Post by Rob Caprio on Oct 30, 2018 9:36:23 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
i.pinimg.com/originals/7d/22/ea/7d22eab53858d02b136f605bf6f180a0.jpg
There are numerous witnesses that saw, heard, or saw and heard, some things on 11/22/63 that did not match the official theory, thus, their testimony was buried or ignored. Also, many witnesses would say they heard the second and third shots come very close together and this was simply NOT possible based on the Warren Commission’s (WC) own statements. They said it would take at a minimum 2.3 seconds to recycle the bolt of the alleged murder weapon and we can safely assume that is under IDEAL conditions. Who knows how long it would take to work an old bolt under stressful conditions? We will look at some of these witnesses over time in this series beginning with this post.
*************************************
One such witness was Ms. Lillian Mooneyham, a Deputy District Court Clerk, worked for the Records department in a nearby building. She would give the FBI an affidavit on 1/8/64. In the affidavit she said she watched the motorcade with colleagues, Mrs. Rose Clark and Ms. Jeannette Hooker, from a window in Judge Frank Wilson's courtroom which overlooked Main St. Once the motorcade passed the three women ran down to another courtroom, that of Judge Henry King, and watched from a window which faces Houston St. Ms. Mooneyham believed another Dept. Court Clerk, Mr. Bob Reid, was in the courtroom watching with them.
Ms. Mooneyham heard a gunshot and observed the President slump to the left of the seat of the car. Ms. Mooneyham, like many others, believed the first shot to be a firecracker. She also matched many others by saying there was a pause after the first shot and then two more came rapidly and close together. We know this could NOT be possible for Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) based on the statements given to us in the WC Report. Here is what they said again.
Quote on
Examination of the Zapruder motion picture camera by the FBI established that 18.3 pictures or frames were taken each second, and therefore, the timing of certain events could be calculated by allowing 1/18.3 seconds for the action depicted from one frame to the next. …Tests of the assassin’s rifle disclosed that at least 2.3 were required between shots.
Quote off
So why did so many witness state the second and third shots (or volleys?) they heard came so close together?
She also noticed the First Lady climb on the trunk of the car and then was diverted by a man who had fallen on the ground near the car.
Ms. Mooneyham's benefit comes after the shooting and this is why her affidavit would be buried in volume XXIV (CE-2098), and not be easy to find in the days of no index. After the shots Ms. Mooneyham left with Mrs. Clark and went to Judge Julien C. Hyer office on the third floor of the Records building, where they continued to watch the happenings from Jugde Hyer's window. Ms. Mooneyham would notice all the people running to cement pavilion that is between the knoll and the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD).
As stated numerous times before in this series, the majority of people went to the Grassy Knoll (GK) and railroad yard areas after the shots stopped, NOT the TSBD where the WC claimed the shots came from.
She would estimate it was 4 1/2 to 5 minutes after the shooting that she would look up to the sixth floor of the TSBD and see a figure of a man standing behind the sixth floor window behind some cardboard boxes. This man appeared, to Ms. Mooneyham, to be looking out of the window, however, the man was NOT close up to the window but was standing slightly back from it, so that she could NOT make out his features. She could not describe the man in any fashion, but this is not what makes her testimony important.
What does is the fact there was a man there at all. Who was this man 5 minutes after the shooting near the alleged Sniper’s Nest (SN)? We know it was not LHO as the WC had him in the second floor lunchroom within 90 seconds of the shooting, so who was this man? Why did the WC not find this interesting (or the police or FBI) to find out who this could have been? This is just one more example of no investigation being conducted, thus, the claim the case is solved or closed is just that - a claim - NOT a fact. Also, no verdict in a court of law makes this so as well.
She would also say the following in her affidavit:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0275b.gif
Mrs. MOONEYHAM stated that following the assassination of President JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY, she observed a re-enactment of the assassination on two separate occasions on one day, and it was her impression that the Presidential Motorcade was going slower than the re-enactment motorcade. She stated that it was her estimation that the Presidential car was going approximately five or six miles per hour at the time of the assassination, however, she noted that her estimation was based upon her observation of the Presidential car as it moved west on Elm away from the position where she was located. (Commission Exhibit (CE) 2098, p. 532; p. 2 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0275b.htm
Quote off
This testimony could invalidate the whole re-enactment due to the fact the limousine was going slower on 11/22/63 than it was when they were re-enacting the event. When re-enacting you must follow the EXACT conditions that occurred during the real event or you can’t hope to reach the SAME CONCLUSION. Her testimony is NOT easily dismissed as fifty-nine witnesses said the limousine either nearly stopped or came to a stop during the shooting so it could NOT have been going that fast when she saw it.
She would be corroborated by Mr. Robert Reid in his FBI affidavit (CE-2099) who said he watched the motorcade from the window of Henry King’s courtroom and he said he believed Mrs. Mooneyham was there too. He would say the following in his very limited FBI affidavit:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0275b.gif
Mr. REID heard the three gunshots fired and took his eye from the President's car because he noticed people who were lining the streets were either running or dropping to the ground after the shots were fired. He observed people running or dropping to the ground and noticed policemen running up the grass toward the railroad tracks between the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) and the railroad overpass. Mr. REID stated he observed nothing significant and at no time did he observe the windows of the TSBD building. (CE 2099, p. 532; p. 1 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0275b.htm
Quote off
The important part here is where he stated that he “noticed policemen running up the grass towards the railroad tracks between the TSBD and the railroad overpass” as that means the GK area. The next person she mentioned, Rose Clark, would also be ignored by the WC like Mooneyham and Reid. She too gave a FBI affidavit (CE-2100) about what she saw. After confirming she was with Mooneyham and Hooker in the courthouse she said the following:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0276a.gif
From the window of Judge HENRY KING's courtroom on the second floor of the courthouse, she heard the three shots, and it was her impression that the first shot was louder than the second and third shots. She noted that the second and third shots seemed closer together than the first and second shots. It was her impression that bystanders on the sidewalk on Elm Street ran toward the cement pavilion on the north side of Elm Street, and she noticed that the President's automobile came almost to a halt following the three shots, before it picked up speed and drove away. Mrs. CLARK did not see the President following the shots because she was watching the bystanders running away. (CE 2100, p. 533; p. 1 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0276a.htm
Quote off
She too noticed a greater pause between the first and second shots than the second and third shots. She also noticed the bystanders on Elm Street run to the GK area as Mooneyham and Reid had.
Except for confirming she was with Mooneyham Jeannette Hooker's affidavit (CE-2101) doesn’t say much as she really didn’t claim to see anything relevant.
Mr. Ault, who was named by Robert Reid as being present in the courtroom, could NOT recall who else was there with him, but he did say some interesting things in his affidavit (CE-2103) like these.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0276b.gif
Mr. AULT heard three loud reports which Mr. AULT immediately recognized as shots from a high-powered rifle. He noted that the first and second shots sounded to him close together and the third shot was spaced more after the second shot, the first two shots sounding close enough to be from an automatic rifle. Mr. ULT could not tell from what direction the rifle shots came.
Mr. AULT advised that he did not look toward the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the firing of the three shots and immediately thereafter because his attention was directed toward a policeman who got off his three-wheeler on Elm Street and ran toward a hedge to the left of the cement pavilion which is immediately north of Elm Street. (CE 2103, p. 534; p. 1 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0276b.htm
Quote off
He said the first and second shots sounded closer together, but the third shot was “spaced more after the second shot…”. Again, the order does NOT matter, what does is the ability to recycle the bolt of the M-C and fire accurately. To have to shots sound like they were close together or on top of one another as some witnesses said is simply NOT possible with CE-139 firing alone. He said it sounded like a “high-powered rifle” too and the alleged murder weapon was NOT a high-powered rifle. Finally, he said the first two shots sounded “close enough to be from an AUTOMATIC rifle” and we know the alleged murder weapon was NOT an automatic rifle.
He too would see a policeman run towards the GK area and NOT the TSBD.
Why was she and the others NOT called before the WC or at least its lawyers to give this valuable information? Probably because their statements sink the WC’s conclusion.
i.pinimg.com/originals/7d/22/ea/7d22eab53858d02b136f605bf6f180a0.jpg
There are numerous witnesses that saw, heard, or saw and heard, some things on 11/22/63 that did not match the official theory, thus, their testimony was buried or ignored. Also, many witnesses would say they heard the second and third shots come very close together and this was simply NOT possible based on the Warren Commission’s (WC) own statements. They said it would take at a minimum 2.3 seconds to recycle the bolt of the alleged murder weapon and we can safely assume that is under IDEAL conditions. Who knows how long it would take to work an old bolt under stressful conditions? We will look at some of these witnesses over time in this series beginning with this post.
*************************************
One such witness was Ms. Lillian Mooneyham, a Deputy District Court Clerk, worked for the Records department in a nearby building. She would give the FBI an affidavit on 1/8/64. In the affidavit she said she watched the motorcade with colleagues, Mrs. Rose Clark and Ms. Jeannette Hooker, from a window in Judge Frank Wilson's courtroom which overlooked Main St. Once the motorcade passed the three women ran down to another courtroom, that of Judge Henry King, and watched from a window which faces Houston St. Ms. Mooneyham believed another Dept. Court Clerk, Mr. Bob Reid, was in the courtroom watching with them.
Ms. Mooneyham heard a gunshot and observed the President slump to the left of the seat of the car. Ms. Mooneyham, like many others, believed the first shot to be a firecracker. She also matched many others by saying there was a pause after the first shot and then two more came rapidly and close together. We know this could NOT be possible for Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) based on the statements given to us in the WC Report. Here is what they said again.
Quote on
Examination of the Zapruder motion picture camera by the FBI established that 18.3 pictures or frames were taken each second, and therefore, the timing of certain events could be calculated by allowing 1/18.3 seconds for the action depicted from one frame to the next. …Tests of the assassin’s rifle disclosed that at least 2.3 were required between shots.
Quote off
So why did so many witness state the second and third shots (or volleys?) they heard came so close together?
She also noticed the First Lady climb on the trunk of the car and then was diverted by a man who had fallen on the ground near the car.
Ms. Mooneyham's benefit comes after the shooting and this is why her affidavit would be buried in volume XXIV (CE-2098), and not be easy to find in the days of no index. After the shots Ms. Mooneyham left with Mrs. Clark and went to Judge Julien C. Hyer office on the third floor of the Records building, where they continued to watch the happenings from Jugde Hyer's window. Ms. Mooneyham would notice all the people running to cement pavilion that is between the knoll and the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD).
As stated numerous times before in this series, the majority of people went to the Grassy Knoll (GK) and railroad yard areas after the shots stopped, NOT the TSBD where the WC claimed the shots came from.
She would estimate it was 4 1/2 to 5 minutes after the shooting that she would look up to the sixth floor of the TSBD and see a figure of a man standing behind the sixth floor window behind some cardboard boxes. This man appeared, to Ms. Mooneyham, to be looking out of the window, however, the man was NOT close up to the window but was standing slightly back from it, so that she could NOT make out his features. She could not describe the man in any fashion, but this is not what makes her testimony important.
What does is the fact there was a man there at all. Who was this man 5 minutes after the shooting near the alleged Sniper’s Nest (SN)? We know it was not LHO as the WC had him in the second floor lunchroom within 90 seconds of the shooting, so who was this man? Why did the WC not find this interesting (or the police or FBI) to find out who this could have been? This is just one more example of no investigation being conducted, thus, the claim the case is solved or closed is just that - a claim - NOT a fact. Also, no verdict in a court of law makes this so as well.
She would also say the following in her affidavit:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0275b.gif
Mrs. MOONEYHAM stated that following the assassination of President JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY, she observed a re-enactment of the assassination on two separate occasions on one day, and it was her impression that the Presidential Motorcade was going slower than the re-enactment motorcade. She stated that it was her estimation that the Presidential car was going approximately five or six miles per hour at the time of the assassination, however, she noted that her estimation was based upon her observation of the Presidential car as it moved west on Elm away from the position where she was located. (Commission Exhibit (CE) 2098, p. 532; p. 2 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0275b.htm
Quote off
This testimony could invalidate the whole re-enactment due to the fact the limousine was going slower on 11/22/63 than it was when they were re-enacting the event. When re-enacting you must follow the EXACT conditions that occurred during the real event or you can’t hope to reach the SAME CONCLUSION. Her testimony is NOT easily dismissed as fifty-nine witnesses said the limousine either nearly stopped or came to a stop during the shooting so it could NOT have been going that fast when she saw it.
She would be corroborated by Mr. Robert Reid in his FBI affidavit (CE-2099) who said he watched the motorcade from the window of Henry King’s courtroom and he said he believed Mrs. Mooneyham was there too. He would say the following in his very limited FBI affidavit:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0275b.gif
Mr. REID heard the three gunshots fired and took his eye from the President's car because he noticed people who were lining the streets were either running or dropping to the ground after the shots were fired. He observed people running or dropping to the ground and noticed policemen running up the grass toward the railroad tracks between the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) and the railroad overpass. Mr. REID stated he observed nothing significant and at no time did he observe the windows of the TSBD building. (CE 2099, p. 532; p. 1 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0275b.htm
Quote off
The important part here is where he stated that he “noticed policemen running up the grass towards the railroad tracks between the TSBD and the railroad overpass” as that means the GK area. The next person she mentioned, Rose Clark, would also be ignored by the WC like Mooneyham and Reid. She too gave a FBI affidavit (CE-2100) about what she saw. After confirming she was with Mooneyham and Hooker in the courthouse she said the following:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0276a.gif
From the window of Judge HENRY KING's courtroom on the second floor of the courthouse, she heard the three shots, and it was her impression that the first shot was louder than the second and third shots. She noted that the second and third shots seemed closer together than the first and second shots. It was her impression that bystanders on the sidewalk on Elm Street ran toward the cement pavilion on the north side of Elm Street, and she noticed that the President's automobile came almost to a halt following the three shots, before it picked up speed and drove away. Mrs. CLARK did not see the President following the shots because she was watching the bystanders running away. (CE 2100, p. 533; p. 1 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0276a.htm
Quote off
She too noticed a greater pause between the first and second shots than the second and third shots. She also noticed the bystanders on Elm Street run to the GK area as Mooneyham and Reid had.
Except for confirming she was with Mooneyham Jeannette Hooker's affidavit (CE-2101) doesn’t say much as she really didn’t claim to see anything relevant.
Mr. Ault, who was named by Robert Reid as being present in the courtroom, could NOT recall who else was there with him, but he did say some interesting things in his affidavit (CE-2103) like these.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0276b.gif
Mr. AULT heard three loud reports which Mr. AULT immediately recognized as shots from a high-powered rifle. He noted that the first and second shots sounded to him close together and the third shot was spaced more after the second shot, the first two shots sounding close enough to be from an automatic rifle. Mr. ULT could not tell from what direction the rifle shots came.
Mr. AULT advised that he did not look toward the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the firing of the three shots and immediately thereafter because his attention was directed toward a policeman who got off his three-wheeler on Elm Street and ran toward a hedge to the left of the cement pavilion which is immediately north of Elm Street. (CE 2103, p. 534; p. 1 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0276b.htm
Quote off
He said the first and second shots sounded closer together, but the third shot was “spaced more after the second shot…”. Again, the order does NOT matter, what does is the ability to recycle the bolt of the M-C and fire accurately. To have to shots sound like they were close together or on top of one another as some witnesses said is simply NOT possible with CE-139 firing alone. He said it sounded like a “high-powered rifle” too and the alleged murder weapon was NOT a high-powered rifle. Finally, he said the first two shots sounded “close enough to be from an AUTOMATIC rifle” and we know the alleged murder weapon was NOT an automatic rifle.
He too would see a policeman run towards the GK area and NOT the TSBD.
Why was she and the others NOT called before the WC or at least its lawyers to give this valuable information? Probably because their statements sink the WC’s conclusion.