"JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" (PART 3)

Subject: "JFK: Inside The Target Car"
Date: 7/3/2009 1:35:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Gary Mack

---------------------------------

Hi Gary,

I just felt like writing to you today to give you my support with regard to the
2008 Discovery Channel program that you were a part of "JFK: Inside The Target Car", which is a documentary, despite a few errors, that served its purpose very nicely (i.e., it demonstrated, via actual rifle tests, the direction from which the fatal head shot to President Kennedy must have come -- FROM BEHIND).

I've enjoyed reading some of the e-mails that you've been sending to various people in the last several days concerning "Inside The Target Car" (which have then been formatted into Internet messages), including the following very good excerpt culled from one such e-mail message:

"During production of 'JFK: Inside the Target Car' a year ago, I told the producer that the conspiracy buffs will either love me or hate me depending solely on what the tests revealed. Since the results proved the fatal shot came from behind and that JFK was not hit from the front, the buffs have resorted to trying to discredit me since they cannot criticize the science behind the experiment. Perhaps they expected me to phony the results? Such crazy rantings demonstrate to me who the nuts are, making it easy to differentiate between real researchers and everyone else." -- Gary Mack

I also wanted to remind you (in case you didn't know) that conspiracy theorist James DiEugenio was once again spouting his usual anti-Gary Mack and anti-"Target Car" nonsense on Len Osanic's "Black Op Radio" laughfest on July 2, 2009 [Click Here].

Near the end of the 7/2/09 Black Op program (as DiEugenio was winding down his interminably lengthy and meaningless critique of the "Inside The Target Car" program), DiEugenio issued a challenge to four people with whom Jim said he would like to have a debate about the "Target Car" documentary [and Jim also said he would debate any of these four "LNers" with respect to any of the material that DiEugenio has written in his multi-part review of Vince Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History"].

The four people Jim challenged are: John McAdams, Dave Reitzes, Gary Mack, and David Von Pein (that's me, even though host Len Osanic and DiEugenio seem to think that Reitzes and I are the very same person; and according to Osanic's comments on July 2nd, I guess I'm supposedly John McAdams in disguise too; that type of "alias" silliness never seems to end either).

As far as my own opinions about the "Target Car" program, I've pretty much laid out all of my thoughts in print form -- HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.

And Mr. DiEugenio is beyond all mental help if he thinks he can debunk and undercut the logic (and truth) that resides in this excerpt from one of the above-linked Internet posts:

"The conspiracy nuts/retards act as if Gary Mack ALL BY HIMSELF is holding the "lone assassin" scenario together with his bare hands. As if Gary Mack...or ANY single person...needs to do ANYTHING at all in order to hold together the facts of the JFK assassination...with those facts being: Lee Harvey Oswald killed two people in Dallas on 11/22/63, and he almost certainly acted alone. (And so did Mr. Ruby.)

"Gary Mack could retire tomorrow and the "LN" scenario wouldn't crumble to bits. How could it? It's built on a bedrock of facts -- facts that Gary Mack HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH.

"As for the "JFK: Inside The Target Car" program -- it served its main purpose very well (despite Mr. DiEugenio's and Ms. [Milicent] Cranor's seemingly-endless efforts to rip the program to pieces with a million meaningless words of criticism).

"And that "main purpose" was to try and find out (via actual tests with various types of rifles) if President Kennedy could have been shot in the head with a gunshot that came from the FRONT of his automobile.

"And the answer to that question is a firm and undeniable "No", the President could not possibly have been shot in the head with a rifle bullet that came from anywhere in FRONT of his car.

"As the "Target Car" program amply demonstrated via actual tests, if a frontal shot had hit JFK in the head, his head would have probably either been completely blown off of his neck or would have resulted in obvious damage to the LEFT side of his head (if a lower-powered rifle like Oswald's Carcano had been used by a frontal gunman). ....

"The remainder of the "Target Car" program, other than the two "From The Knoll" tests, is not very important at all (in my opinion), because once it can be established that President Kennedy COULD NOT have been shot in the head from the FRONT (which is a fact that was definitely established, very firmly, in the "Target Car" program), then the math concerning the fatal head shot becomes pretty simple to perform....even for hardline conspiracy theorists. ....

"A secondary "purpose" that was accomplished during the...documentary was to see if Oswald's 6th-Floor gunshot to JFK's head could be duplicated within a reasonable degree of accuracy. And it was. ....

"But I'm sure that the conspiracy kooks of Planet Earth will continue to cry "FOUL" when examining every single test that has ever been done in trying to simulate the wounds of President Kennedy, including all of the Discovery Channel specials...[which all favor] the likelihood of a single assassin named Lee Oswald being able to perform his wicked deed of murder in 1963." -- DVP; June 22, 2009


As far as appearing as a guest on "Black Op Radio" in order to "debate" James DiEugenio's ridiculous and subjective (and flat-out loony) thoughts concerning the "Target Car" show [and Jim's nitpicking points regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book], I doubt the day will ever come when I'll actually have a desire to enter Mr. Osanic's playhouse of conspiracy-oriented silliness known as "Black Op Radio".

Mr. DiEugenio, however, seems to consider the Black Op "pigpen" his home away from home.*

* = I put "pigpen" in quotes there, because Jim D. called John McAdams' alt.assassination.jfk Internet newsgroup a "pigpen" on multiple occasions during the latter portions of his lengthy "Black Op Radio" appearance on July 2nd. So, I was merely reciprocating.

Evidently, according to Jim D., the "only place" that lone-assassin believers such as myself and Prof. McAdams and David A. Reitzes can go to promote our common-sense thoughts about Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt is to the "pigpen" that McAdams moderates at alt.assassination.jfk.

I guess DiEugenio doesn't realize that Mr. Reitzes and I (and probably Mr. McAdams too) have posted at several other JFK fora around the Internet over the years too.

I was a member of Debra Conway's JFK-Lancer forum for several years, up until July 28, 2005, which was the date when my posting privileges were suspended due to the fact that Ms. Conway got tired of having TWO different "LNers" posting a lot of lone-assassin facts on her forum at the same time.

Another lone-gunman believer had joined the forum just 11 days earlier and began posting a lot too. This became too much common sense for the conspiracy kooks at Lancer to bear, so we both got kicked out the Lancer door on the same day.

I've found that such restrictive anti-"LN" actions are commonplace around the Internet. In other words -- the conspiracy theorists want the whole field to themselves, and to hell with common sense and the actual EVIDENCE and the RAW FACTS of Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt.

With respect to debating Mr. DiEugenio on the subject of Vincent Bugliosi's book, that is something that I've already done (to a large extent) right here on the Internet during the last ten months, via a series of lengthy "Battling DiEugenio" posts that took me many, many hours to compose (plus a [multi]-part audio/video series I put together that amply destroys several of Mr. DiEugenio's absurd notions concerning the JFK assassination):

A couple of other things:

An additional hilarious (and stupendously silly) comment made by James DiEugenio on the 7/2/09 Black Op show was this one:

"If I ever met Hugh Aynesworth, I'd probably spit in his face. [He's] been dedicated to the [JFK assassination] cover-up from the day it happened."

That's hilarious, Jim. Hilarious.

DiEugenio also referred to Oswald's 19-year-old Book Depository co-worker, Buell Wesley Frazier, as a "suspicious character" during the July 2 Black Op program.

That's the kind of paranoid conspiracy theorist Mr. DiEugenio seems to be. Unbelievable.

Anyway, I just wanted to write to you and talk about the latest round of horse manure that surfaced on Osanic's conspiracy-laden radio show this week.

And a friendly piece of advice -- If you decide to take DiEugenio up on his "debate" offer, please don't forget to wear your wading boots and your gas mask -- because the bullshit that's dished out on "Black Op Radio" every week is at least a mile deep....and not exactly pleasant to sniff.

Best regards,
David Von Pein

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

Subject: "JFK: Inside The Target Car"
Date: 7/4/2009 8:37:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: Gary Mack
To: David Von Pein

---------------------------------

Dave,

Thanks for your thoughts. The show's ["JFK: Inside The Target Car"] premise was quite simple: bullet goes in, matter comes out. We weren't trying to disprove anything. We merely tested the official story and the most likely second gunman theory. The results spoke eloquently.

As I mentioned in the show, IF there was a second gunman, he missed. There may still have been a conspiracy, but the man who killed President Kennedy fired from the TSBD window. Those who disagree are free to perform as many scientifically valid tests as their minds can envision.

As for why the test shots weren't fired in Dealey Plaza, there was no reason to do so. Such actions would be dangerous, pure exploitation and probably against the law, since the Plaza is a city park and a National Historic Landmark.

To minimize the horrific aspect of the test, we decided to have the brain matter and blood changed to unnatural colors; we also asked to have faces essentially featureless. I got JFK's hat size from the Kennedy Library and our Aussie scientists did the rest.

Michael Yardley's ammunition came from a collector who had Carcano rounds from the same lot as Oswald's, and his rifle was very close to the one Oswald bought from Klein's.

The TSBD distance, angle and elevation are well known, as is the Love Field weather bureau information I supplied for the wind speed and gusts recorded at 12:30pm just a few miles north of Dealey Plaza.

As a final check, I referred to the Muchmore film of the head shot, which shows Hill's and Moorman's coats blowing parallel to the limousine. That visual confirmation matched the weather bureau's records.

You may also wish to review the comments I made on the Discovery Channel's website (which have since been removed):

Q&A with Gary Mack:

November 17, 2008

JFK assassination expert, Gary Mack, served as a consultant for the Discovery show, "JFK: Inside the Target Car." Producer Tracy Staedter asked Gary five questions about his experience with the assassination and the making of the show.

1. The investigators involved with "JFK: Inside the Target Car" approached this decades' old controversy with an arsenal of experts, science and technology. What did they bring to the table that, in your 30-plus years of experience, you hadn't seen before?

GARY: The study offered the ability to examine the assassination in a new way, one that had never been done before. If we accurately recreated the physical aspects of the fatal shot to Kennedy’s head, we could observe whether the bullet’s effects match what appears in the Zapruder home movie of the shooting.


2. What was your favorite part of this experience?

GARY: The recreations in Dealey Plaza where the assassination actually happened, and those at a California gun range for our test shots. In Dallas, we had actors assuming the approximate positions of those in the presidential limousine. With Kennedy, however, we had to place our actor in the exact posture for both a suspected grassy knoll shot by a second gunman and the window shot from the former Texas School Book Depository.


3. Given the modern-day approach to this answering the controversial question, did you think that the investigators might find something new? Why or why not?

GARY: We had no idea what would happen and that’s what made the experience quite an adventure. We set up our targets and shooters as accurately as possible and stepped back to see and report on the results. We hoped our tests would be conclusive one way or another; the worst result, of course, would have been for the studies to have been inconclusive and, therefore, would not contribute to today’s knowledge of what really happened.


4. Even though the Discovery investigators used a slew of advanced technology and science, they still came up with the same results as the Warren Commission. What, in your opinion, does that say about the Warren Commission's tools as investigators?

GARY: The Warren Commission relied primarily upon trained FBI, Secret Service, Dallas Police and other investigators. Despite popular opinion and numerous revelations over the years of unanswered questions and unfollowed leads, no hard, unquestioned, evidence has surfaced showing anyone other than Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy. It is fair to question, however, if he was working with others or whether he was the one firing. No test could answer those questions, of course.


5. Do you think that using more sophisticated techniques to draw essentially the same conclusion as the Warren Commission was a wasted use of technology? Why or why not?

GARY: Public opinion surveys have shown, starting that weekend in 1963, that most people do not believe only one man was responsible for the death of a president. What’s obvious in hindsight now is that government apparently believed most would accept the findings and move on to other concerns. That didn’t happen, so others, both private citizens and a second government investigation in the late 70s, delved further into the assassination. The result has been a blur of conflicting theories and opinions over the years that may or may not have any basis in fact. Oliver Stone’s “JFK” film popularized the “back and to the left” observation of the shooting that seemed to prove a second gunman fired from the front. Our test examined what crime scene investigators would have done in 1963 had they had been able to study the car before its evidence was disturbed. We also had the new ability to recreate a human head and fire actual bullets at it to observe the results. There could be no such study, and this program could not have been made, without high technology being able to duplicate the mass and density of a human head. We may have demonstrated a new way to analyze crime scenes and thus give law enforcement one very effective new tool!


Gary Mack Answers Blog Comments:

November 21, 2008

Gary Mack, curator at The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, was asked by the producers to oversee the production and content of the Discovery Channel show, "JFK: Inside the Target Car." We asked for his personal comments about the program and answers to some of the questions following the premier broadcast. For brevity, the questions have been reworded:

QUESTION: Why didn’t your test include Kennedy being knocked back and to the left as seen in the film?

GARY MACK: That movement, which is so obvious in the Zapruder film, was a separate response. We only tested the initial effect of the bullet striking the skull and where the blood spatter went. For test-to-test consistency, it was important to have the heads mounted in the exact same position each time, so we mounted them on a rigid platform.


QUESTION: I noticed that Jackie Kennedy was not in the right position with regard to Kennedy in your Dealey Plaza test. [See photo below.]



GARY MACK: She wasn’t and we didn’t catch it at the time. At the moment of the fatal shot, Jackie’s head was in front of JFK, whereas our actor’s head was behind him. However, that error had no bearing on the purpose of the recreation in Dallas. The only actor who needed to be seated correctly was JFK, and he was perfectly placed. After all, we were only trying to show whether or not a sharpshooter could see his target -- Kennedy -- from the various locations.


QUESTION: You said you had four target skulls, but I only saw three of them being shot. What happened to the missing target?

GARY MACK: The “cutting room floor,” as they say, removed for time and clarity by Discovery. Their decision was reasonable, as there wasn’t enough time to include everything. The show’s producers and I very much wanted the scene to be shown; for that reason, it will be included in the DVD release of the show. .... For that shot, fired from behind, Michael missed the spot on the skull slightly, resulting in damage on the right side of the skull. Nevertheless, the blood spray pattern was very similar to the second attempt from our Depository window.


QUESTION: So what happened to the bullets you fired? Were they examined after the shots?

GARY MACK: Michael Yardley fired four times, but only one bullet was recovered. One bullet, of course, fragmented as it was designed to do. Two of the other three were never found. The two bullets fired from behind went through the target and continued through the mock limousine and struck the ground. One went off down the gun range and the other lodged under the tire of the wind machine. It was significantly deformed, but that could have happened when it struck the ground first.


QUESTION: So the bullets that hit the head did not fragment like Oswald’s did?

GARY MACK: No, and that was quite a surprise. Carcano bullets are military, metal jacketed bullets designed not to fragment upon impact. Oswald’s did, but ours did not. We do not know why that happened.


QUESTION: Why did you choose such odd colors for the brain interior?

GARY MACK: We did not want to use red, since that would have been rather gross to watch. And we couldn’t use a clear liquid since that wouldn’t show up on camera. For best visibility on television, we used bold colors that were easy to see. The HD version of the show has clearer images than the regular TV version.


QUESTION: Why did you use a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle for the grassy knoll shot? Wouldn’t a gunman there use something smaller or less noisy?

GARY MACK: As mentioned by our narrator, we could have used almost anything, since we were dealing with a hypothetical situation. We decided on an identical rifle to Oswald’s because, if he had been framed for the assassination (Oswald claimed he was “a patsy”), it seems likely that another gunman would use the same ammunition. If a different weapon were used, investigators would find that evidence and conclude there were two guns. A conspiracy to frame Oswald would want investigators to think there was only one gun.


QUESTION: How do you really know the wind was blowing straight at the car? I know you referenced the weather bureau data, but maybe the wind gusts came at an angle?

GARY MACK: A home movie by Marie Muchmore, taken from the other side of the street from Zapruder, shows the moment of the fatal head shot. Eyewitness Jean Hill appears near the limousine and her coat is blown directly to her right, thus indicating the precise direction of the wind at that moment in time.


QUESTION: I noticed that your depository shot severely damaged the top right of the target skull, but that’s not what happened to Kennedy. Why the difference?

GARY MACK: Although our test shot struck very, very close to the actual bullet entry hole, no such test can be absolutely exact. What’s more important is the effect of the bullet and whether or not the blood spatter matches the film of the actual shooting or not.


QUESTION: Why did you ignore the "magic bullet theory" that Kennedy and Connally were both wounded by one bullet?

GARY MACK: We tackled that theory in the third of four Unsolved History programs for the Discovery Channel. In that program, Beyond the Magic Bullet, the producers concluded that the "magic bullet" was possible, though the results may not have been as conclusive as the test in "JFK: Inside the Target Car."

Best regards,

Gary Mack

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

Subject: "JFK: Inside The Target Car"
Date: 7/5/2009 3:38:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Gary Mack

---------------------------------

Hi again Gary,

Thank you for your very (very) detailed return e-mail regarding the "Inside The Target Car" program. There's a lot of good and informative stuff in that Q&A.

I'm sure that the hardline conspiracy theorists, however, have already claimed that all of your answers are "not good enough", but that's to be expected from people who desperately want a conspiracy (and a Grassy Knoll gunman) in the JFK case.

Thanks again.

Regards,
David Von Pein

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

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (JULY 5, 2009)

"JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" (PART 1)

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


REVIEW OF THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL DOCUMENTARY
"JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" (2008):

On November 16, 2008, the Discovery Channel cable television network
aired the fourth and (evidently) last in a mini-series of "JFK" programs
for that network's "Unsolved History" television series, entitled
"JFK: Inside The Target Car".

Utilizing groundbreaking techniques, the Discovery Channel, along with
award-winning sharpshooter Michael Yardley and an Australian company
that specializes in creating surrogate dummies, went about the task of
trying to simulate the fatal gunshot that struck the head of President
John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963.

And that fatal shot was, indeed, simulated with a very good degree of
accuracy, as Yardley (on a California test-firing range) took aim at a
human-like head filled with simulated brain tissue from a mock firing
position that represented the sixth-floor sniper's perch inside the
Texas School Book Depository Building in Dallas.

The result of that "Depository" test shot, when compared with the
"blood spray" pattern seen in Abraham Zapruder's famous home movie of
the actual assassination of JFK in 1963, was almost identical in nature
to that of the Zapruder Film -- with the spray pattern of blood and
brain tissue from Yardley's test shot matching the real Zapruder Film to
a tee (as was shown in side-by-side comparisons on the Discovery
Channel broadcast).

The direction of the spray of blood and brain tissue was almost all
FORWARD of the head (a head that was shot from behind), with one
interesting exception (also captured on film by the high-speed cameras
that were used to document the test) -- one chunk of brain tissue went
flying to the REAR after the surrogate head was hit from BEHIND by
Yardley's 6.5-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano bullet (a bullet just like
the type Lee Harvey Oswald used in his rifle in 1963).

For decades, conspiracy theorists have argued that it would have been
impossible for JFK to have been hit from behind and still have brain
matter end up on the TRUNK of the Presidential limousine afterward.
This Discovery Channel test positively debunks that conspiracy notion
for all time--without a shred of a doubt.

Another very impressive part of the "Target Car" program is when we
see Mr. Yardley take two shots (on the California range again) from a
location in front of JFK's car -- i.e., from a position that simulated
the famous Grassy Knoll in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.

And those two "Grassy Knoll" gunshots were very interesting, in that
they effectively proved beyond virtually ALL doubt that John Kennedy
was definitely NOT hit in the head by a bullet fired from the Grassy
Knoll.

The first "Knoll" simulated shot, using a different type gun and
bullet (instead of a Carcano, Yardley used a Winchester rifle and a
"soft point" bullet), literally blew the surrogate head right off of its
spring-based "neck". [See the video below.] It was actually a rather
unnerving test, with the head being totally blown to bits, with nothing
left on the "neck" to even analyze afterward. And, of course, nothing
even close to that kind of "obliteration" of JFK's head occurred in
Dealey Plaza back in '63.



Thankfully, the Discovery Channel and Mr. Yardley had enough of these
human-like surrogate heads (four in total) to perform a second test
shot from the Grassy Knoll firing location -- and this time Yardley
fired a 6.5-millimeter bullet through a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle like
Lee Harvey Oswald's.

And the results of that test were just as I had predicted they would be:

"Any...shot from a simulated "Grassy Knoll" firing position would no
doubt have resulted in the test skull having quite a bit of damage to
the LEFT side of the head (which we don't find at all in the real head
of John Kennedy)." -- DVP; November 1, 2008

Yardley's test bullet went clear through the simulated JFK head,
entering near the right temple and exiting on the other side, causing
a good deal of damage to the LEFT SIDE of the head....which is
something that positively did not happen to John Kennedy in 1963. The
left side of Kennedy's head at his autopsy was completely undamaged,
as we can easily see via this official autopsy photograph of JFK taken
on the night of 11/22/63:



So, in the final analysis, I don't think there can be much doubt
whatsoever about the direction from which President Kennedy received
his fatal head wounds -- that shot HAD to have come FROM BEHIND the
President.

Of course, that particular fact (i.e., JFK was shot only one time in
the head, with that shot coming from behind) was actually arrived at
back in November 1963, during JFK's autopsy at the Bethesda Naval
Medical Center, and this autopsy picture below proves that fact:



But it's also nice to be able to put this issue to bed once and for all
from a strictly scientific and "hands-on" testing standpoint, with an
actual test using lifelike skulls and real bullets being done to check
out what happens to a human head when it is hit with a Mannlicher-
Carcano (Oswald-like) bullet from the front. We now have the answer.
And it's not a surprising answer at all -- the LEFT side of the head
will suffer major damage. And since this did not happen to JFK in '63,
the math is fairly easy to do from that point forward.


OTHER "INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" COMMENTS:


The final results of the actual test firings that were done by Michael
Yardley are very impressive indeed, with those results driving a big
fat nail of doom into the heart of many conspiracy theories
surrounding the death of JFK (at least the theories that offer up the
notion that Kennedy was hit in the head by a frontal gunshot at any
rate)....but there were three things in the "Target Car" documentary
that had me scratching my head a little bit as I watched them:

1.) The Discovery Channel team and Yardley and Sixth Floor Museum
curator Gary Mack chose four areas within Dealey Plaza as potential
shooting locations (not counting Lee Harvey Oswald's Sniper's Nest on
the 6th Floor of the Book Depository).

But of those four possible places where a gunman could have been, I
believe that only one of them is a location that has seriously been
considered as a source for any gunfire by a vast majority of
conspiracy theorists over the many years since the assassination. And
that one location is behind the picket fence on the Grassy Knoll on
the north side of Elm Street, which is an area that's a little bit
west of the even-more-famous "Badge Man" shooting position. It's from
this shooting location that Yardley's shot resulted in major damage to
the left side of the test dummy's head.

But the other three "frontal" shooting spots were all very strange
ones, in my opinion, with very few people that I have ever encountered
(even hardcore conspiracy kooks) believing that shots came from any of
these three locations, which included an area on the far-south side of
Dealey Plaza (the south-side "Grassy Knoll"), and another location on
top of the south side of the Triple Underpass, and a third on the
north end of the Underpass (but not actually on top of the Underpass
bridge itself).

Now, maybe some conspiracists believe that those three locations
contained a gunman who fired shots at JFK back in '63, but I sure as
heck don't think that that number of theorists is very high at all.

For one thing, if shots had come from either of the two SOUTH-SIDE
locales, why did no witnesses report hearing any shots at all coming
from the SOUTH end of the Plaza? I doubt you could find any witness
who suggested that shots had come from that far SOUTH in Dealey Plaza.

And for another thing, as Gary Mack rightly and logically points out
to the audience during the Discovery Channel program when talking
about the north-side shooting location near the Underpass, any shot by
a gunman from that spot (or ANY location on top of the Underpass
itself) would have almost certainly been detected by the many railroad
workers--not to mention the TWO uniformed Dallas police officers--who
were watching the motorcade from just a few yards away, from atop the
Triple Underpass itself.

Would a gunman have been so bold and reckless to have placed himself
in such a vulnerable and wide-open position when firing a rifle at the
President? Common sense is telling me--no way.

Therefore, I'm wondering why the Discovery Channel people even
bothered to speculate about those three crazy-as-all-get-out potential
shooting locations in the first place? It seemed quite strange that
precious time would have been wasted in a 40-plus-minute TV
documentary by speculating about such obviously-insane firing
positions within Dealey Plaza.

IMO, the more commonly-accepted possible shooting points of the Dal-
Tex Building, or the County Records Building, or Gary Mack's own
famous "Badge Man" location would have been more appropriate when
speculating about any potential additional non-Depository gunmen in
Dealey Plaza. But none of those three locations I just mentioned was
even brought up in the Discovery documentary.


2.) When positioning the occupants in the limousine, the Discovery
Channel has placed Jackie Kennedy in an absurd position inside the
car. The documentary shows Jackie's head situated in a place that
appears to be BEHIND her husband's head at the time of Zapruder Frame
#312. But in the Zapruder Film, we can see that Jackie's head is very
much to the FRONT of President Kennedy's head.

Now, I realize that the perspective of the limousine's occupants for
any "frontal" gunman would be different when compared with Mr.
Zapruder's pretty much STRAIGHT ON point-of-view as of Z-Frame 312.
But even accounting for this difference in perspective, it appears to
me that the Discovery people have got Jackie severely out of position
in the car at Z312:



NOTE: The above comparison photo comes courtesy of assassination
researcher David Emerling, who was kind enough to e-mail me that
comparison shot. The picture on the right side, btw, was taken from a
spot in front of the fence near the Triple Underpass on the north side
of Elm Street, which is one of those three crazily insane firing
positions being examined during the documentary as potential places to
put a sniper.

Also, the documentary program has both of Jackie's arms wrapped around
her husband at the time of Frame 312, which is not accurate at all.
Not even close. Here's Zapruder Frame 312:




3.) I'm wondering why the test shots couldn't have simply been done in
the best possible place to perform such a test -- right in Dealey Plaza
itself (and from the 6th-Floor window inside the Book Depository itself)?

The Discovery people already had arranged for the police to completely
close off Elm Street and Dealey Plaza for a period of time for their
initial "looking through the rifle scope" tests (to see whether certain
angles within the Plaza were feasible ones or not for the head shot),
so I wonder why they didn't just go the whole nine yards and perform
the actual test shots that were fired into the surrogate skulls from
Dealey Plaza as well?

I know that Oswald's Sniper's-Nest window is now technically "off
limits" to visitors of Mr. Mack's Sixth Floor Museum. But surely an
exception could have been made to allow Mr. Yardley to use that
corner window to fire just that one shot at a dummy's head.

If the test shots could have been fired right at the scene of the
crime itself (Dealey Plaza), I think it would have been better all the
way around, and mainly to silence even more critics of the lone-
assassin conclusion.

But by doing the actual shooting tests in California, the naysayers
can now argue that the tests weren't set up right...or that the
distances cannot be confirmed...or that the height of Oswald's window
wasn't measured with accuracy...etc., etc.

But I'm guessing that some legal restrictions (or some kind of
roadblock anyway) prohibited the shooting tests from being done right
there in Dealey Plaza. That's too bad, too, because unless I miss my
guess, a head-shot test performed from the actual crime scene would
have been even MORE powerful and conspiracy-refuting.

Despite my three quibbles listed above, I very much enjoyed "Inside
The Target Car". It's a program that proves, via filmed scientific
tests, that the Warren Commission and the autopsy doctors were 100%
correct -- the fatal bullet that hit JFK in the head on 11/22/63 came
from behind the President's car. There can be no doubt about that
fact.

My thanks to the Discovery Channel, and to the Australian team of
people who built the four human-like heads, and to Gary Mack.
Together, this group of people--via the TV documentary "JFK: Inside
The Target Car"--has placed on film another important piece of
documentation relating to the truth about the assassination of
President John F. Kennedy.

----------------------------------------

"The more scientific and ballistics tests that are done (like the
Discovery Channel's tests and Dale Myers' excellent computer
animation projects relating to both the SBT and the acoustic/Dictabelt
evidence), the further and further away from a multi-gun conspiracy
we get in the JFK case.

"Shouldn't that make even the staunchest CTer pause and ask -- I
wonder how this can be...if JFK was really hit from the front and rear,
like Oliver Stone, Jim Garrison, et al, insist he was?" -- DVP; 11/1/2008

David Von Pein
November 2008

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


ALSO SEE:







"Inside The Target Car" Preview

Another "Target Car" Preview

"JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet"

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

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 605)

EducationForum.com

J. RAYMOND CARROLL SAID:

There [is nothing] sinister about Dave [Perry] helping Gary Mack to land the Curator's job at the Sixth Floor Museum. Sounds like Dave Perry is a good neighbor.


GARY MACK SAID (VIA AN E-MAIL
SENT TO CARROLL):

Dave Perry had absolutely nothing to do with me gaining the Archivist (now Curator) position at The Sixth Floor Museum. Folks forget that I was one of the original unpaid consultants for the Museum beginning two years or so before it opened in 1989.

For the newly-created position I had to make a complete career change and, if I got the job, had to take two years of entry level archival and curatorial training at area universities. [James] DiEugenio’s review – and “facts” - are absurd.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I agree, Gary. Very much so.

James DiEugenio has probably spent more time trying to debunk, undermine, and trash the Discovery Channel's 2008 documentary "JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" than it took to produce the program itself. DiEugenio's oversized 3-part "Target Car" review is completely meaningless.

Regardless of the conspiracy-oriented spin that people like Jim DiEugenio continuously want to apply to the "Inside The Target Car" program, it won't change the following bottom-line fact:

The November 2008 "Target Car" documentary achieved one of its ultimate goals by answering this question --- COULD PRESIDENT KENNEDY HAVE BEEN SHOT IN THE HEAD FROM THE GRASSY KNOLL?

To repeat what I said earlier this month on this issue:

"The conspiracy nuts/retards act as if Gary Mack ALL BY HIMSELF is holding the "lone assassin" scenario together with his bare hands. As if Gary Mack...or ANY single person...needs to do ANYTHING at all in order to hold together the facts of the JFK assassination...with those facts being: Lee Harvey Oswald killed two people in Dallas on 11/22/63, and he almost certainly acted alone. (And so did Mr. Ruby.)

Gary Mack could retire tomorrow and the "LN" scenario wouldn't crumble to bits. How could it? It's built on a bedrock of facts -- facts that Gary Mack HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH. As for the "JFK: Inside The Target Car" program -- it served its main purpose very well (despite Mr. DiEugenio's and Ms. [Milicent] Cranor's seemingly endless efforts to rip the program to pieces with a million meaningless words of criticism).

And that "main purpose" was to try and find out (via actual tests with various types of rifles) if President Kennedy could have been shot in the head with a gunshot that came from the FRONT of his automobile. And the answer to that question is a firm and undeniable "No", the President could not possibly have been shot in the head with a rifle bullet that came from anywhere in FRONT of his car.

As the "Target Car" program amply demonstrated via actual tests, if a frontal shot had hit JFK in the head, his head would have probably either been completely blown off of his neck or would have resulted in obvious damage to the LEFT side of his head (if a lower-powered rifle like Oswald's Carcano had been used by a frontal gunman).

[...]

The remainder of the "Target Car" program, other than the two "From The Knoll" tests, is not very important at all (in my opinion), because once it can be established that President Kennedy COULD NOT have been shot in the head from the FRONT (which is a fact that was definitely established, very firmly, in the "Target Car" program), then the math concerning the fatal head shot becomes pretty simple to perform....even for hardline conspiracy theorists.

[...]

A secondary "purpose" that was accomplished during the...documentary was to see if Oswald's 6th-Floor gunshot to JFK's head could be duplicated within a reasonable degree of accuracy. And
it was.

[...]

But I'm sure that the conspiracy kooks of Planet Earth will continue to cry "FOUL" when examining every single test that has ever been done in trying to simulate the wounds of President Kennedy, including all of the Discovery Channel specials...[which all favor] the likelihood of a single assassin named Lee Oswald being able to perform his wicked deed of murder in 1963." -- DVP; June 22, 2009

David Von Pein
June 30, 2009

"JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" (PART 2)

A KOOK AT IMDB.COM SAID:

>>> "[Gary] Mack and his pathetic attempts to sell the cover story
are clearly a liability to the Lone Nut brigade. They haven't answered
your question because they have no answer except the one that they
are incapable of giving. That being the truth which is "Mack lies all the
time because lies are the only way to keep this "story" going". I wouldn't
be surprised if Mack suddenly takes a leave of absence from the Sixth
Floor Museum. Even the lone nuts can see when something just isn't
working." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN THEN SAID:

The conspiracy nuts/retards act as if Gary Mack ALL BY HIMSELF is
holding the "lone assassin" scenario together with his bare hands.

~Big 'ol LOL here~

As if Gary Mack...or ANY single person...needs to do ANYTHING at all
in order to hold together the facts of the JFK assassination...with
those facts being: Lee Harvey Oswald killed two people in Dallas on
11/22/63, and he almost certainly acted alone. (And so did Mr. Ruby.)

Gary Mack could retire tomorrow and the "LN" scenario wouldn't crumble
to bits. How could it? It's built on a bedrock of facts -- facts that
Gary Mack HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH.

As for the "JFK: Inside The Target Car" program -- it served its main
purpose very well, despite Mr. DiEugenio's and Ms. Cranor's seemingly-
endless efforts to rip the program to pieces with a million
meaningless words of criticism.

And that "main purpose" was to try and find out (via actual tests with
various types of rifles) if President Kennedy could have been shot in
the head with a gunshot that came from the FRONT of his automobile.

And the answer to that question is a firm and undeniable "No", the
President could not possibly have been shot in the head with a rifle
bullet that came from anywhere in FRONT of his car.

As the "Target Car" program amply demonstrated via actual tests
[see the video below], if a frontal shot had hit JFK in the head, his
head would have probably either been completely blown off of his neck
or would have resulted in obvious damage to the LEFT side of his head
(if a lower-powered rifle like Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano had been
used by a frontal gunman).



A secondary "purpose" that was accomplished during the November 2008
"Target Car" documentary was to see if Oswald's sixth-floor gunshot to
JFK's head could be duplicated within a reasonable degree of accuracy.
And it was.

The shot from the simulated sixth-floor location did remove a larger
portion of the head of the surrogate dummy, but the general wound
pattern was similar to that of Kennedy's.

As in the similar skull tests done by Dr. Alfred Olivier for the Warren
Commission in 1964 and the later tests with human skulls done by
Dr. John K. Lattimer in the 1970s, it's possible that the extended
damage to a substitute skull is to be expected in tests like those,
due to the fact that a real-life human scalp was not covering those
test skulls.

A real human scalp would tend to minimize the skull damage (to a
small extent at least), as Dr. Olivier fully explained during his 1964
Warren Commission testimony [at 5 H 89]:

ARLEN SPECTER -- "And what does that show as to damage done to the
[test] skull?"

DR. ALFRED G. OLIVIER -- "It blew the whole side of the cranial cavity
away."

MR. SPECTER -- "How does that compare, then, with the damage inflicted
on President Kennedy?"

DR. OLIVIER -- "Very similar. I think they stated the length of the
defect, the missing skull was 13 centimeters, if I remember correctly.
This, in this case, it is greater, but you don't have the limiting
scalp holding the pieces in, so you would expect it to fly a little
more, but it is essentially a similar type wound."

MR. SPECTER -- "Does the human scalp work to hold in the human skull
in such circumstances, to a greater extent than the simulated matters
used?"

DR. OLIVIER -- "Yes, we take this into account."


But I'm sure that the conspiracy kooks of Planet Earth will continue
to cry "FOUL" when examining every single test that has ever been done
in trying to simulate the wounds of President Kennedy, including all
of the Discovery Channel specials.

And even though tests like those done by Olivier and Lattimer and the
Discovery Channel have ALL favored the likelihood of a single assassin
named Lee Oswald being able to perform his wicked deed of murder in
1963, the conspiracy seekers will never tire of wagging their tongues
in useless attempts at undermining the lone-assassin truth that exists
in the John F. Kennedy murder case.

I haven't (yet) had the desire (or the stomach) to read any of James
DiEugenio's anti-"Target Car" review....but I wonder what he has to
say about the two very impressive "From The Grassy Knoll" rifle tests
that were done by the Discovery Channel?

Those two tests, as I alluded to earlier, prove beyond all reasonable
doubt that if a gunshot had struck JFK in the head from the RIGHT-
FRONT of the President's limousine, President Kennedy would have
certainly sustained considerable injuries to the LEFT side of his head
(even when using a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle like Oswald's).

The remainder of the "Target Car" program, other than the two "From
The Knoll" tests, is not very important at all (in my opinion), because
once it can be established that President Kennedy COULD NOT have
been shot in the head from the FRONT (which is a fact that was definitely
established, very firmly, in the "Target Car" program), then the math
concerning the fatal head shot becomes pretty simple to perform....even
for hardline conspiracy theorists.

David Von Pein
June 2009

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (JUNE 22, 2009)

"JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" (PART 4)

http://JFKAssassinationForum.com


>>> "David, let me ask a few questions [re: the 2008 Discovery Channel documentary "JFK: Inside The Target Car"]. In front of the fence or behind? Near the Triple Underpass? How much?" <<<

If you're referring to the comparison photo below (and I'm pretty sure you are), that "scope" view is taken from a north-side shooting position, and in front of the fence, right out in plain sight for anyone to see the sniper:



To be fair, that particular shooting location was actually a slightly different one from the one that Gary Mack, et al, decided would have been a doable shooting spot for some goofball gunman firing at JFK.

The actual gunman's purported position was more-or-less ON TOP of the Triple Underpass (or slightly north of it), on higher ground. The photo below from the "Target Car" program shows Gary Mack and Michael Yardley standing in the approximate spot. There's a short fence there that the Discovery people decided could have been a good place for a gunman.



But, in 2008, the foliage in Dealey Plaza was such that a shot from that particular on-top-of-the-underpass shooting location was not possible, because it was obstructed by the foliage.

But the trees were not an obstruction in 1963 (per Gary Mack). So, in order to simulate at least the correct angle from the gunman to the limo, and in order to get an unobstructed view of JFK in the car, the Discovery people moved a little lower, in front of the fence/Underpass, and looked through the scope from the lower position.


>>> "Not only Jackie's actor was positioned absurd (as you said) also JFK's actor was placed wrong." <<<

I disagree with you there. The JFK stand-in looks to be in approximately the correct position for the Z313 head shot, IMO. And having the JFK actor positioned correctly is really the most important point.

But I agree that the Jackie stand-in's posture isn't even close to being correct. And Gary Mack himself has also said she was positioned incorrectly, which is an especially odd error for Gary to make, since he probably knows the Zapruder Film forward and backward by heart.

But, then too, for people who might think that Mr. Mack DELIBERATELY placed Jackie out of position....you must also ask yourself this question:

Since Gary Mack certainly knows the JFK case inside-out (plus the fact that I believe Gary was staring right at a photo of Z-Frame 312 when he was positioning the stand-in "Jackie" in such a ridiculous posture in the limousine)....how could he POSSIBLY hope to get away with such deliberate trickery?

He is certainly smart enough to realize that such a deliberate "mistake" would be exposed by the many "JFK Assassination Junkies" of the world almost immediately after the airing of the Discovery Channel program. (And it was exposed immediately.)

On the flip-side of that coin, it's also hard for me to imagine Gary Mack making such a "Jackie" error by mistake either (knowing the photographic record of this assassination as I know he does know it).

So, I'm left in complete bewilderment as to how that error with Jackie ever came about in the first place, because it makes absolutely no sense no matter which side of the fence (CT or LN) you reside on.

~big shrug~


>>> "Where was this car exactly positioned, shown in this frame? At the Z#313 spot?" <<<

I believe I'm correct in saying that the Discovery Channel photo shown earlier [and again below] is supposed to be depicting the limo at Z312, one frame before the "impact" frame of Z313.




>>> "Every objective person must be skeptical about the accuracy of the DC [Discovery Channel] work in this documentation, because in fact they placed the car dummy/head dummy wrong in California -- ergo, what is correct and what's not, whether intentional or a mistake?" <<<

Why are you saying the dummy head was placed wrong "in California"? The comparison picture above shows the limo in Dealey Plaza itself, not in California. And the dummy heads that Yardley actually shot at in California WERE positioned accurately.

But even if the dummy heads WEREN'T positioned perfectly accurately during the test shots, it would matter very little from the following perspective:

No matter what exact position the dummy heads were in during Yardley's two simulated "Grassy Knoll" shots (as long as the Discovery filmmakers didn't have the heads turned completely around or otherwise in some obviously-cockeyed position [which they didn't]), those two "Knoll" simulated shots were going to totally demolish a long-held belief of conspiracy theorists -- the belief that a shot from the Grassy Knoll could have struck President Kennedy in the head.

Or do CTers think that if the Discovery Channel people had only moved the dummy heads a few inches this way or that way, it would have meant that Yardley's two "Knoll" shots would have NOT either totally blown the first dummy head completely off its simulated neck....or would have NOT resulted in any damage to the LEFT side of the surrogate head via the Carcano bullet?

And anybody who might think it would have made any difference at all WHERE Yardley shot from when he fired his soft-point Winchester bullet at the dummy head is a person who must not have seen the results of that Winchester bullet [see the video below]. Because regardless of WHERE Yardley fired that particular shot (be it from the front, side, or from behind), the damage was still going to be catastrophic...i.e., that bullet would have no doubt obliterated the JFK dummy head no matter WHERE it was fired from.



David Von Pein
August 2009
August 2010

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (AUGUST 7, 2009)

"JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" (PART 5)

http://JFKAssassinationForum.com

http://JFKAssassinationForum.com


PAMELA BROWN SAID:

>>> "Although "DVP" loves to take any opportunity to ramble on about his theories about the assassination and pay homage to his heroes such as the Bug [Vincent T. Bugliosi] and Gary Mack either directly or indirectly through imitation, it is usually quickly apparent that he also prefers to allow others such as Mack and the Bug to do his thinking for him, and seems to have little interest in working through issues objectively. Such is also the dilemna [sic] of ITTC ["JFK: Inside The Target Car"], in that it conveniently tells everyone what to think, no matter what their footage actually shows. It also encourages everyone to allow Gary Mack and the DC [Discovery Channel] to do their thinking for them, and not to question what might
have been purposefully left out, and cheerily follow all the rabbit trails it sets up." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

In my opinion, the simulated Texas School Book Depository gunshot that was shown during the "Inside The Target Car" program wasn't nearly as important as the two "from the Knoll" simulated shots, which were two gunshots (from two different types of rifles) that prove beyond all possible doubt that no shot could have struck JFK in the head from the Grassy Knoll, which is the favorite location, of course, for the conspiracy theorists of the world to place their make-believe "frontal" gunman in Dealey Plaza.

"Pam" [Brown] apparently thinks the two "from the Knoll" simulated shots that sharpshooter Michael Yardley fired for the "Target Car" show were rigged in some way. That's a typical conspiracist mindset, of course, and it's a mindset that will never ever change when it comes to the hardline conspiracy theorists.

In other words -- Even when faced with rock-solid PROOF that they are dead wrong when it comes to their long-held beliefs of a Grassy Knoll gunshot killing President Kennedy, conspiracists will merely shake off the proof and begin their pro-conspiracy raving anew the next day, as if the proof they just witnessed the previous day never even existed.

Hardline JFK conspiracy theorists are, indeed, pathetic (as usual).


"BLACK OP RADIO" FOOTNOTE:

On a related "conspiratorial" note, I was treated to my weekly Thursday-night chuckle on August 13, 2009, when conspiracy guru James DiEugenio made his
first appearance this month on Len Osanic's weekly "Black Op Radio" program (linked HERE).

The biggest laugh from the August 13th show was when Mr. DiEugenio decided to add three additional suspects to the forever-growing list of potential conspirators in the JFK case. The three being: Buell Wesley Frazier, Marrion Baker, and Roy Truly.

DiEugenio thinks that the "curtain rod"/"paper bag" story told by Frazier is "questionable", and Jim also has now decided to believe that the whole Baker/Truly/Oswald/Lunchroom encounter is "questionable" as well.

In other words, DiEugenio apparently smells a rat when it comes to the things that were said (under oath) to the Warren Commission by Wesley Frazier, Marrion Baker, Roy Truly, and Linnie Mae Randle.

DiEugenio didn't mention Randle among his latest batch of plotters/liars, but he really has no choice but to put Linnie Mae under that same "questionable" umbrella too, since she is also on record as one of only two people who observed Lee Harvey Oswald carrying a long paper bag on the day of JFK's murder (with 19-year-old Depository employee Frazier, of course, being the other).

It must be great to be a conspiracy theorist, huh? You can just go on Internet radio (or wherever) and spout any stupid, unprovable nonsense you want to....and you'll get some people to believe you. And you never have to be worried about the actual evidence in the case either. Just say the evidence (and the testimony of multiple innocent witnesses) is "in question" or "questionable", as DiEugenio did on 8/13/09, and evidently that's good enough.

As I said -- pathetic.

David Von Pein
August 2009

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (AUGUST 14, 2009)

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 598)

PAT SPEER SAID:

DVP, the use of a FULLY-loaded soft point bullet [in the 2008 program, "JFK: Inside The Target Car"] was a strawman. Anyone who's read anything about wound ballistics would know that a fully-loaded soft-point bullet fired from anywhere in Dealey, and striking Kennedy in the skull, would have left far more metal in the brain, and exited from the opposite side. As a result, it seems pretty clear they took that shot to mislead their viewers, and convince them such a shot--a shot no one really proposes--did not occur.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

So, you think that most conspiracy theorists believe that the phantom "Knoll Shooter" shot JFK with a very LOW-powered gun and/or only a PARTIALLY-loaded bullet (vs. a "FULLY-loaded" one)?

IOW -- The stupid conspirators decided they'd give JFK a fightin' chance to survive by NOT USING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF FIREPOWER THAT THEY COULD GET THEIR HANDS ON.

I.E.,

The stupid conspirators were apparently as miserly and/or short of funds as Lee Harvey Oswald was on 11/22/63, so the "plotters" decided to use a crappy or semi-crappy weapon that fired bullets that weren't "FULLY-loaded" and that wouldn't even result in ANY metal fragments being found in the left half of JFK's head at all after the assassination, eh?

As can easily be seen via my comments above, it's very easy to defeat the conspiracists who reside in the "JFK Was Shot In The Head From The Grassy Knoll" club by utilizing common sense alone.

And when the actual EVIDENCE is thrown into the mix (along with the common sense that CTers lack), defeating these conspiracy advocates becomes a considerably easier task.


PAT SPEER SAID:

BTW, I also find it unlikely the head shot came from the front.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But, being very similar to a conspiracist named Thomas H. Purvis, you can manage to get to within shouting distance of the official lone-assassin truth of JFK's assassination, but you can't quite travel that extra few feet to reach the "LHO Did It All" endzone.

A very curious thing indeed. Not many CTers suffer from that odd affliction, but Mr. Speer and Mr. Purvis are certainly two that do.


PAT SPEER SAID:

My problem with the ["Inside The Target Car"] program has NOTHING to do with whether or not I disagree with their conclusion, and has EVERYTHING to do with its being a dishonest presentation.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It wasn't a dishonest presentation at all (at least as far as the meat-&-potatoes of the program are concerned; i.e., the three head-shot tests that were done and that ended up on the TV screen).

The program fired three bullets into test dummies and filmed the results. Simple as that.

You, Pat, I guess are upset at The Discovery Channel people for not using a much lower-powered weapon (or bullet) for the non-Carcano "Grassy Knoll" simulation.

But, like I said in an earlier post, since the Knoll shot is one that never occurred in the first place, the people doing the simulation of this non-existent gunshot had to make a choice of what type of rifle and ammunition to use.

And they chose a Winchester that fired a soft-nosed bullet (and why on Earth anyone would think that a group of conspirators would have chosen some type of weak-sister, half-assed, low-powered type of ammunition to achieve their goal of KILLING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES in Dealey Plaza, is a CTer mindset that I cannot understand in the slightest).

BTW, Pat, your earlier post didn't even mention the non-Carcano (Winchester) test shot. You wrote that post as if the Carcano "Knoll" shot was the only one done during the "Target Car" program.

Why did you write your post as if you were totally unaware of the Winchester rifle test shot?

David Von Pein
June 23, 2009

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 405)

DR. DAVID W. MANTIK SAID:

The final irony of this Discovery program ["JFK: Inside The Target Car"] is the reliance placed on eyewitnesses—there are just two, and it is, after all, 45 years later. Of course, the program had no choice: because the Secret Service bucket brigade had done its job so well at Parkland Hospital, the program could present no objective evidence of blood spatter from the actual crime scene. .... However, lone gunman theorists repeatedly remind us that eyewitnesses cannot be trusted and that their comments should simply be ignored. Now that the shoe has shifted, will anyone notice?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Totally untrue, of course.

Witnesses like Brennan, Markham, Davis, Davis, Scoggins, Benavides, and Callaway certainly haven't been "ignored" by lone-assassin believers.

And that's simply because those particular witnesses said something (such as IDing Lee Oswald with a gun in his hands) that is fully corroborated by OTHER STUFF (like ballistics evidence, fingerprints, and Oswald's own actions and lies). Ignoring those witnesses would be just plain silly.

Can anyone name one "conspiracy" type witness in Dealey Plaza or on 10th Street or at Parkland Hospital whose observations can be backed up with ballistics evidence (or any other hard, physical evidence of some kind)?

Alas, no such "conspiracy" witness exists, of course, because no shot was fired from the Grassy Knoll. Therefore, it's perfectly proper to dismiss such witnesses in favor of better evidence (such as the autopsy photos and X-rays, which prove ALL of the Parkland witnesses to be wrong, as amazing as that may sound).

Also....

Mantik's above comment -- "the final irony of this Discovery program is the reliance placed on eyewitnesses" -- is a rather weak argument when the "Inside The Target Car" documentary is weighed in full.

Dr. Mantik is referring to only two "blood spatter" witnesses in that above quote -- and, ironically, one of the two is motorcycle policeman Bobby Hargis, who is almost always used by the conspiracy theorists (not by LNers) when discussing the head "spray" and debris that struck Hargis after the fatal shot hit JFK in the head.

The only other witness referred to in the Mantik quote is a young man who happened to be in the Parkland parking lot and looked inside the bloody back seat of JFK's car before the crowd was shoved further back by police.

IMO, these two witnesses could have easily been cut out of the Discovery Channel program altogether, because they don't have much to offer anyway.

The "Target Car" program was mainly about re-creating the fatal head shot, and observing the differences in a surrogate head when that head is hit by a bullet being fired from both the rear and the front.

And that type of SCIENTIFIC reconstruction (and an evaluation of the holes in the mock heads after they've been struck with bullets from various locations) doesn't need any "witnesses" at all. The surrogate heads were simply shot from different locations, and the results were then filmed and examined. No Dallas witnesses required at all.

So when Mantik props up the Discovery Channel's "reliance" on those two completely unneeded eyewitnesses (who are peripheral, at best, to the program's main content), it sounds to me as if Dr. Mantik is digging deeper than usual for some "CT chaff". And that's probably because no conspiracy-favoring wheat was available for him to prop up in this instance.

David Von Pein
December 24, 2008

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1124)

BRAD MILCH SAID:

I was disappointed in James [DiEugenio's] & Len Osanic's interview from last night in that Mr. DiEugenio points out CBS left out the LHO sidewalk tree & the curve in Elm Street but forgot the most important detail of all......no representation for the SS followup car & its agents inside the car & outside on the two running boards was included in the re-enactment. IMHO, the public needs to focus on that issue of the vanishing guards & their car that was left out of the initial SS & FBI filmed re-enactments starting the week after the assassination & continuing into 1964.

Visit Mr. Von Pein's spectacular video collection & look for the SS followup car & actor stand in's for the agents in the Government re-enactments & those conducted by MSM in their TV specials, computer animators & TV mini-series & movies. You won't find them.

CBS used a portion of the SS film re-enactment & boldly told its audience that what they were watching was a filmed re-enactment of JFK's murder, when in fact what the audience was seeing was a car representing JFK's limo being driven as a solo target down Elm St. with no consideration for the big & taller obstacle that was directly behind it (Queen Mary) during the actual ambush.

Line of sight blockage wasn't a problem for an alleged assassin because Hoover & Rowley's boy removed it from an unsuspecting public that trusted them.

What Hoover's FBI & Rowley's SS did was like running an ad for a used car photo in the newspapers & not mentioning the other side of the car (not visible in the photo) is all smashed in.

I'm beginning to think some JFK researchers are afraid to discuss the missing SS followup car in the initial re-enactments & those that followed the past 53 years. I don't believe in tip toeing thru the tulips...I'm broadcasting it loudly here at the Ed Forum for those afraid to discuss it.

Someone needs to put a YouTube video on that subject out there. I'm emailing a couple visualists to help get the word out if the highest respected researchers are operating under some kind of gag order or fear.


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Brad, IMO, the MSM will never ever do a true reconstruction of what the WR says Oswald did.

They will always leave out something or other.

The key point that I tried to make last night was that, unbeknownst to the public, CBS had enlarged the target to at least twice as large as it would be in real life.

So Brad, with all that out there I think anyone of average intelligence can understand why there has never been a true reconstruction. And CBS had a fine opportunity to do so.


BRAD MILCH SAID:

Some of the public is gullible, James. They believe whatever the police & higher up the law enforcement food chain tells them.

The fast one Hoover & Rowley pulled by yanking the guards & their car out of their re-enactments that CBS & others in MSM followed their example is still played on the public today. Dale Meyers [sic] used it in his deceptive computer animation that so impressed Peter Jennings over a decade ago.

I've got some friends I know working on something for YouTube (I don't mess with videos).

It's the same with filmmakers....they'll show an actor portraying LHO firing off his carbine, but won't show the public the line of sight LHO allegedly had with replicas of the target car & the guards tailgating it historically & accurately positioned at key points on Elm Street (Z-313 being the most critical, because if there was blockage from the guards or their car, there could not have been a fatal headshot from that TSBD window).

All the public knows about the SS guards is what they saw in 'The Smoking Gun' or that Clint Hill appeared from out of nowhere to jump on the back of JFK's car to save Jackie. That's about it.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I don't think I've ever heard a conspiracy theorist complain about the Secret Service car being removed from any of the re-enactments. But that's an interesting theory indeed, especially since we know how close the Queen Mary follow-up car was to JFK's limo on Elm Street.

However, I doubt very much that the agents standing on the running boards posed any kind of a serious obstacle for Lee Harvey Oswald when he was shooting at the President from the TSBD. And, Brad, you're surely not suggesting that the follow-up car ITSELF was in any way blocking the view of an assassin who was shooting at Kennedy from the sixth floor, are you?

Here's the closest I could come to an actual "re-enactment" in Dealey Plaza with a car representing the Queen Mary Secret Service car also being used in the reconstruction. It's from a screen capture I took via the sixth-floor "Dealey Cam" on October 8, 2015, during the filming of Stephen King's mini-series "11/22/63". As we can see in this view from the "Oswald window", the Secret Service car does not get in the way of a shot at approximately the time of the fatal head shot. However, it's possible that the SS car should be a little closer to the back bumper of JFK's car here. The gap between the cars might be just a tad too big in the re-enactment done here. But it's not too far off. Click to enlarge:




More photos HERE and HERE.


And here's a video of the 2015 re-enactment:




BRAD MILCH SAID:

That's pretty good work, David! I'll step aside & let others tell you if the cars are in the correct places or not on Elm Street. The Queen Mary can be seen at the Z-313 spot in the Nix, Muchmore & Bronson films.

The height of the Queen Mary & its bulky hood & fat front fenders specifications are of interest to several folks good with math (I'm not one of them). I figure that if Stephen King could locate replicas of the JFK parade car & Queen Mary, someone else should too & get measurements. Measurements in conjunction with angles & the decline of the street could possibly answer some questions about the shooting as time goes by.

Now I ask you, David. If someone is going to pay the bucks to put a replica of JFK's parade car & the Queen Mary & position them as they were 53 years ago, why is [it] so hard for them to show the public what that looks like from an assassin's line of sight from the sniper's nest? Wouldn't it help convince more people that the murderer was in that window if people could see what he saw?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes, Brad, it would be nice to see a view from Oswald's window with the SS car (and its occupants) in the exact place they were in during the shooting. But in the long run, I doubt very much it would make any difference from an "Assassin's Line-of-Sight" POV. The SS car wasn't blocking Oswald's view of any part of JFK's body. And I think the 2015 photo of the Stephen King reconstruction pretty much proves that fact.

Even if you move the SS car up a few more feet, to the point where it's almost touching the bumper of the President's limousine, I still don't think that would affect Oswald's line of sight to JFK's head or upper back. If you disagree, that's fine. But I can't see the SS car or the agents in it as representing any kind of an obstacle for Oswald to have to cope with at all. And you're the first person I have ever talked with who seems to think otherwise.

But, as I said, it is an interesting subject.


BRAD MILCH SAID:

From what I can see, it appears there is clearance over the Queen Mary's windshield. I suspect Chris Davidson & other visual analysts are working your re-enactments photos over with a compass, ruler & protractor as I type this. That means that a shot over that obstacle was possible. It would have cleared the agents' heads in the front seat by mere inches or fractions. This demonstrates just how close the shooter came to killing more people than just JFK. Often the savageness of the crime is left out of the various theories on how the shooting occurred.

My interest from all this came from an on site visit to Dealey Plaza in the very early 1970s with a couple of Army buddies. We took turns standing, squatting or sitting at the Z-313 spot (there was no street X back then to point it out) while the others pretended to be the Queen Mary by standing a few feet back (closer to the TSBD). None of us could ever see the bottom of the sniper's nest window, regardless of what posture we used or what we sat or stood on (simulating car seats & running boards). Unscientific, yes, but it was all we had to use for visual tools.

Again, I commend you for creating your re-enactment photos. You corrected something that's been visually wrong for 53 years. Are you going to allow other researchers to use your photos if they give you proper credit?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Certainly. No problem. Use them all you want.

If I had known this topic would surface six months later, I would have created a lot more screen captures of the Stephen King re-enactments. (They did 17 total run-throughs on October 8th of last year.)

Here's another intriguing photo, which (I think) was taken from the 7th floor of the Depository (because the sixth-floor sniper's window is forever sealed off, as you know):




BRAD MILCH SAID:

@David Von Pein...

Before the crickets set in, I wanted to finish this day off by stating to you that what you shared with us here at the Education Forum in your 6th floor Museum box cam JFK ambush re-enactment photos & video is monumental (in my book). For me personally, it settles an issue that began in late 1974 & has nagged at me ever since. Since that time I believed a shot from the TSBD 'sniper's nest' was impossible; now I can see that it was possible. That says it all for me.

By rolling up your trouser legs & wading in the water with us all (and checking out all sides of the body of water we splash around in from time to time), you have demonstrated to me that you are a man of high scruples. If apologies are warranted to you from anything & everything I have ever said to you in the past in a mean spirited kind of way, I humbly & sincerely apologize. The truth is all I ever sought in the JFK murder case; if it's deemed to be on your side of the fence, that's where I'll quietly graze with the matter kinda settled in my mind.

I wasn't the only one that thought there was more to it than Oswald. Mrs. Rodgers (my 5th grade elementary school teacher) stayed with the story for months & thought it all sounded 'fishy' to her. From her lead, it became 'fishy' for a lot of her young students as well.

The Donald needs to drop out of the race IMHO. I'm now voting for you, David.

Hat off & a salute to you, Distinguished Sir.

Sincerely,
Brad Milch

PS: I can't let Dan Rather or CBS off the hook so easy. For a man who has a net worth of 70 million dollars, it wouldn't have killed him to put a replica of the SS Queen Mary behind the Lincoln used in the 1967 CBS TV specials & let us see what a sniper saw from the infamous window. Dan could afford it, he had the big bucks.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Brad,

As much as I appreciate your kind words above very much, I can't help but think that my run for the Presidency in 2016 (after knocking Mr. Trump out of the race) might be a tad premature. :)

The truth is, Brad, when I captured that image of the motorcade re-enactment via the Dealey Plaza Cam last October, I was doing it merely for the sake of pure entertainment. I wasn't attempting to prove any theory about JFK's assassination. I just seized upon an opportunity to do a little rubbernecking as the Stephen King film was being shot in the Plaza. And that "Dealey Cam" is a perfect "spying" tool. So I utilized it.

I stayed at my computer all day long that day, watching President Kennedy get shot over and over again. And then watched as the limousine carrying the mortally wounded President circled the Plaza after each filmed re-enactment, slowly moving east on Main Street, then driving out of sight in front of the old courthouse as the car moved into position for another "take". It was nearly dusk when they finally wrapped up the filming in Dealey Plaza. It was both fascinating and eerie at the same time, watching that limo round the corner of Main onto Houston 17 different times during the filming of the Stephen King mini-series.

But if one of my screen captures has inadvertently helped you in any way, that's great. But the thanks should probably go to Stephen King....and also to the person who decided to place that permanent camera in the window of the old Book Depository Building. :)

David Von Pein
April 22, 2016