Grassy knoll=diversion

[Seamus Coogan]

Seamus, I believe we're looking at something like a .243 or a .270 Winchester. Also, it has been suggested that the actual bullet that struck Kennedy may have used a sabot - a device used to fit a small caliber bullet into a larger shell. That very well could have caused the massive damage to his head, but my personal opinion is that he was struck by a hollowpoint medium caliber hunting bullet of either of the calibers I suggested above.

You questioned how a shot from the right front of Kennedy's head could make an exit wound on the right rear of the head, right? Simple...after a bullet, especially a hollowpoint one, doesn't always follow a straight path. Deflection from the resistance of the skin or bone can cause a bullet to take a direction completely different from the original point of entry. Being a hunter, I've seen bullets end up in completely different places than their entry points would originally suggest.

[quote=Gordon Gray]While I believe a shot definitely struck the President in the head from the front, I have always questioned how a trajectory from the right front(Grassy Knoll, edge of the fence and overpass) could be consistent with an exit wound on the right rear of his head, given the orientation of his head and the position of the car at the moment of impact. That would seem to be more consistent with a wound to the left rear. It seems to me the President's wounds are more consistent with a trajectory from the left front, originating on the south end of the overpass or the south knoll. I question whether this trajectory would allow for a shot that did not strike Jackie or Greer and did not penetrate the limosine windshield. I wonder if anyone has done sightings from these positions to see if it is possible.

[/QUO

Okay Jim what calibre hollowpoint we talking about here? And where's your direction. No right or wrong I've always been interested in this sort of thing. My mates been telling me about hunting slugs with hollow points he's been using that are really small but do a shit load of damage he says they are relatively newish. Question what sort of smaller high velocity rounds were capable of doing that to someone in that era. Jim Di has always said they may well have used some pretty fancy shit before its time.

Right I had a look and this guy knows what he's doing. I was thinking were I to shoot at say a moving target would you be inclined to go with a gun calibre with this less kick? The .27o here looks pretty grunty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCaVU6tkb...re=related

Heres one of a .243

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLkTEluwehY

I'm inclined to go with the lighter calibre myself. But yeah with a sabot and a hollowpoint.

The problem I have with Macks remake here is of course they don't explain the actual calibre of the gun Yardley uses, the neck on the model is stiff and doesnt leave anywhere for the impact to go and Yardley is also shooting from near on the side. Also I think Yardleys gun is far to cumbersome. These guys had to get in and get the hell out real fast. At least thats what I think. Any insights Jim?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szGciJo0iPo