the weapon into position to shoot JFK?
He was taller than Dave Powers.
Thre feet taller? Diagram it.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
The Bronson Film holds the final answer.
Good luck. I've seen the Bronson film. Taken from over a block away
without a zoom lens it has nowhere near the resolution you need.
Depends on your computer. Mine has a 4x magnification function
to examine frames provided on the Robin Unger Website.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
If he was holding it chest high that could be enough.
Not even close.
Remember the motorcade was going downhill. The highest point in the
follow-up car would be the backseat, like a see-saw.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
If SSA Hickey was holding the rifle chest high that might be enough
to clear the windshield.
NO. Try it sometime.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It not only has to clear the windshield, it has to be firing at a downward
angle. You can't do both with the rifle held chest high.
Donahue thought the trajectory was flat or rising a degree.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
A family member claimed a relative saw the
accident happen and the bodyguard fell forward.
Did he say the bodyguard fired his gun? Your problem is that you
need Hickey to be standing tall and falling down at the same time.
Triple hearsay.
Post by claviger
A witness saw a SSA do exactly that.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
A senior Detective in Australia read the book and found the ballistic
evidence convincing. Maybe you should do the same.
Why would when simple geometry tells me what Donahue proposes is not
possible. The Menninger diagram posted by Grizzlie Antagonist shows the
geometry doesn't work. To get Hickey high enough to fire downward, the
diagram has him standing on the backseat.
I feel sure SSA Hickey was standing on the floorboard making him him
higher than the windshield. That means a 6ft tall SSA standing inside the
car would be approx 24" higher than the windshield. If he was 6'3" tall
he would be 27" above the windshield.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Howard Donahue was convinced it was a freak accident and impossible
to do intentionally. I agree with that opinion.
Howard Donahue is wrong. So are you. It could not have happened that way.
Logic compels me to believe two experts in their field of expertise
They are not experts. You've been duped.
Post by claviger
studied this case for several years before writing a book about their
conclusions. I feel sure the first measurement they would confirm is
clearance over the windshield for a possible rifle shot from the back
seat.
donald willis
2019-03-31 00:57:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible
unless he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window.
Even though he never said he did.
Much of what we all deal with in this case is conjecture. There is a photo
of SSA Hickey turned to the right looking at the TSBD and we know there is
No there is NOT. If you are thinking of the Altgens photo you jumped to
a false conclusion. You see Kenny O'Donnel not Hickey.
Post by claviger
sniper on the 6th floor of that building. All those SSA are reacting by
turning toward the TSBD after the 2nd shot. SSA Hickey sitting taller may
have glanced up and noticed the barrel pointing at the street for another
shot. If he can get a burst into that window he can disrupt the sniper and
possibly wound him.
None of them could see a shooter.
I think it more likely (okay, not a certainty) that the target was in
FRONT of Hickey, as JFK was too, and thus there were two virtually
simultaneous shots, one from in front, one from behind. Now, if, like
claviger and other less daring LNs, you posit a shot from ABOVE and
behind, then you're back to Mrs. Walther's 5th-floor "machine gun", or
whatever she called it. That, at least, would seem to agree with some of
the terminal ballistics and trajectories.

(By the bye, what kind of rifle did Rowland say he saw?)

dcw
Mark
2019-03-27 03:44:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
The barrel of the rifle would be above the windshield under two
circumstances. One is if it is pointing upward which would be the proper
way to hold the rifle until a target was identified. This picture was
cropped from one taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland. I should
have included it in the OP.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Hickey-ar-15_jfk.jpg
https://vincepalamara.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/1743633_10202682499879178_1562261881_n.jpg
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s680/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMe1NiZf3I/AAAAAAAAGsc/IqaIHX9AVRQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-Hawaii.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4tI4MCJuwDw/VKZdwOFKuqI/AAAAAAABCWQ/cEiR8Mc-osQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMi1_6QSkI/AAAAAAAAGs0/8jwVenBofgQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-4.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9oqweQOoDzQ/VTWZsn57qaI/AAAAAAABFxI/OSUD2H6O9gw/s530/JFK-The-Final-Hours-22.png
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4tI4MCJuwDw/VKZdwOFKuqI/AAAAAAABCWQ/cEiR8Mc-osQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vFs5R-l9qRc/T3_Z6oRyc5I/AAAAAAAAHSM/_YzhME8ZTq8/s530/Washington-Motorcade-10-4-61.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMi1_6QSkI/AAAAAAAAGs0/8jwVenBofgQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-4.jpg
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4e3gLIt_8NU/WAPemw9A-zI/AAAAAAABKuo/mnOTXseZ1sE8MQ6jvGsVcXUP5QmAyB5DQCLcB/s1600/JFK-At-Love-Field-11-22-63.png
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible unless
he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window.
Even though he never said he did.
Post by claviger
He attempted to position himself to
fire back by standing up and pointing his rifle at the sniper.
Which would be away from JFK.
Post by claviger
As he tried to twist around to make that shot he lost balance when
the two cars suddenly slowed down.
If he was turned toward the TSBD when the car slowed, that would cause him
to tumble backward which would be toward the front of the car since he was
facing to the rear. Tumbling backward would throw the barrel skyward, not
toward JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
No one we know about took a photo but there may be a frame
in the Bronson Film.
Let us know when you find it.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
He is standing in the photo I provided and the rifle is not at shoulder
level which is where it would have to be in order to shoot downward
at JFK. What reason would you have to believe that Hickey would have
shouldered the rifle without a definite target?
All possible targets were on the right side of the car he was riding in.
To fire at any of them he would need to stand up and point his rifle in
that direction. If the TSBD will allow closer inspection of the Bronson
film we might be able to answer your questions.
No one trained in firearms is going to point a rifle in a direction until
he had identified a target. Also, no one trained in firearms would put his
finger on the trigger until he is prepared to fire just to prevent the
kind of accidental discharge Donahue has hypothesized.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward
at JFK.
To make such a definitive statement like that we would need precise
measurements.
No, all you have to do is look at the various photos to realize the only
way to get the rifle above the windshield and firing at a downward angle
is to raise it to shoulder level while standing straight up.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
If that were the case, he would turn in that direction and the rifle would
be pointing away from JFK. If the Queen Mary slowed or stopped suddenly
with Hickey facing the TSBD, that would cause him to fall backward from
his position which would point cause the muzzle to point farther upward,
not down toward JFK.
Again, SSA Hickey was a tall bodyguard who was right handed.
It was an awkward move to twist around and fire at a target six
stories tall to his right.
How does that bring the weapon into position to shoot JFK?
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
See earlier in this post.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Even if that had happened, it wouldn't result in Hickey raising the rifle
to shoulder level and pointing it downward toward JFK. That is the only
position the rifle could be in for Hickey to shoot JFK without firing
through the windshield. There is no way he would achieve that position
accidentally. It is preposterous.
The Bronson Film holds the final answer.
Good luck. I've seen the Bronson film. Taken from over a block away
without a zoom lens it has nowhere near the resolution you need.
I don't know, BD. These still frames taken from the Bronson film at the time of the head shot have me almost 100% convinced Hickey was sitting down.
They are from an article on Dale Myer's site from 2013 which McAdams
reprints on his Assassination web page (where I found it).

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html

The Hickey portion of the article is about a quarter or less of the way
down. Mark
Mark
2019-03-27 19:49:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
The barrel of the rifle would be above the windshield under two
circumstances. One is if it is pointing upward which would be the proper
way to hold the rifle until a target was identified. This picture was
cropped from one taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland. I should
have included it in the OP.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Hickey-ar-15_jfk.jpg
https://vincepalamara.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/1743633_10202682499879178_1562261881_n.jpg
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s680/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMe1NiZf3I/AAAAAAAAGsc/IqaIHX9AVRQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-Hawaii.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4tI4MCJuwDw/VKZdwOFKuqI/AAAAAAABCWQ/cEiR8Mc-osQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMi1_6QSkI/AAAAAAAAGs0/8jwVenBofgQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-4.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9oqweQOoDzQ/VTWZsn57qaI/AAAAAAABFxI/OSUD2H6O9gw/s530/JFK-The-Final-Hours-22.png
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4tI4MCJuwDw/VKZdwOFKuqI/AAAAAAABCWQ/cEiR8Mc-osQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vFs5R-l9qRc/T3_Z6oRyc5I/AAAAAAAAHSM/_YzhME8ZTq8/s530/Washington-Motorcade-10-4-61.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TOMi1_6QSkI/AAAAAAAAGs0/8jwVenBofgQ/s530/JFK-Motorcade-4.jpg
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4e3gLIt_8NU/WAPemw9A-zI/AAAAAAABKuo/mnOTXseZ1sE8MQ6jvGsVcXUP5QmAyB5DQCLcB/s1600/JFK-At-Love-Field-11-22-63.png
Post by bigdog
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible unless
he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
What I've said is SSA Hickey heard shots from the TSBD and saw a
sniper in the 6th floor window.
Even though he never said he did.
Post by claviger
He attempted to position himself to
fire back by standing up and pointing his rifle at the sniper.
Which would be away from JFK.
Post by claviger
As he tried to twist around to make that shot he lost balance when
the two cars suddenly slowed down.
If he was turned toward the TSBD when the car slowed, that would cause him
to tumble backward which would be toward the front of the car since he was
facing to the rear. Tumbling backward would throw the barrel skyward, not
toward JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
No one we know about took a photo but there may be a frame
in the Bronson Film.
Let us know when you find it.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
He is standing in the photo I provided and the rifle is not at shoulder
level which is where it would have to be in order to shoot downward
at JFK. What reason would you have to believe that Hickey would have
shouldered the rifle without a definite target?
All possible targets were on the right side of the car he was riding in.
To fire at any of them he would need to stand up and point his rifle in
that direction. If the TSBD will allow closer inspection of the Bronson
film we might be able to answer your questions.
No one trained in firearms is going to point a rifle in a direction until
he had identified a target. Also, no one trained in firearms would put his
finger on the trigger until he is prepared to fire just to prevent the
kind of accidental discharge Donahue has hypothesized.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward
at JFK.
To make such a definitive statement like that we would need precise
measurements.
No, all you have to do is look at the various photos to realize the only
way to get the rifle above the windshield and firing at a downward angle
is to raise it to shoulder level while standing straight up.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
If that were the case, he would turn in that direction and the rifle would
be pointing away from JFK. If the Queen Mary slowed or stopped suddenly
with Hickey facing the TSBD, that would cause him to fall backward from
his position which would point cause the muzzle to point farther upward,
not down toward JFK.
Again, SSA Hickey was a tall bodyguard who was right handed.
It was an awkward move to twist around and fire at a target six
stories tall to his right.
How does that bring the weapon into position to shoot JFK?
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
See earlier in this post.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Even if that had happened, it wouldn't result in Hickey raising the rifle
to shoulder level and pointing it downward toward JFK. That is the only
position the rifle could be in for Hickey to shoot JFK without firing
through the windshield. There is no way he would achieve that position
accidentally. It is preposterous.
The Bronson Film holds the final answer.
Good luck. I've seen the Bronson film. Taken from over a block away
without a zoom lens it has nowhere near the resolution you need.
I don't know, BD. These still frames taken from the Bronson film at the time of the head shot have me almost 100% convinced Hickey was sitting down.
They are from an article on Dale Myer's site from 2013 which McAdams
reprints on his Assassination web page (where I found it).
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
The Hickey portion of the article is about a quarter or less of the way
down. Mark
Woops, didn't realize BT George had posted the Myers/Russo article.

Mark
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 18:59:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
The barrel of the rifle would be above the windshield under two
circumstances. One is if it is pointing upward which would be the proper
way to hold the rifle until a target was identified. This picture was
cropped from one taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland. I should
have included it in the OP.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Hickey-ar-15_jfk.jpg
I would expect Hickey to be holding it this way prior to the headshot. The
other way would be if Hickey was standing and had raised the rifle to his
shoulder. That would make no sense if he hadn't identified a definite
target. You would have us believe that just before the head shot, Hickey
had raised the rifle to his shoulder and was pointing it ahead in the
direction of the overpass. That would be completely irresponsible unless
he had identified a threat there which he hadn't.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
That still doesn't bring the rifle to shoulder level which is what you
need to get a downward shot at JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
He is standing in the photo I provided and the rifle is not at shoulder
level which is where it would have to be in order to shoot downward at
JFK. What reason would you have to believe that Hickey would have
shouldered the rifle without a definite target?
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Without the rifle raised to shoulder level, there is no way for Hickey to
shoot JFK in the back of the head without firing through the windshield.
It is an impossibility. Holding the butt of the rifle low in the crook of
his arm would not allow it to be raised high enough to shoot downward at
JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
If that were the case, he would turn in that direction and the rifle would
be pointing away from JFK. If the Queen Mary slowed or stopped suddenly
with Hickey facing the TSBD, that would cause him to fall backward from
his position which would point cause the muzzle to point farther upward,
not down toward JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
See earlier in this post.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Even if that had happened, it wouldn't result in Hickey raising the rifle
to shoulder level and pointing it downward toward JFK. That is the only
position the rifle could be in for Hickey to shoot JFK without firing
through the windshield. There is no way he would achieve that position
accidentally. It is preposterous.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Donahue assumed as I would that SSA Hickey had both hands on the rifle as
he attempted to twist to the right to maintain eye contact with the
acquired target. It is possible SSA Hickey placed his left hand on the
seat-back in front of him to steady himself as he tried to turn right with
the rifle in his right hand.
Still doesn't raise the rifle to his shoulder which is where it would have
to be to fire downward at JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
If the Queen Mary stopped or slowed, Hickey's momentum would have thrown
him forward and that would have caused the barrel of the rifle to lower.
It would then be pointing at the windshield, not over it which is what
Donahue's theory requires.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head.
Is it your hobby to critique books you've never read, then take
bets on what's in them?
I don't read books unless I have reason to believe they are proposing
something that is credible. If what is being proposed is preposterous on
the surface, I see no reason to waste my time delving any further into
it.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I'll bet none of the proponents of this theory could present such
a diagram either. It just isn't feasible.
There was a diagram in the book you didn't read. The original
book "Mortal Error" had several illustrations.
Does it have a profile diagram showing Hickey's position at the time of
the alleged discharge and how he could have accidentally fired downward
into the back of JFK's head. If so, why don't you post it for us. There is
no way Hickey could achieve such a position by accident. It would have to
be an intentional act which is a whole different ballgame. Don Willis
suggested that as a possibility. While I find that ludicrous, it actually
makes more sense than what Donahue proposes because it is at least
physically possible.
WHat are you, rude. He doesn't have to defend his theory.
Herre is one example of the diagram:

https://buelahman.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/jfk-2.jpg?w=800
I would say that if someone has to make the effort to SHOULDER his
weapon that rules out an accidental firing.
claviger
2019-03-23 16:16:56 UTC
Permalink
SSA Hickey is sitting on top of the backseat or trunk.
If he was standing up he could easily fire a shot over
the windshield.
Loading Image...
bigdog
2019-03-24 03:51:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
SSA Hickey is sitting on top of the backseat or trunk.
If he was standing up he could easily fire a shot over
the windshield.
http://www.combatreform.org/THEJFKRESEARCHSITE/ssagentwithm16indealeyplaza.jpg
Are you claiming that in DP he was standing on the backseat because that
is the only way you can get him high enough to fire over he windshield at
a downward angle. That is what the Menninger diagram shows as provided by
Grizzlie Antagonist.
claviger
2019-03-25 00:29:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
SSA Hickey is sitting on top of the backseat or trunk.
If he was standing up he could easily fire a shot over
the windshield.
http://www.combatreform.org/THEJFKRESEARCHSITE/ssagentwithm16indealeyplaza.jpg
Are you claiming that in DP he was standing on the backseat because that
is the only way you can get him high enough to fire over he windshield at
a downward angle.[?]
No one I know of has ever claimed SSA Hickey was standing up on the
backseat. He was a tall guy to begin with so didn't need to. Surely they
all knew how unstable that would be. Judging by all photos I have seen
seen SSA Hickey was the tallest person in the car and SSA Bennet was the
shortest.

It is possible SSA Hickey had his left foot on the floorboard and right
foot on the back seat but that did not elevate him. It could certainly
lead to an unstable stance to fire a rifle.
Post by bigdog
That is what the Menninger diagram shows as provided by Grizzlie
Antagonist.
Grizz is a fine researcher with a keen eye for detail. I will ask him
about it. Photos I've posted for your perusal clearly show even short Dave
Powers could easily point his camera over the front windshield of SS697X
while he was standing on the floorboard.
bigdog
2019-03-26 01:09:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
SSA Hickey is sitting on top of the backseat or trunk.
If he was standing up he could easily fire a shot over
the windshield.
http://www.combatreform.org/THEJFKRESEARCHSITE/ssagentwithm16indealeyplaza.jpg
Are you claiming that in DP he was standing on the backseat because that
is the only way you can get him high enough to fire over he windshield at
a downward angle.[?]
No one I know of has ever claimed SSA Hickey was standing up on the
backseat.
Maybe not in so many words but look at Menninger's diagram. He would have
to be standing on the seat to be as high as Menninger shows him.
Post by claviger
He was a tall guy to begin with so didn't need to. Surely they
all knew how unstable that would be. Judging by all photos I have seen
seen SSA Hickey was the tallest person in the car and SSA Bennet was the
shortest.
He was maybe a half a head taller than the other agents but that doesn't
raise him up high enough to shoot over the windshield and hit JFK.
Post by claviger
It is possible SSA Hickey had his left foot on the floorboard and right
foot on the back seat but that did not elevate him. It could certainly
lead to an unstable stance to fire a rifle.
It doesn't position him high enough to have fired the fatal shot.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
That is what the Menninger diagram shows as provided by Grizzlie
Antagonist.
Grizz is a fine researcher with a keen eye for detail. I will ask him
about it.
No need to ask him. He provided the link to it. I believe it is from
Marsh's website, the puzzlepalace.
Post by claviger
Photos I've posted for your perusal clearly show even short Dave
Powers could easily point his camera over the front windshield of SS697X
while he was standing on the floorboard.
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason to
believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had to
violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident
Donahue theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these
rules, the odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are
ridiculously long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what
Donahue believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying
this.
claviger
2019-03-27 03:20:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
bigdog
2019-03-28 02:18:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm. Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one
which proves nothing.
claviger
2019-03-29 03:14:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
bigdog
2019-03-30 03:08:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Mitch Todd
2019-03-30 22:38:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
claviger
2019-03-31 18:02:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
How did Lattimer do that? The test requires a gaping hole on top of the
skull and 40+ very small fragments inside the skull.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
The victors often see dead enemy soldiers or wounded soldiers
taken prisoner. Natural curiosity.
bigdog
2019-04-02 02:19:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
How did Lattimer do that? The test requires a gaping hole on top of the
skull and 40+ very small fragments inside the skull.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
The victors often see dead enemy soldiers or wounded soldiers
taken prisoner. Natural curiosity.
How often were the Italians victors? Even if they had been, the only way
they could determine if any of the shots from their Carcanos had left a
trail of fine lead particles in the bodies of their victims would have
been by doing autopsies. On all of them. That wouldn't be apparent at a
glance. Do you think they did that?

You're trying to hard to save this silly theory of Donahue's. It make no
sense.
donald willis
2019-04-02 20:47:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
How did Lattimer do that? The test requires a gaping hole on top of the
skull and 40+ very small fragments inside the skull.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
The victors often see dead enemy soldiers or wounded soldiers
taken prisoner. Natural curiosity.
How often were the Italians victors?
Now, now. But, okay, yes, as early as about 1943, in the Billy Wilder
movie "Five Graves to Cairo", Nazis are sitting around a table badmouthing
their hapless Italian allies....

dcw
r***@gmail.com
2019-04-02 20:46:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
How did Lattimer do that? The test requires a gaping hole on top of the
skull and 40+ very small fragments inside the skull.
It's in his book. You didn't read it? Or are you just relying on what
Menninger said that Donahue said about it? For that matter, where are the
results of Donahue's experiments? Where are the photos and x-rays of the
skulls that Donahue shot to demonstrate his contentions?
Post by claviger
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
The victors often see dead enemy soldiers or wounded soldiers
taken prisoner. Natural curiosity.
So, Donahue wrote the Italian government to see if they knew of any of
these curious passers-by who may have seen someone who may have been shot
with a 6.5mm bullet in the head? No wonder he didn't get much of an
answer! ;-D
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-31 21:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an
overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Not the lead snowstorm.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars.  Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
r***@gmail.com
2019-04-02 20:45:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an
overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Not the lead snowstorm.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars.  Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
What "lead snowstorm?" Don't recall Humes, Boswell, Finck, Ebersole, the
Ramsey Panel or the HSCA FPP using the term to describe any of JFK's
injuries.
donald willis
2019-04-03 20:39:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a
reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic
accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these
rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Not the lead snowstorm.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars.  Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
What "lead snowstorm?" Don't recall Humes, Boswell, Finck, Ebersole, the
Ramsey Panel or the HSCA FPP using the term to describe any of JFK's
injuries.
I've been wondering myself where that term started, as regards the JFK
assassination.
r***@gmail.com
2019-04-04 01:27:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald willis
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level.
Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the
AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no
reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to
believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would
have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a
reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic
accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these
rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are
ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying
this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor
window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the
case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Not the lead snowstorm.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars.  Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
What "lead snowstorm?" Don't recall Humes, Boswell, Finck, Ebersole, the
Ramsey Panel or the HSCA FPP using the term to describe any of JFK's
injuries.
I've been wondering myself where that term started, as regards the JFK
assassination.
The earliest reference I know of is in DiMaio's _Gunshot
Wounds_ which dated back to the mid-1980's. He used it to
refer to the typical fragmentation pattern generated by
hollow- and soft-point rifle ammunition. He includes the
5.56mm FMJ rounds, because they leave a similar pattern.

There are a number of obscure cases where other FMJ
rounds will do un-FMJ things. M L Fackler, an Army
field surgeon in Vietnam who went on to do a lot of
work on terminal ballistics in the 80's and 90's, notes
that the Bundeswehr's 7.62x51 NATO round will fragment
just as readily, while the US version of the same
cartridge won't. Of course, if you hit bone first, all
bets are off.
Anthony Marsh
2019-04-05 19:42:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a
reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic
accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these
rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Not the lead snowstorm.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars.  Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
What "lead snowstorm?" Don't recall Humes, Boswell, Finck, Ebersole, the
Ramsey Panel or the HSCA FPP using the term to describe any of JFK's
injuries.
I've been wondering myself where that term started, as regards the JFK
assassination.
The earliest reference I know of is in DiMaio's _Gunshot
Wounds_ which dated back to the mid-1980's. He used it to
refer to the typical fragmentation pattern generated by
hollow- and soft-point rifle ammunition. He includes the
5.56mm FMJ rounds, because they leave a similar pattern.
There are a number of obscure cases where other FMJ
rounds will do un-FMJ things. M L Fackler, an Army
field surgeon in Vietnam who went on to do a lot of
work on terminal ballistics in the 80's and 90's, notes
that the Bundeswehr's 7.62x51 NATO round will fragment
just as readily, while the US version of the same
cartridge won't. Of course, if you hit bone first, all
bets are off.
I think the reason is higher velocity.
Anthony Marsh
2019-04-05 19:42:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald willis
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a
reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these
rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Not the lead snowstorm.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars.  Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
What "lead snowstorm?" Don't recall Humes, Boswell, Finck, Ebersole, the
Ramsey Panel or the HSCA FPP using the term to describe any of JFK's
injuries.
I've been wondering myself where that term started, as regards the JFK
assassination.
I hope I started it, but I can't really take credit for it. If you
Google the newsgroup and put it in quotes it probably goes back to
before 2000.
Anthony Marsh
2019-04-05 19:41:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an
overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
The WC and Lattimer were both able to get the kind of fragmentation
that we see in the JFK case. Donahue simply didn't want to believe
it because it conflicted with his pet theory.
Not the lead snowstorm.
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars.  Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Why would he ask the Italians in the first place? They were the
ones doing the shooting in this case! 'Twas the poor bastards on
the other side who were taking the hits. And "there are stories
that..." is poor cousin to the irrational belief that the plural
of "anecdote" is "data."
What "lead snowstorm?" Don't recall Humes, Boswell, Finck, Ebersole, the
Ramsey Panel or the HSCA FPP using the term to describe any of JFK's
injuries.
In his WC testimony Humes referred to them as "dustlike."

Mr. Specter.
Will you proceed now, Dr. Humes, to continue in your description of
the head wound?
Commander Humes.
Head wound--a careful inspection of this large defect in the scalp
and skull was made seeking for fragments of missile before any actual
detection was begun. The brain was greatly lacerated and torn, and in
this area of the large defect we did not encounter any of these minute
particles.
I might say at this time that the X-ray pictures which were made
would have a tendency to magnify these minute fragments somewhat in size
and we were not too surprised in not being able to find the tiny
fragments depicted in the X-ray.
Mr. Specter.
Approximately how many fragments were observed, Dr. Humes, on the
X-ray?
Commander Humes.
I would have to refer to them again, but I would say between 30 or
40 tiny dustlike particle fragments of radio opaque material, with the
exception of this one I previously mentioned which was seen to be above
and very slightly behind the right orbit.
Mr. Dulles.
Were these all fragments that were injected into the skull by the
bullet?
Commander Humes.
Our interpretation is, sir, that the missile struck the right
occipital region, penetrated through the two tables of the skull, making
the characteristic coning on the inner table which I have previously
referred to. That one portion of the missile and judging by the size of
the defect thus produced, the major portion of the missile, made its
exit through this large defect.
A second portion of the missile or multiple second portions were
deflected, and traversed a distance as enumerated by this interrupted
line, with the major portion of that fragment coming to lodge in the
position indicated.

Perhaps some of these minor fragments were dislodged from the major
one it traversed this course.
To better examine the situation with regard to the skull, at this
time, Boswell and I extended the lacerations of the scalp which were at
the margins of this wound, down in the direction of both of the
President's ears. At that point, we had even a better appreciation of
the extensive damage which had been done to the skill by this injury.
We had to do virtually no work with a saw to remove these Portions
of the skull, they came apart in our hands very easily, and we attempted
to further examine the brain, and seek specifically this fragment which
was the one we felt to be of a size which would permit us to recover it.
Mr. Specter.
When you refer to this fragment, and you are pointing there, are
you referring to the fragment depicted right above the President's right
eye?
Commander Humes.
Yes, sir; above and somewhat behind the President's eye.
Mr. Specter.
Will you proceed, then, to tell us what you did then?
Commander Humes.
Yes, sir. We directed carefully in this region and in fact located
this small fragment, which was in a defect in the brain tissue in just
precisely this location.
Mr. Specter.
How large was that fragment, Dr. Humes?
Commander Humes.
I refer to my notes for the measurements of that fragment.
I find in going back to my report, sir, that we found, in fact, two
small fragments in this approximate location. The larger of these
measured 7 by 2 mm., the smaller 3 by 1 mm.
To make my presentation of this wound of the skull more logical to
the Commission, I would like to go forward in time that evening to at a
later hour. I apologize--time and what happened exactly at what moment
escapes me at this time.
I mentioned previously that there was a large bony defect. Some
time later on that evening or very early the next morning while we were
all still engaged in continuing our examination, I was presented with
three portions of bone which had been brought to Washington from Dallas
by the agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
These were--
Mr. Specter.
BT George
2019-04-02 20:42:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
I'm not the one claiming that couldn't happen. It did happen in the case of JFK.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
Now you are channeling Jim Marrs. That is not a good thing. This is all
anecdotal evidence which doesn't establish anything. It's safe to say that
during WWII a lot of soldiers were shot and killed by Carcanos. To
establish the unlikelihood that a Carcano bullet would leave a lead
snowstorm you would need to look at many cases where the Carcano bullet
fragmented on impact and then see if it left such a trail of small lead
particles in the victim's body. I doubt that such a sample size even
exists since it would be unusual to conduct an autopsy on a soldier killed
in combat. It is done to study wound ballistics but not on a widespread
basis. It is the exception, not the rule.
Agreed. And not everyone thought so poorly of the Carcano as a weapon of
dealing out death. And there are some very real counter-factuals to its
actually be a "Humanitarian Rifle"

http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/general.html

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/M9rMnU2RF3s/q82ksRy68rkJ

It's as simple as this, no one thought very highly of much of *any* of the
equipment used by the Italians in WWII, but surely they managed to deal
out some death and destruction with them. I saw one source that put
Italy's estimated military combat deaths at around 110,000 both before and
after switching sides in WWII. Even if we assume a generous 4 Italians
dropped for every one enemy killed, that leaves 27,500 enemies killed.
If even 20% of these were attributable to the main rifle in the hands of
Italian infantrymen, we can safely attribute at least 5,500 deaths to the
Carcano. Those persons surely did not find the Carcano particularly
humane!
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-30 17:40:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
It is a nonsensical claim that no other Carcano bullet ever produced a
lead snowstorm.
Do you know a specific case where that did happen?
Post by bigdog
Donahue looked at a small sample size and didn't find one which proves
nothing.
He came across stories of Italian soldiers who used knives and bayonets to
cut groves on the nose of Carcano bullets so they would crumble when
hitting enemy soldiers. The Carcano was called "The Humanitarian Rifle" of
two World Wars. Donahue did not make up that name.
CUte. SO dupiicate that and produce bullets which cause lead snowstorms.
You can't.
claviger
2019-03-30 17:35:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window
fired the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm
on a human target.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-31 00:54:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window
fired the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm
on a human target.
You still are not brave enough to clearly state that you believe that
JFK as hit in the head only once, by Hickey, and not by Oswald.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-30 17:40:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Most likely Powers would have raised his camera to eye level. Hickey's
AR-15 was not at eye level. Of course it is possible to raise the AR-15
high enough to shoot over the windshield at JFK but there is no reason
to believe Hickey would have done that and lots of reasons to believe he
wouldn't. In order to have accidentally shot JFK, Hickey would have had
to violate at least three cardinal rules of gun safety. There is a reason we
have these rules. It is to prevent just the sort of tragic accident Donahue
theorized. Even if we were to believe Hickey violated all of these rules, the
odds of an accidental discharge striking JFK in the head are ridiculously
long. Yet we are supposed to believe all this because of what Donahue
believes the minute lead fragments indicate. Sorry, I'm not buying this.
So JFK is the unluckiest President in history. Either an overprotective
SSA shot the President or the amateur sniper in the 6th floor window fired
So now you say that there is only one headhot and we have to chose
between Kickey OR the dixth floor? Is that what you are saying?
Post by claviger
the only Carcano bullet in history to shatter into a lead snowstorm.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-26 00:55:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
SSA Hickey is sitting on top of the backseat or trunk.
If he was standing up he could easily fire a shot over
the windshield.
http://www.combatreform.org/THEJFKRESEARCHSITE/ssagentwithm16indealeyplaza.jpg
Are you claiming that in DP he was standing on the backseat because that
is the only way you can get him high enough to fire over he windshield at
a downward angle. That is what the Menninger diagram shows as provided by
Grizzlie Antagonist.
That would rule out trying to shoot at the TSBD.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 18:59:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
SSA Hickey is sitting on top of the backseat or trunk.
When? What photo shows that? All the way up Houston? You are forgetting
thar he'd have to reach down to the FLOOR to pick up the AR-15. He must
have had very long arms. Your story changed every day as we point out more
errors in it. Mortal errors.
Post by claviger
If he was standing up he could easily fire a shot over
IF
IF
IF

That's all you have are IFS.
Post by claviger
the windshield.
http://www.combatreform.org/THEJFKRESEARCHSITE/ssagentwithm16indealeyplaza.jpg
claviger
2019-03-23 19:50:40 UTC
Permalink
55 YEARS AGO TODAY
JFK’s final hour, in the words of his widow and other eyewitnesses
By John ManciniNovember 22, 2018
Loading Image...

Notice SSA McIntyre isn't that tall but he
could fire a rifle over the windshield.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 19:00:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
55 YEARS AGO TODAY
JFK’s final hour, in the words of his widow and other eyewitnesses
By John ManciniNovember 22, 2018
https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/AP_6311220179.jpg?quality=75&strip=all&w=1240
What is that cropped photo supposed to tell us.
Why not start posting pictures of the moon?
Post by claviger
Notice SSA McIntyre isn't that tall but he
could fire a rifle over the windshield.
When did he ever do that? In some tests?
bigdog
2019-03-24 19:02:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
55 YEARS AGO TODAY
JFK’s final hour, in the words of his widow and other eyewitnesses
By John ManciniNovember 22, 2018
https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/AP_6311220179.jpg?quality=75&strip=all&w=1240
Notice SSA McIntyre isn't that tall but he
could fire a rifle over the windshield.
To make the theory work, you not only have to have Hickey fire over the
windshield but also on a downward angle. If you draw a line from JFK' head
over the top of the windshield it looks like it goes to the top of his
shoulders.

With Hickey in the back seat, the angle is even worse. He would have to
hold the weapon even higher. You're trying to force fit the geometry to
the theory rather than seeing if the theory holds up to the geometry.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 18:58:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
Post by bigdog
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Donahue assumed as I would that SSA Hickey had both hands on the rifle as
he attempted to twist to the right to maintain eye contact with the
acquired target. It is possible SSA Hickey placed his left hand on the
seat-back in front of him to steady himself as he tried to turn right with
the rifle in his right hand.
Post by bigdog
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
Post by bigdog
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head.
Is it your hobby to critique books you've never read, then take
bets on what's in them?
Post by bigdog
I'll bet none of the proponents of this theory could present such
a diagram either. It just isn't feasible.
There was a diagram in the book you didn't read. The original
book "Mortal Error" had several illustrations.
But YOU'RE not brave enough to show them.
Loading Image...
Mark
2019-03-24 19:03:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
I don't know how Donahue got that idea. Hickey does not say that in his
signed report.

Also, if Hickey eyeballed a sniper on the 6th floor, I think he would have
told SSA Emory Roberts, who was handling the Queen Mary's radio, to alert
the DPD that he saw a shooter on an upper floor of the Depository. To my
knowledge he didn't do that.

Mark
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-26 00:58:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
I don't know how Donahue got that idea. Hickey does not say that in his
signed report.
Also, if Hickey eyeballed a sniper on the 6th floor, I think he would have
He could not eyeball a sniper on the sixth floor.
Post by Mark
told SSA Emory Roberts, who was handling the Queen Mary's radio, to alert
the DPD that he saw a shooter on an upper floor of the Depository. To my
knowledge he didn't do that.
I don't think that makes sense. Instead of doing his job of protecting the
President you want him to pass it off to the police?

What if they don't answer? This situation needs a split-second resonse.
The samartist thing is to tell the driver to take evasive action. Just
curious. Does anyone know if he supposedly saw the sniper BEFORE Clint
Hill jumped off?
Post by Mark
Mark
Mark
2019-03-27 03:36:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers.
Then by all means let us address it.
Post by bigdog
JFK's head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary.
Yes.
Post by bigdog
In addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would
lower him a few inches more.
More than what?
Post by bigdog
For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would have to
either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or he
would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame
to allow him to shoot downward at JFK.
The rifle would be higher than the windshield on SS-697-X
Post by bigdog
I don't see any way that could happen accidentally.
SSA Hickey was the tallest SSA in this unit, however Dave Powers
easily stood up while taking movies of the President sitting inside
SS-100-X. I believe the floor of SS697X was higher than SS100X.
Post by bigdog
To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level.
He would have to be standing not sitting.
Post by bigdog
No one who is trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level
unless he had a definite target.
I doubt he ever got to that position. It would have been better and safer
had SSA Hickey turned to the left and used the trunk to steady the rifle
with his left elbow. That move would need to be well trained and well
practiced because it is counterintuitive, and he would lose eye contact
for a moment, but a much easier ergonomic position to return fire. Had the
driver of SS100X accelerated gravity would have helped either way.
Post by bigdog
One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon should
always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to fire.
A very important rule, if possible.
Post by bigdog
To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy.
A very good rule.
Post by bigdog
Unless Hickey had located a definite target, there is no way he
would raise his rifle to shoulder level.
With no identified target no need to raise the rifle. One more reason
Donahue thought SSA Hickey spotted LHO in the 6th floor window.
Post by bigdog
The Bronson film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the
headshot but it is too far away to clearly show how Hickey was
holding the weapon.
Which Bronson Frame are you referring to?
Post by bigdog
However a photo taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland
shows Hickey standing up with the AR-15 pointed skyward.
What photo are you referring to? Do you remember the photographer?
Post by bigdog
This is the proper way to handle a firearm and it is likely this is
how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
Donahue was convinced SSA Hickey spotted LHO on the 6th floor
and was turning to the right to aim and fire, but lost balance when
both cars slowed down.
I don't know how Donahue got that idea. Hickey does not say that in his
signed report.
Also, if Hickey eyeballed a sniper on the 6th floor, I think he would have
He could not eyeball a sniper on the sixth floor.
Post by Mark
told SSA Emory Roberts, who was handling the Queen Mary's radio, to alert
the DPD that he saw a shooter on an upper floor of the Depository. To my
knowledge he didn't do that.
I don't think that makes sense. Instead of doing his job of protecting the
President you want him to pass it off to the police?
What if they don't answer? This situation needs a split-second resonse.
The samartist thing is to tell the driver to take evasive action.
That's not what I'm saying. IF he had seen a shooter in the Depository
there was probably too much confusion and not enough time to alert Roberts
while on Elm. But after they got on Stemmons there was plenty of time.
Mark
Grizzlie Antagonist
2019-03-22 22:45:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
Loading Image...

You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.

All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.

The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.

But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.

Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.

I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?

And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
bigdog
2019-03-23 19:57:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?

Here is a photo of the motorcade racing to Parkland:

Loading Image...

Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
claviger
2019-03-24 14:03:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
A career Police Detective and career Firearms Expert who studied
ballistics both wrote a books about this case. I'm quite sure they
carefully considered all the forensic details you ask about before writing
a book.

More photos:

flickr
Taken on June 26, 1963 Germany
Dave Gelinos
https://www.flickr.com/photos/***@N07/18562818803


Dave Powers photo
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2013/1122/JFK-assassination-Why-suspicions-still-linger-about-Umbrella-Man


BBC NEWS
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-25031434
Loading Image...


White House
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Grizzlie Antagonist
2019-03-24 14:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.

But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.

The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.

I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.

But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.

So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.

Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
bigdog
2019-03-25 00:42:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.
But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and still
clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.
Which is way to low to get the rifle in the position it would need to be
to fire a downward shot at JFK over the top of the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.
But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.
So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.
Even if Hickey was wrong about when he grabbed the AR-15, that still
doesn't put the rifle in his hands with the butt of the rifle at shoulder
height which is the only way it could fire downward at JFK and still clear
the windshield. As I just told claviger, the problem with this theory is
it requires Hickey to be both standing tall and falling down at the same
time.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
BT George
2019-03-26 01:24:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.
But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and still
clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg


I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he clearly
looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So I do
dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though your
point is valid either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.
Which is way to low to get the rifle in the position it would need to be
to fire a downward shot at JFK over the top of the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.
But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.
So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.
Even if Hickey was wrong about when he grabbed the AR-15, that still
doesn't put the rifle in his hands with the butt of the rifle at shoulder
height which is the only way it could fire downward at JFK and still clear
the windshield. As I just told claviger, the problem with this theory is
it requires Hickey to be both standing tall and falling down at the same
time.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
claviger
2019-03-27 03:37:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and
still clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he
clearly looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So
I do dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though
your point is valid either way.
If SSA Hickey did panic and try to stand on the seat, unless he fell
toward the back seat and trunk it would be a disaster of a wild shot. He
may have gone crazy trying to fire back at the sniper in the window. Did
he make a balanced shot or unbalanced shot? That is the question.
bigdog
2019-03-28 02:18:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and
still clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he
clearly looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So
I do dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though
your point is valid either way.
If SSA Hickey did panic and try to stand on the seat, unless he fell
toward the back seat and trunk it would be a disaster of a wild shot. He
may have gone crazy trying to fire back at the sniper in the window. Did
he make a balanced shot or unbalanced shot? That is the question.
You are assuming much and offering evidence of little.
claviger
2019-03-29 03:17:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and
still clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he
clearly looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So
I do dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though
your point is valid either way.
If SSA Hickey did panic and try to stand on the seat, unless he fell
toward the back seat and trunk it would be a disaster of a wild shot. He
may have gone crazy trying to fire back at the sniper in the window. Did
he make a balanced shot or unbalanced shot? That is the question.
You are assuming much and offering evidence of little.
Study these photos one more time:

San Antonio Airport
Loading Image...
http://john-f-kennedy-and-his-family.tumblr.com/post/95869186708/

Tampa Parade
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...

SSA Training Exercise:
http://www.art.com/products/p45926231601/product.htm?RFID=990319

More photos:
JFK waving to the right
Loading Image...

Ireland Parade
Loading Image...

http://thekennedydetailsecretservicejfk.blogspot.com/

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/731835008170699620/
https://twitter.com/ClintHill_SS

Loading Image...
claviger
2019-03-29 16:43:06 UTC
Permalink
Correction:

Autokolonne in Germany
https://www.irishcentral.com/uploads/assets/JFKcar2.jpg
bigdog
2019-03-27 03:47:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.
But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and still
clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he clearly
looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So I do
dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though your
point is valid either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.
Which is way to low to get the rifle in the position it would need to be
to fire a downward shot at JFK over the top of the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.
But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.
So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.
Even if Hickey was wrong about when he grabbed the AR-15, that still
doesn't put the rifle in his hands with the butt of the rifle at shoulder
height which is the only way it could fire downward at JFK and still clear
the windshield. As I just told claviger, the problem with this theory is
it requires Hickey to be both standing tall and falling down at the same
time.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
claviger
2019-03-27 19:50:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.
But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and still
clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he clearly
looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So I do
dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though your
point is valid either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.
Which is way to low to get the rifle in the position it would need to be
to fire a downward shot at JFK over the top of the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.
But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.
So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.
Even if Hickey was wrong about when he grabbed the AR-15, that still
doesn't put the rifle in his hands with the butt of the rifle at shoulder
height which is the only way it could fire downward at JFK and still clear
the windshield. As I just told claviger, the problem with this theory is
it requires Hickey to be both standing tall and falling down at the same
time.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
14 COMMENTS:
Did you notice the questions by Historicus on the Dale Myers Q&A?
A black stick is visible between SSA Hickey and SSA Bennet which
must be the AR-15. So it was in hand prior to the 3rd shot.
BT George
2019-03-28 02:23:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.
But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and still
clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he clearly
looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So I do
dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though your
point is valid either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.
Which is way to low to get the rifle in the position it would need to be
to fire a downward shot at JFK over the top of the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.
But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.
So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.
Even if Hickey was wrong about when he grabbed the AR-15, that still
doesn't put the rifle in his hands with the butt of the rifle at shoulder
height which is the only way it could fire downward at JFK and still clear
the windshield. As I just told claviger, the problem with this theory is
it requires Hickey to be both standing tall and falling down at the same
time.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
I also came across Hank Seinzant's posts to Donald Willis in another
thread. He was mentioning tests from a Dr. Olivier that are of interest
on the whole debate about whether the Carcano bullet can perform as is
stated for the Kennedy case. (I've probably heard about them before, but
if I did, I had forgotten.) Here is one of Hank's posts:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/dfqW_Kx_VFM/UAOlMKQCAwAJ
bigdog
2019-03-29 03:13:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
Post by BT George
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.
But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.
I don't dispute Hickey was standing at the time of the head shot. I am
disputing he was holding the rifle high enough to fire downward and still
clear the windshield of the Queen Mary.
True, but I think you are being too kind. Of the photo I linked too from
Myer's site and the one GA linked to, the clarity is better on the former
than the latter.
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2013/08/drums-of-conspiracy.html
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
I can't really tell much of anything regarding Hickey in his link, but in
mine, comparing the middle image blow up with the third image, he clearly
looks to be seated; perhaps even holding his rifle upwards. So I do
dispute that there is any visual evidence of him standing, though your
point is valid either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.
Which is way to low to get the rifle in the position it would need to be
to fire a downward shot at JFK over the top of the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.
But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.
So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.
Even if Hickey was wrong about when he grabbed the AR-15, that still
doesn't put the rifle in his hands with the butt of the rifle at shoulder
height which is the only way it could fire downward at JFK and still clear
the windshield. As I just told claviger, the problem with this theory is
it requires Hickey to be both standing tall and falling down at the same
time.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
I also came across Hank Seinzant's posts to Donald Willis in another
thread. He was mentioning tests from a Dr. Olivier that are of interest
on the whole debate about whether the Carcano bullet can perform as is
stated for the Kennedy case. (I've probably heard about them before, but
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/dfqW_Kx_VFM/UAOlMKQCAwAJ
After the JFK assassination and especially after Ruby murdered Oswald,
many people leapt to the conclusion that there had been a conspiracy
before seeing any evidence of such and were simply unable to let go of
that belief. So it is with the Russian collusion story. Many couldn't
accept that Hillary had lost because she was such a weak candidate and
leapt to the conclusion that there were sinister forces at work to steal
the election from her. Now after a two year long investigation has found
no evidence of collusion, they simply refuse to let it go. The lack of
evidence matters not to JFK conspiracy believers nor to Russian collusion
believers. They will take their beliefs to their graves.
claviger
2019-03-28 14:45:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
All frames of the Bronson film need to be enhanced and studied. It is the
only film of the motorcade going down Elm Street that has not been made
available for meticulous scientific research. The SFMDP would not allow
that to happen in 55 years for LNs or CTs. Wonder why?
BT George
2019-03-29 03:26:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
All frames of the Bronson film need to be enhanced and studied. It is the
only film of the motorcade going down Elm Street that has not been made
available for meticulous scientific research. The SFMDP would not allow
that to happen in 55 years for LNs or CTs. Wonder why?
SFMDP?
claviger
2019-03-29 16:43:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by BT George
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
All frames of the Bronson film need to be enhanced and studied. It is the
only film of the motorcade going down Elm Street that has not been made
available for meticulous scientific research. The SFMDP would not allow
that to happen in 55 years for LNs or CTs. Wonder why?
SFMDP?
Actually SFMADP is more word for word correct: Sixth Floor Museum At
Dealey Plaza. Maybe they didn't like the MAD part in the middle.
bigdog
2019-03-29 16:29:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
All frames of the Bronson film need to be enhanced and studied.
Have at it.
Post by claviger
It is the
only film of the motorcade going down Elm Street that has not been made
available for meticulous scientific research. The SFMDP would not allow
that to happen in 55 years for LNs or CTs. Wonder why?
Forgive my ignorance but I don't know what that abbreviation stands for.
From what I've seen of the Bronson film, you aren't going to learn much of
anything from it. It was taken from too far away with too little
resolution to provide much detail. It likely would result in a Rorschach
test where people will see what they want to see. The clearest frame I've
seen is the one on Myers website and it definitely does not show Hickey
standing up nor do I see anything that looks like a gun being held. For
the reasons I've already stated, that doesn't rule out Hickey holding a
gun, but it certainly doesn't establish that either. Hickey's recollection
is that he picked up the AR-15 as they were approaching the overpass and
I've seen nothing that refutes that recollection.
claviger
2019-03-30 03:23:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
Tampa Bay Times
Loading Image...
bigdog
2019-03-31 00:19:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
Where did you get the idea that he was standing on the back seat? From
that diagram? That would be a silly thing to do in a moving car.
You're right. That is a much clearer version and pretty much rules out
Hickey having been high enough to shoot over the windshield. This should
be the final nail in the coffin of the Donahue theory.
Tampa Bay Times
https://www.tampabay.com/resizer/RAFUGxnMC6Wklr6THDNf5xnq32I=/900x0/smart/filters:quality(60)/s3.amazonaws.com/arc-wordpress-client-uploads/tbt/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/30231351/RHKXUJCP2RHEHIMXVFAIDD2SOA.jpg
Hickey could shoot downward at JFK if he was standing in that position AND
if he had raised the rifle to his shoulder. You have no evidence he was
doing either at the time of the headshot and the Bronson film seems to
indicate he was not.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-26 00:58:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
Perhaps. I wouldn't swear to that being a flame, and Donahue thought
that, with the muzzle suppressor, the flame wouldn't be visible at
daylight anyway.
But there's a man in a dark suit -- darker than that worn by any spectator
-- standing up, and I don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing
that that is surely Hickey standing up at the time that the headshot is
delivered...as indeed a number of witnesses said he was. In that sense,
this isn't such a remarkable photo at all. It's Bennett, seated to
Hickey's right that remains seated. not Hickey.
The figure in the dark suit who is standing has his left arm bent at the
elbow as if he were holding something.
I also don't think I'm being too ambitious in supposing that that's the
AR-15 that he's holding even if the gun itself isn't visible. Jean Hill,
dressed in red, blocks that part of the scene off.
But what else could it be? He was SEEN with the AR-15 immediately
afterward, though Hickey himself said that he didn't pick it up until
after the car was going through the overpass. That's another reason why
So now we have to call Hickey a liar to get the kook theory to work?
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
it's significant that he appears to be handling it here.
So, you see that in the frenzy of events over a period of no more than a
few seconds, he's NOT holding it correctly, at least not at this moment in
time.
Given that he is standing on the back seat and given also that the Queen
Mary is behind the presidential limousine with both cars on a downslope,
of course, the gun can be fired over the windshield from this position.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 19:01:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Well I guess I lost the bet. Menninger did provide a diagram but it
doesn't help his cause.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The diagram looks like Menninger has Hickey standing on the seat. His
Does he say that? Is that what you need to say to get the theory to work?
Post by bigdog
knees are above the side of the car. It's the only way he could get him
high enough to shoot over the windshield. It actually demonstrates what I
have said. Put Hickey where he actually was with his feet on the floor of
the limo, he would have to shoot through the windshield.
Ah, DUH!
You're just not trying hard enough. Maybe they had a stand there to help
people get into the car. ;]>
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
It would still require him to be in a ridiculously high position to begin
with. Do you really think Hickey's knees would be at the level of the top
of the car side if his feet were on the floor?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/25/02/38/250238a0bc266522f34b4eba060066d0.jpg
Note the agent in front has his waist at the level of the top of the car
side. Granted Hickey is taller and is standing up straight, but that still
doesn't put him in the ridiculously high position of the diagram. There is
no photographic evidence that supports that diagram. Menninger was simply
trying to force fit the diagram to the theory and reveals how ridiculous
it is.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
Even if it does, the rifle would be too low to shoot over the windshield.
You're thinking this through too hard. It was an obvious hoax. Why can't
we debate whether Santa Clause really exists?
Post by bigdog
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Yes.
donald willis
2019-03-24 03:26:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
If Claviger is right, and a couple frames have been excised from the
Bronson, then I doubt you'd be able to see a flame or smoke. That would
seem to be the first thing that would be excised.

dcw
Grizzlie Antagonist
2019-03-25 00:26:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald willis
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
If Claviger is right, and a couple frames have been excised from the
Bronson, then I doubt you'd be able to see a flame or smoke. That would
seem to be the first thing that would be excised.
dcw
Well, Donahue said, in any event, that it wouldn't likely be seen by
daylight if there was a muzzle suppressor, though I don't know if that's
the same thing as saying that it couldn't be captured on film.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 19:00:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
You know; I'd never seen this version of the still photo (to which a
diagram is attached) before I searched for it for the specific purpose of
responding to this post.
OMG! Did you have to look on a conspiracy kook web site to find that?
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
All of the Mortal Error diagrams have Hickey standing up, and indeed there
were witnesses who saw a Secret Service agent standing up with a gun in
his hands.
Fuck the witnesses.
Post by Grizzlie Antagonist
The scenario suggests that he stumbled while handling the gun so the issue
of whether he could have shot over the windshield and the issue of how to
properly handle a gun or that particular gun aren't really issues since
the whole scenario involves clumsy handling of the gun. It doesn't assume
that the gun went off while it was being held correctly.
But this photo...all of the still photos that I'd seen of the Bronson film
are taken from far away and all you really see is an assemblage of small
dark shapes and figures.
Here the still photo is magnified to a greater extent than I'd ever seen
before, and what the viewer gains in size, he loses in clarity; this is a
little fuzzier than the other still photos that I've seen.
I wouldn't absolutely positively swear to it, but, as Colin McLaren might
put it, this photo just might be a smoking gun. It just might be. Is
there a secret service agent standing up with his arm bent at the elbow?
And is there a flame being generated by a combustible device that he's
holding? Or is that too ambitious on my part? :0)
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-22 23:03:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
You see - they have a special bullet which can hop and skip over the
windshield then drop to hit JFK.
claviger
2019-03-23 19:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.>
You see - they have a special bullet which can hop
and skip over the windshield then drop to hit JFK.
Thanks for the silly kindergarten explanation. You lost that argument
a long time ago. Try looking at several photographs recently posted.
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-24 19:01:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.>
You see - they have a special bullet which can hop
and skip over the windshield then drop to hit JFK.
Thanks for the silly kindergarten explanation. You lost that argument
a long time ago. Try looking at several photographs recently posted.
https://buelahman.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/jfk-2.jpg?w=800

No one is c\falling for your phony theory.
claviger
2019-03-24 14:04:57 UTC
Permalink
More Photos


JFK Assassination Presidential Limousine SS100X
Loading Image...


DOUG E DOUG
JFK LINCOLN LIMOUSINE GG 300 SS 100 X ASSASSINATION
https://www.flickr.com/photos/***@N04/4066087699/in/photostream/
SS-100-X GG-300 AZ...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/***@N04/albums/72157646971739664


JFK LINCOLN LIMOUSINE GG 300 SS 100 X ASSASSINATION
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/***@N04/4751947433/
bigdog
2019-03-25 00:43:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
More Photos
JFK Assassination Presidential Limousine SS100X
https://ss100x.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/slide00081.jpg?w=908
DOUG E DOUG
JFK LINCOLN LIMOUSINE GG 300 SS 100 X ASSASSINATION
SS-100-X GG-300 AZ...
JFK LINCOLN LIMOUSINE GG 300 SS 100 X ASSASSINATION
This view should tell you how impossible the angle is. Draw a line from
JFK's head over the windshield and continue on toward the backseat. It's
easy to see how high the rifle would have to be held to make that shot.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/***@N04/4751945585/in/album-72157646971739664/
claviger
2019-03-29 03:22:38 UTC
Permalink
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?

In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
bigdog
2019-03-30 03:08:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
If he was turned toward the TSBD, when the limo stopped, momentum would
cause him to tumble backwards toward the front of the car. Tumbling
backward would cause the barrel of the rifle to swing upward toward the
sky, not downward toward JFK. The physics is wrong. The geometry is wrong.
In addition there are no witnesses and no photographic evidence that
Hickey had picked up the AR-15 at the time of the headshot or that he was
standing up. There are no witnesses inside or outside the Queen Mary who
reported a shot coming from inside that car. Yet we are supposed to
disregard all that because Donahue couldn't find another case where a
Carcano bullet fragmented and left a trail of small lead particles in the
victim's body.
donald willis
2019-03-30 22:38:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
If he was turned toward the TSBD, when the limo stopped, momentum would
cause him to tumble backwards toward the front of the car. Tumbling
backward would cause the barrel of the rifle to swing upward toward the
sky, not downward toward JFK. The physics is wrong. The geometry is wrong.
In addition there are no witnesses and no photographic evidence that
Hickey had picked up the AR-15 at the time of the headshot or that he was
standing up. There are no witnesses inside or outside the Queen Mary who
reported a shot coming from inside that car.
Didn't one SS agent think that the Presidential limo had had a tire blow
out? That could have been....

dcw
bigdog
2019-03-31 21:26:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
If he was turned toward the TSBD, when the limo stopped, momentum would
cause him to tumble backwards toward the front of the car. Tumbling
backward would cause the barrel of the rifle to swing upward toward the
sky, not downward toward JFK. The physics is wrong. The geometry is wrong.
In addition there are no witnesses and no photographic evidence that
Hickey had picked up the AR-15 at the time of the headshot or that he was
standing up. There are no witnesses inside or outside the Queen Mary who
reported a shot coming from inside that car.
Didn't one SS agent think that the Presidential limo had had a tire blow
out? That could have been....
dcw
There would be no mistaking a rifle shot from a few feet away for a tire
blowout. From hundreds of feet, maybe.
donald willis
2019-04-01 18:55:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
If he was turned toward the TSBD, when the limo stopped, momentum would
cause him to tumble backwards toward the front of the car. Tumbling
backward would cause the barrel of the rifle to swing upward toward the
sky, not downward toward JFK. The physics is wrong. The geometry is wrong.
In addition there are no witnesses and no photographic evidence that
Hickey had picked up the AR-15 at the time of the headshot or that he was
standing up. There are no witnesses inside or outside the Queen Mary who
reported a shot coming from inside that car.
Didn't one SS agent think that the Presidential limo had had a tire blow
out? That could have been....
dcw
There would be no mistaking a rifle shot from a few feet away for a tire
blowout. From hundreds of feet, maybe.
Then you're saying that the agent actually did hear a tire blow out on one
of the limos? I don't recall hearing about either one of them having a
flat tire....

dcw
bigdog
2019-04-02 14:24:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
If he was turned toward the TSBD, when the limo stopped, momentum would
cause him to tumble backwards toward the front of the car. Tumbling
backward would cause the barrel of the rifle to swing upward toward the
sky, not downward toward JFK. The physics is wrong. The geometry is wrong.
In addition there are no witnesses and no photographic evidence that
Hickey had picked up the AR-15 at the time of the headshot or that he was
standing up. There are no witnesses inside or outside the Queen Mary who
reported a shot coming from inside that car.
Didn't one SS agent think that the Presidential limo had had a tire blow
out? That could have been....
dcw
There would be no mistaking a rifle shot from a few feet away for a tire
blowout. From hundreds of feet, maybe.
Then you're saying that the agent actually did hear a tire blow out on one
of the limos? I don't recall hearing about either one of them having a
flat tire....
Why don't you reread what I said and point out where I said what you just
claimed I did.
claviger
2019-04-02 03:43:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Didn't one SS agent think that the Presidential limo had
had a tire blow out? That could have been....
dcw
There would be no mistaking a rifle shot from a few feet
away for a tire blowout. From hundreds of feet, maybe.
Jackie said she didn't recognize the first shot because it
sounded like a motorcycle backfire.
Anthony Marsh
2019-04-02 03:44:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
If he was turned toward the TSBD, when the limo stopped, momentum would
cause him to tumble backwards toward the front of the car. Tumbling
backward would cause the barrel of the rifle to swing upward toward the
sky, not downward toward JFK. The physics is wrong. The geometry is wrong.
In addition there are no witnesses and no photographic evidence that
Hickey had picked up the AR-15 at the time of the headshot or that he was
standing up. There are no witnesses inside or outside the Queen Mary who
reported a shot coming from inside that car.
Didn't one SS agent think that the Presidential limo had had a tire blow
out? That could have been....
dcw
There would be no mistaking a rifle shot from a few feet away for a tire
blowout. From hundreds of feet, maybe.
Sure, but lots of people were confused by the firs sound. I don't see
how someone only 2 feet away from the rifle can think it's anything
other than a rifle. Did the 3 black men on the fifth floor think that
noise was a motorcycle backfire?
donald willis
2019-04-02 20:47:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could SSA Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
In a heroic effort to fire back at the 6th floor window assassin, he
lost balance when SS697X suddenly stopped. He obeyed the law
of gravity and fell forward, accidentally discharging his rifle. This
brave SSA may or may NOT have pulled the trigger. More on that
curious situation later.
If he was turned toward the TSBD, when the limo stopped, momentum would
cause him to tumble backwards toward the front of the car. Tumbling
backward would cause the barrel of the rifle to swing upward toward the
sky, not downward toward JFK. The physics is wrong. The geometry is wrong.
In addition there are no witnesses and no photographic evidence that
Hickey had picked up the AR-15 at the time of the headshot or that he was
standing up. There are no witnesses inside or outside the Queen Mary who
reported a shot coming from inside that car.
Didn't one SS agent think that the Presidential limo had had a tire blow
out? That could have been....
dcw
There would be no mistaking a rifle shot from a few feet away for a tire
blowout. From hundreds of feet, maybe.
Sure, but lots of people were confused by the firs sound. I don't see
how someone only 2 feet away from the rifle can think it's anything
other than a rifle. Did the 3 black men on the fifth floor think that
noise was a motorcycle backfire?
There was only one black man on the fifth floor, Williams, who was in
cahoots with the shooter beside him, probably Oswald....

dcw
Anthony Marsh
2019-03-31 00:54:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
You see, man, like that's really not a problem because they had these
new magical bullets which could go through glass without breaking it or
leavving a mark. Didn't you see the movie Dune, man?
Post by bigdog
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
But you don't say how tall he was. He could be like 10 feet tall and it
would work.
Post by bigdog
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
Why coulnd't he raise it over his head? Anyhing to get the theory to work!
Post by bigdog
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
Yeah, like pointed at JFK?
Post by bigdog
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
Ever see the movie In the Line of Fire? They are supposed to yell out
"Gun" So that everyone can concentrate on the threat.
Post by bigdog
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
I doubt that he even reacted BEFORE the head shot.
Post by bigdog
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
OK so he didn't fire after they got past the unerpass? Why not? He had a
clear shot at the TSBD.
Post by bigdog
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
Now, wait a damn second. You are making too much sense. Are you sure
you're in the right newsgroup?
Post by bigdog
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
But you would not know how to find it online.

Loading Image...


You might even have to visit a conspiracy Web site:

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/mortal_error_bronson.jpg
Post by bigdog
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
Didn't you like that cute cartoon from thr book?
claviger
2019-04-02 14:27:56 UTC
Permalink
How could Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?

He was holding the rifle and President Kennedy was leaning left
close to centerline in the Limousine. The SSA was right-handed
so the rifle would be close to the centerline too. For any reason
a discharge of the flat trajectory bullet could hit the President in
back of the head.
bigdog
2019-04-03 20:36:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
How could Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
He was holding the rifle and President Kennedy was leaning left
close to centerline in the Limousine. The SSA was right-handed
so the rifle would be close to the centerline too. For any reason
a discharge of the flat trajectory bullet could hit the President in
back of the head.
You continue to fail to address the problem that the rifle would have to
be held high enough to shoot over the windshield at a downward angle in
order to hit JFK in the head. To do that he would have to shoulder the
weapon. There is no evidence he did that just as there is no evidence he
ever discharged the AR-15.
claviger
2019-04-04 13:16:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
He was holding the rifle and President Kennedy was leaning left
close to centerline in the Limousine. The SSA was right-handed
so the rifle would be close to the centerline too. For any reason
a discharge of the flat trajectory bullet could hit the President in
back of the head.
You continue to fail to address the problem that the rifle would have to
be held high enough to shoot over the windshield at a downward angle in
order to hit JFK in the head. To do that he would have to shoulder the
weapon.
Please provide evidence to support that statement, such as dimensions of
the Queen Mary. Did you know SSA Hickey was sitting on a suitcase? Have
you not looked at the many photos posted showing Dave Powers is tall
enough to easily film the Limousine in parades? If Powers had a rifle
instead of camera he could easily shoot a passenger in the Limousine.
Post by bigdog
There is no evidence he did that just as there is no evidence he ever
discharged the AR-15.
There is photo evidence to prove that statement is inaccurate.
bigdog
2019-04-05 19:36:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
How could Hickey accidentally shoot JFK?
He was holding the rifle and President Kennedy was leaning left
close to centerline in the Limousine. The SSA was right-handed
so the rifle would be close to the centerline too. For any reason
a discharge of the flat trajectory bullet could hit the President in
back of the head.
You continue to fail to address the problem that the rifle would have to
be held high enough to shoot over the windshield at a downward angle in
order to hit JFK in the head. To do that he would have to shoulder the
weapon.
Please provide evidence to support that statement, such as dimensions of
the Queen Mary.
You have acknowledged that JFK's head was lower than the top of the
windshield of the Queen Mary. Furthermore, JFK was downhill from the Queen
Mary putting his head even lower. Do you really need dimensions of the
limo to figure out that to shoot JFK in the head without shooting through
the windshield, Hickey would have to hold the weapon above the windshield
an fire it downward unless you think a bullet could arc that much in a
very short distance.
Post by claviger
Did you know SSA Hickey was sitting on a suitcase?
That is irrelevant to this discussion because you have him standing up
with the rifle.
Post by claviger
Have
you not looked at the many photos posted showing Dave Powers is tall
enough to easily film the Limousine in parades?
A camera is generally held at eye level. A rifle when it is being fired
intentionally is held at shoulder level. If it is being held at the ready
before a target was identified, it would be held in the crook of Hickey's
are as he was later seen as the limo raced to Parkland.
Post by claviger
If Powers had a rifle
instead of camera he could easily shoot a passenger in the Limousine.
Nobody holds a rifle at eye level. you place it against your shoulder and
you lower your head so you can't take aim.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
There is no evidence he did that just as there is no evidence he ever
discharged the AR-15.
There is photo evidence to prove that statement is inaccurate.
Cite?
claviger
2019-04-17 01:17:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Nobody holds a rifle at eye level. you place it against your shoulder and
you lower your head so you can't take aim.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
There is no evidence he did that just as there is no evidence
he ever discharged the AR-15.
There is photo evidence to prove that statement is inaccurate.
Cite?
In the Bronson Film the SFMDP did not want you to see in magnified detail
under previous management. So far Stephen Fagin has acted like a
professional Curator which is a change from past behavior and welcome
recognition of equal responsibility to all researchers around the World.
Fagin seems to be taking a major step forward to raise the level of
professional leadership at the SFMDP and polish the image of the Museum as
a world class institution, and in so doing, enhance the reputation for the
City of Dallas as well.

David Von Pein
2019-04-03 00:31:54 UTC
Permalink
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-780.html
bigdog
2019-04-04 01:14:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Von Pein
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-780.html
I recently reviewed Frazier's testimony before the WC and he said the
limousine fragments had small traces of blood on them which he cleaned off
but he also said it was not necessary to have done so because there was so
little.
David Emerling
2019-04-04 01:17:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
I absolutely agree that any agent (who would be well trained in the
handling of firearms) would point his weapon in a safe direction. Take a
look at the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan. That was a protracted
affair with many agents and officers drawing their weapons. Watch how they
handle them.



The whole Hickey theory is preposterous.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN
bigdog
2019-04-04 18:19:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Emerling
Post by bigdog
I've made this point in other threads yet no one has wanted to address it
so I'll present it in its own thread to see if there are any takers. JFK's
head was lower than the top of the windshield on the Queen Mary. In
addition since he was downhill from the Queen Mary, that would lower him a
few inches more. For Hickey to shoot JFK in the back of the head, he would
have to either fire the shot through the windshield of the Queen Mary or
he would have to raise the rifle far enough above the windshield frame to
allow him to shoot downward at JFK. I don't see any way that could happen
accidentally. To achieve that downward angle, Hickey would have to be
standing straight up and have the rifle at shoulder level. No one who is
trained in firearms would raise a rifle to shoulder level unless he had a
definite target. One of the cardinal rules of firearm safety is the weapon
should always be pointed in a safe direction until you are prepared to
fire. To put it another way, you don't point a firearm at anything you
don't intend to destroy. Unless Hickey had located a definite target,
there is no way he would raise his rifle to shoulder level. The Bronson
film captures the Queen Mary at the time of the headshot but it is too far
away to clearly show how Hickey was holding the weapon. However a photo
taken as the motorcade was racing to Parkland shows Hickey standing up
with the AR-15 pointed skyward. This is the proper way to handle a firearm
and it is likely this is how he would have held it prior to the head shot.
With the rifle held in that position with the butt of the rifle in the
crook of his arm, it is not possible that he could have lost his balance
and fired the shot at JFK without the bullet going through the windshield.
Had he been thrown forward by the Queen Mary braking, that would have
lowered the rifle so that both the butt and the muzzle were below the top
of the windshield frame.
I've never read Mortal Error so I have never seen either Donahue's
original theory or Menninger's explanation of it, but I would bet dollars
to donuts neither presented a diagram showing how a bullet could be fired
over the top of the windshield of the Queen Mary into JFK's head. I'll bet
none of the proponents of this theory could present such a diagram either.
It just isn't feasible.
I absolutely agree that any agent (who would be well trained in the
handling of firearms) would point his weapon in a safe direction. Take a
look at the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan. That was a protracted
affair with many agents and officers drawing their weapons. Watch how they
handle them.
http://youtu.be/s6CNRlQG0mg
The whole Hickey theory is preposterous.
Note the agent with the automatic weapon has it pointing skyward and his
finger is off the trigger. Both proper gun handling techniques. You keep
your finger off the trigger and you don't point your weapon until you have
identified a definite target. Gun safety rules have been established to
prevent just the kind of catastrophic accident that Donahue has theorized.
Loading...