Monday, August 7, 2017

I have received some very interesting observations from the new energetic researcher Amy Joyce. She has given us food for thought here:

Shooter's gun from Jackson photo (see attached): 
Compare to the gun from evidence (also attached). That's a pretty good closeup of the shooters gun.  Notice it doesn't appear to have a sight, like Ruby's gun. 

RC: It's a hard to say because the grey-scale of the gun and the sweater are so close. So, is there a sight on the Jackson pistol on our right or not?  As I look at it and try to conjure one there, I don't see it as being the same shape as the sight on our left. So, this indeed is a mystery. 
Also, where is the shooter's trigger finger?  You might be able tell. That white "blotch" may supposed to be a finger but looks way too long.  I'd think he'd still have his gun on the trigger or through that hole if he had just shot someone.

RC: I and others have pegged that as being his middle finger in the trigger. Here is a discussion of middle-finger usage from a Smith and Wesson forum. And note that someone brought up Ruby using his middle finger because you can see it in the photo:
Jack Ruby used this method when he iced Lee Oswald. You can see it in the photo.

I will simply add that I think the idea that the shooter used his middle finger to pull the trigger (whether you think he was Ruby or Bookhout) is PREPOSTEROUS. 

UPI photo of LC Graves getting the gun:
To me, that doesn't even look like a gun.....let alone a snub nose!  The barrel is extra long.  The only thing I can think of is that maybe the photo captured a splice in the floor in exactly that spot which only makes the "barrel" look longer.  I'm not sure though and I hope you can figure that out.

RC: Here is a collage of Grave's gun and the evidence gun:

More about the gun:
Remember the reporter?  "I saw the flash against his black sweatah", lol.  I watched every film in slow motion and never once saw a flash or smoke. 

Perhaps the reporter may have mistaken the car lights coming on for a flash. I am attaching screenshots of the Newsreel clip which, despite the blurriness, should show a flash and dissipating smoke if there was a gunshot ....but it doesn't!

RC: Amy, there are no genuine images of muzzle flash. There is a fake image that Backes and others point to. Here is the real muzzle flash from a Colt Cobra, and what they show looks nothing like this:

And below is the one that they claim:

*A close gunshot (within a foot of the victim) would leaved evidence on the clothing.  LHO's sweater had no burnt edges around the hole and no melting. There is also no evidence of gunshot residue that would have discolored the sweater.

RC: RIght, there is no sign of any damage to Oswald's sweater. We don't even see the hole in it. 

Gunshot residues emitted from the muzzle will travel out to distances of approximately 3 and 5 feet (good photos!):

They are familiar with examining evidence of gunshot victims.

Another thing, an officer wrote in his report that Oswald had powder burns on his skin.  According to my research, two or 3 layers of clothing (sweater, shirt, and t-shirt) would have protected him from that!

It could be that whenever Oswald was actually shot that they pulled up his shirt and fired directly where they knew fatal organ damage would occur.

Another thing I read was that when you give a gunshot victim to the chest area mouth to mouth, it helps kill them.  Pressure against those wounds near the chest encourage bleeding. I heard officers did that but I'm not sure.

RC: Amy, I am not familiar with any claims of Oswald having been given mouth to mouth. But, I have been saying for a very long time that we don't see any sign of damage to Oswald or even to his clothing. And to me, the whole arms akimbo arrangement of the Jackson photo was designed to cover up the area of impact to justify the absence of any visible trauma to Oswald and his clothing. Everything got covered up, AND IN THREE-TENTH OF A SECOND!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.