21-03-2017, 05:38 AM
Hi Jim
I was just re-reading the posts I made on this thread, and I realized I didn't do a very good job of getting my point across. As usual, I made things too complicated, and expected you to be able to glean the vital information from my long winded posts.
Much of the ballistic evidence in this case is quite complicated and, with the majority of the population not being able to decipher this evidence, the FBI was able to present several mistruths that only a handful of people have been able to work out over the last 53 years. Ms. Cranor was on the right track, but not able to fully appreciate the implications of the irregularities she had uncovered. I would also like to meet the ballistics "expert" who told her a rifle shooting 2.5 to 4 inches high at 15 yards would only shoot 14 inches high at 100 yards. This was clearly a piece of disinformation and a favorite trick of the coverup crew. "Yes, you're right, Ms. Cranor, it would have been shooting high at 100 yards, but only 14 inches high, and that was easily adjusted for." Then she would be complimented on her smart detective work and she would leave there thinking 14 inches high was Gospel.
If anyone wishes, I will show them precisely how I deduced a rifle firing a round nosed bullet, weighing 162 grains, at a muzzle velocity of 2165 to 2200 feet per second and impacting a target 2.5 to 4 inches high at 15 yards, would have impacted a target at 100 yards almost 36 inches high.
Here is the FBI's problem in a nutshell. They lied, and they have no way of escaping that lie.
If it is an inescapable fact that the above described bullet struck the target 2.5 to 4 inches high at 15 yards and would have impacted the 100 yard target almost 36 inches high, it was necessary for the FBI to adjust the scope for elevation, in order to have bullets impacting the 100 yard target 2.5 to 5 inches high in their final set of tests. As this scope, designed for an air pellet rifle, simply had nowhere near that much range in its elevation (vertical) adjustment, a simple elevation adjustment would not do the job.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su9CNet7270
To allow the scope to be properly adjusted, it was necessary to bring the front end of the scope itself up. It sounds so simple, undo the front screw on the scope mount, tilt the front end of the scope upward by pivoting on the back mounting screw, place a shim under the front of the scope mount, re-tighten the front screw and voila! problem solved!
EXCEPT for one tiny detail. As I pointed out earlier, the two screws holding the scope mount to the side of the receiver are inserted HORIZONTALLY, and if you remove the front screw and tilt the front end of the scope mount up, even by a few thousands of an inch, the hole in the scope mount will no longer line up with the hole in the receiver, and it will be impossible to re-insert the front screw.
I know exactly what the problem was, and I also know the only solution would have been to drill new holes in the receiver. Do you see now how the FBI painted themselves into a corner, and why the "expert" told Ms. Cranor the rifle would have only shot 14 inches high at 100 yards?
![[Image: carcano-oswald-rifle-mount.jpg]](https://gastatic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/carcano-oswald-rifle-mount.jpg)
I was just re-reading the posts I made on this thread, and I realized I didn't do a very good job of getting my point across. As usual, I made things too complicated, and expected you to be able to glean the vital information from my long winded posts.
Much of the ballistic evidence in this case is quite complicated and, with the majority of the population not being able to decipher this evidence, the FBI was able to present several mistruths that only a handful of people have been able to work out over the last 53 years. Ms. Cranor was on the right track, but not able to fully appreciate the implications of the irregularities she had uncovered. I would also like to meet the ballistics "expert" who told her a rifle shooting 2.5 to 4 inches high at 15 yards would only shoot 14 inches high at 100 yards. This was clearly a piece of disinformation and a favorite trick of the coverup crew. "Yes, you're right, Ms. Cranor, it would have been shooting high at 100 yards, but only 14 inches high, and that was easily adjusted for." Then she would be complimented on her smart detective work and she would leave there thinking 14 inches high was Gospel.
If anyone wishes, I will show them precisely how I deduced a rifle firing a round nosed bullet, weighing 162 grains, at a muzzle velocity of 2165 to 2200 feet per second and impacting a target 2.5 to 4 inches high at 15 yards, would have impacted a target at 100 yards almost 36 inches high.
Here is the FBI's problem in a nutshell. They lied, and they have no way of escaping that lie.
If it is an inescapable fact that the above described bullet struck the target 2.5 to 4 inches high at 15 yards and would have impacted the 100 yard target almost 36 inches high, it was necessary for the FBI to adjust the scope for elevation, in order to have bullets impacting the 100 yard target 2.5 to 5 inches high in their final set of tests. As this scope, designed for an air pellet rifle, simply had nowhere near that much range in its elevation (vertical) adjustment, a simple elevation adjustment would not do the job.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su9CNet7270
To allow the scope to be properly adjusted, it was necessary to bring the front end of the scope itself up. It sounds so simple, undo the front screw on the scope mount, tilt the front end of the scope upward by pivoting on the back mounting screw, place a shim under the front of the scope mount, re-tighten the front screw and voila! problem solved!
EXCEPT for one tiny detail. As I pointed out earlier, the two screws holding the scope mount to the side of the receiver are inserted HORIZONTALLY, and if you remove the front screw and tilt the front end of the scope mount up, even by a few thousands of an inch, the hole in the scope mount will no longer line up with the hole in the receiver, and it will be impossible to re-insert the front screw.
I know exactly what the problem was, and I also know the only solution would have been to drill new holes in the receiver. Do you see now how the FBI painted themselves into a corner, and why the "expert" told Ms. Cranor the rifle would have only shot 14 inches high at 100 yards?
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964