Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz


Blog powered by Typepad
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported

« What Oswald Wrought: Lament of a Generation | Main | Credit Where Credit Is Due »

22 November 2007



You fail to mention the audio tape presented by acoustic experts at the end of the 1978 House Congressional Investigation on Assasinations.

A scientific analysis of the dictabelt recording WAS MATCHED TO THE ZAPRUDER FILM and concluded that FOUR shots were fired - AND THE FINAL SHOT ORIGINATED FROM THE GRASSY KNOLL. The two scientists also claimed that there was a 95% probability that the timing and origin of the shots heard on the tape were accurate.

As a result of this evidence, the House concluded that it was a CONSPIRACY and that there were at least TWO shooters in Dealy Plaza.

At this date, to suggest that the Zapruder film was an incomplete visual and that Oswald was the lone assassin, despite all the evidence to the contrary, is quite puzzling.

Max Holland

The House finding was junk science and has been thoroughly discredited for decades. See Vincent Bugliosi's book, RECLAIMING HISTORY, for all the details you could possibly want.


Did you even look at the Zapruder film? Kennedy is clearly waving to the crowd just before the limo becomes hidden by the sign.

The first movement Kerry [sic] makes after being shot is to grab his throat - an entry wound. It's right there on the film.

Do you really expect anyone to believe you and not believe their own eyes?

This is truly pathetic.

Andrew Mason

Holland/Rush are attempting to explain what the Warren Commission and HSCA could not explain: how Oswald fired all three shots and only two shots struck the occupants of the limo. They are quite correct in pointing out that the mainstream explanations to date do not fit the evidence, particularly the witness evidence that the last two shots were noticeably closer together than the first two.

According to the SBT, the second shot was 5 seconds before the last and the about 3 seconds after the first. This obviously does not fit the shot pattern heard and clearly recalled by at least 48 witnesses (last two closer together). This is the reason Holland/Rush suggest that the first shot was very early. But they are looking in the wrong place. There is a raft of evidence that does not fit their theory - it is not just the zfilm.

One has to look at all the evidence. The evidence is overwhelming that Oswald fired three shots and that the last two were close together. Set aside preconceptions that JBC has been shot at z224. He was hit on the second shot - that is the evidence. The second shot was close to the third but still within the time required for Oswald to fire - but barely. That is the evidence.
The evidence, then, puts the second shot hitting JBC at about 2.3 seconds before the last shot (frame 313) or at about frame 271. And not so remarkably, you will find a great deal of evidence that this is where JBC was hit. That explanation fits ALL the evidence very nicely and fits the conclusion that Oswald fired all the shots.

Andrew Mason

Lee Bowers

The 11 second theory would support conspiracy not a lone nut on the sixth floor. Do the math ... First shot strikes signal pole. Second shot strikes JFK and Connally (assuming Single Bullet Theory). Third shot hits JFK in the head. A fourth shot strikes curb near James Tague near triple underpass. That is four shots. If Single Bullet Theory is false, you have one more ... five shots. Three spent Carcano shells on the sixth floor suggest more shooters under this unlikely scenario. Clearly the author is not familiar with the case.


A recent discussion about The Witnesses and what they heard would tend to support the early shot theory proposed by Max Holland. Witness recollections are suspect for various reasons and police have learned through experience they can be unreliable. However, it doesn't make sense that 100% of witnesses always get it wrong either. In the discussion mentioned above the question was asked: What are the implications if a majority of witness testimony about the number, sequence, and timing of the shots is assumed to be accurate?

The majority of witnesses describe 3 shots close together, with the last 2 closer than the first 2 shots. Not all witnesses heard it that way. Some say the first 2 shots were closer together and others say they were evenly spaced.

Assuming the majority to be correct and knowing the timing of the last 2 shots relative to the Zapruder film, extending the timing backwards would indicate when the first shot was fired at the Presidential Limousine. Therefore, based on the auricular perception by the majority of witnesses the first shot had to be at, or prior to, frame Z133. This is the exact frame when Zapruder started filming again after a pause.

There is corroboration by a photographer Gary Mack considers to be a reliable witness that Z133 is when the first shot was fired. This particular witness has been ignored until now because the presumption was the first shot was fired much later around Z180-Z190, which would indicate a majority of witnesses heard it backwards.

Using Z133 as the first shot would separate the timing sequence almost in half: 5.0 sec + 4.8 sec = 9.8 sec total. For the auricular perception to be even more distinct, the first shot would need to be prior to frame Z133. Max Holland's new theory is the only explanation that fits the perception of what a majority of earwitnesess in Dealey Plaza claimed to hear.


There may be photographic evidence to support the Holland-Rush theory that a bullet struck the horizontal traffic mast over Elm Street. Take a look at the magnified version of this photo and notice a gleam on the mast that looks like a reflection of sunlight. It appears to be on line with a trajectory connecting the 6th floor window and where the Limousine just passed by (the place where the VP convertible is now positioned). It may just be a random spot caused when the photo was developed but how strange it would be right on line between the street and the 6th floor window. Is this just an amazing coincidence or evidence no one ever noticed before this theory was proposed?

Altgens photo

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Washington Decoded