Hiya Groj, and I remember Kennedy saying "do you mean I am to kill myself" and Lister saying "Hey. it will drive the conspiracy theorists nuts" [img]smile.gif[/img] .

Gee - I could murder a curry ;)

<font color = lightgreen>Actually, the show Unsolved History took a refurbished rifle identical to the one found in the Book Depository, the same type of ammo that was found, and a trained marksman then placed him on a scaffold to reflect the same angle and distance to the target as Oswald would have to have been to accomplish the assassination. The results were that Oswald could have successfully hit Kennedy three times during the correct time frame from that trajectory, so he could have done it on his own.

However, there has never been a successfully convincing argument for Oswald to be acting on his own. That is to say, Oswald had to be working with someone or for someone because he had no reason to kill Kennedy by himself.

There is still the question of the fourth bullet that chipped the curb across Elm street from the Grassy Knoll. That bullet could not have come from Oswald if we assume that all Oswald's shots hit Kennedy and Connally. That shot could have come from any building on the corner of Elm and Houston streets.

Also, the Zapruder film clearly shows Kennedy's head snapping backwards, which indicates a hit from the front, which could have been from either the Grassy Knoll or the Triple Overpass; unfortunately, there were eyewitnesses to prove that there were no shooters on the Triple Overpass. Analysis of magnifications of photos from the Grassy Knoll indicate possible individuals standing in the shadows; the grain of 1963 film is too coarse for any closer or more accurate analysis.

My final conclusion: Oswald indeed shot Kennedy, but not alone. Most likely candidate group: the Mafia.</font>

Just one problem with your theory Azred. Given that you have specifically stated
why, if Oswald could have killed Kennedy on his own, would any organisation increase their risk of being caught by employing a second gunman?

Would not a shot in the upper back have a similar effect? Try pushing someone in the back when they're not tensed up - their head will snap back whiplash style.


Re. the conspiracy theories, I watched a long documentary where they recreated the entire area in a virtual reality simulation reconstructed from video footage. Once this model was created, they showed credibly that only one man was needed and that it had to be Oswald. I can't remember the details (over a year ago) but a bullet passed through somebody I seem to remember which explained a previously unexplained impact. Apparently the model was accurate to within centimetres and they helpfully were able to be clearly map the trajectories of the bullets along with the time index and the path of the motorcade.

<font color = lightgreen>To maximize the likelihood of a successful hit. Besides, you don't think that anyone who got caught would have lived for more than a week, do you? [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img] </font>

<font color = lightgreen>Yes, but the Zapruder film clearly shows the back part of Kennedy's head exploding. Remember that the official autopsy photos and the initial photos of Kennedy taken at Parkland Hospital have never been released.

**********
Personally, I think there was a second group involved in the hit, most likely the Mafia. However, the Single Shooter theory had to be correct to minimize the damage to the nation at that time. This was the height of the Cold War, so tensions with Russia were high, especially since it had been only one year since the Cuban Missile Crisis, and both the anti-Vietnam protests and the Civil Rights Movement were picking up steam, so there were many issues causing a lot of social and political instability. It was--and in many ways still is--a necessary lie.</font>