DVP vs. DiEUGENIO
(PART 113)


JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:

You know, Davey Boy, it's bad enough when you deny the evidence. Which you always do. For instance, the idea that the WC really was not tied to a six-second shooting interval.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

They weren't tied to a 5.6-second shooting interval (or even 6 seconds). And the Warren Report makes that very clear on Page 117 (which you apparently want to totally ignore).


JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:

As always, we have been down that road. You make like you forgot it. So when Jesse [Ventura] does it in [a] best time of 8-9 seconds you say: See, what the WC said was possible! Leaving out all the other problems with this--like the fact that Jesse's targets were not moving--you leave out a very important fact.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

And according to an expert for the HSCA, Lee Oswald's target was essentially a "stationary target" too, Jim.

You like to ignore the fact that when Oswald killed President Kennedy, he was shooting at him from behind, when LHO's target was on virtually a straight line from the barrel of his Mannlicher-Carcano on Elm Street (as we can see from the Secret Service photos in Commission Exhibit No. 875; example below):



The conspiracy theorists like Jesse Ventura (and many others) who love to go around declaring that Oswald's shooting performance was "fucking impossible" [Ventura quote] just do not know what the hell they are talking about. Period.

Maybe Jesse should take a good look at the many photos from Oswald's Sniper's Nest that can be found in CE875. It might do him good. (But I doubt it.)


JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:

The WC was limited by Z 313. Any shot interval had to have ended there for them. Therefore, anything over six seconds, the time had to come from BEFORE JFK DISAPPEARED BEHIND THE SIGN.

But here is your problem, which somehow you fail to mention even though I pointed it out to you: The oak tree made this impossible! Therefore, your imaginary shot had to have come before Z 166.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The simple (and obvious) answer to that is: Oswald squeezed off one (missed) shot prior to the President's car going behind the oak tree. And the Warren Commission fully recognized and acknowledged that possibility on Page 111 of the Warren Report:

"If the first shot missed, the assassin perhaps missed in an effort to fire a hurried shot before the President passed under the oak tree."

On the same WCR page, however, the Commission covered the other side of the coin:

"On the other hand, the greatest cause for doubt that the first shot missed is the improbability that the same marksman who twice hit a moving target would be so inaccurate on the first and closest of his shots as to miss completely, not only the target, but the large automobile."

So, as we can see, the Warren Commission was covering ALL the bases. They weren't saying which one of Oswald's three shots definitely missed the limousine. They were laying all of the possibilities on the table for the readers of the Warren Report to consider.

You'd think that the conspiracy theorists would be willing to give the Commission at least a little bit of credit for NOT trying to definitively state which shot missed. Shouldn't such "covering all the bases" be looked upon as a GOOD thing, instead of a "cover-up" by conspiracists? Such as, for example, when the Commission said this on Page 111:

"The evidence is inconclusive as to whether it was the first, second, or third shot which missed."


JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:

Recall, you are tied to three shots, period. One is the Tague strike, one is the head shot.

Therefore, your last remaining shot has to be the Magic Bullet.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Now it is YOU, Jim, who is not considering alternate possibilities for James Tague's cheek wound and the Main Street curb damage. You are placing too much definitive emphasis on the missed shot having to be the shot that caused Tague's slight wound. But that's not the case at all (although I, myself, do, indeed, think that Oswald's first missed shot did cause Tague's injury).

But there are other possibilities, which the Warren Commission also presented (on Page 117 of the WCR), with the Commission once again being shown to be flexible in its scenarios, allowing for the possibility that the Main Street damage (and, hence, Tague's cheek injury) "might have come from the bullet which hit the President's head, or it might have been a product of the fragmentation of the missed shot upon hitting some other object in the area" [WCR; p. 117].

So, as we can easily see from just those two excellent Warren Commission pages (pages 111 and 117), which are pages that apparently very few conspiracy theorists have ever read or paid any attention to whatsoever, Earl Warren's Commission was considering various possibilities regarding the shooting timeline and the missed shot.

Yes, the Commission was pretty definite on what they felt was the total number of shots fired in Dealey Plaza -- three. But there were plenty of reasons for the Commission to accept a definitive "Three Shots Were Fired" shooting scenario, including the presence of the THREE bullet shells being found in the Sniper's Nest right after the assassination, plus the vast number of witnesses who said they heard exactly THREE shots being fired.

But as far as the Commission boxing itself into a corner regarding a
"5.6 second" shooting timeline or which shot missed the limousine, that is simply untrue. Such talk is merely another one of the hundreds of myths about the JFK case that have been spread by conspiracy mongers over the last 47 years. And it's easy to prove that it's only a myth by taking just one quick look at pages 111 and 117 of the Warren Commission's Final Report.

David Von Pein
November 28, 2010


================================


JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:

I think the argument that [Josiah] Thompson makes based upon Dave Wimp is better. Namely that the frame [Z313] is smudged or blurred [and it's this blurring that is making it look like JFK's head is moving forward between frames 312 and 313, when his head isn't really moving forward at all].


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

IMO, that is a ridiculous argument, and for this reason:

Frame 312, which is just an instant before the bullet hits JFK in the head, is probably the clearest frame in Mr. Zapruder's whole film (it's certainly one of the very clearest and non-blurred frames in the whole 26-second home movie, at any rate).



So, to believe that the forward head movement between Z312 and Z313 is caused by the film being "blurred" or "smudged" (smudged? WTF?), we'd have to believe that this blurring occurred immediately after one of the very clearest of all frames in the entire Zapruder film had just been exposed through Mr. Z's camera.

Now, I'm no photography expert, and I suppose such blurring is possible under the right circumstances, but I think a key to knowing that the "blurring" theory at Z313 is not valid is by looking at Z312, which is a beautiful frame, with no blurring whatsoever. It would seem to me, therefore, that BOTH Z312 and Z313 would need to contain some degree of substantial blurring in order for any such theory to be plausible concerning the forward head movement being caused by merely blurring of the film frames.

Also: What do you suppose the odds are of such a theory being accurate? I.E., a separate "blurring" event occurs on the film at the exact instant when President Kennedy just happens to get struck in the head by a bullet and his head appears to be moving forward slightly.

It appears to me that certain conspiracy theorists will do anything and propose virtually any alternate theory in order to deny the obvious fact that President John F. Kennedy was struck in the head by just one bullet--which was a bullet that came from behind.



David Von Pein
June 3, 2011