FBI Evidence Proves Oswald's Ammunition was not Capable of Sufficient Accuracy to Kill JFK

[Drew Phipps]

Is the ammo for the M-C carbine the same caliber as the ammo for the short rifle? I ask because half of the rifling marks on the magic bullet appear to have a spin more consistent with the carbine. There is also some very good research indicating that the gun "Hidell" ordered from Kleins', and wa subsequently delivered, was a "39 inch M-C carbine", not a "41 inch M-C short rifle".

[Bob Prudhomme]

Is the ammo for the M-C carbine the same caliber as the ammo for the short rifle? I ask because half of the rifling marks on the magic bullet appear to have a spin more consistent with the carbine. There is also some very good research indicating that the gun "Hidell" ordered from Kleins', and wa subsequently delivered, was a "39 inch M-C carbine", not a "41 inch M-C short rifle".

Yes, every Carcano, be it a long rifle, short rifle or carbine, used the same 6.5x52mm cartridge. Even the 7.35mm rifles used this cartridge; the only difference being the neck of the casing opened up to accept the wider bullet.

[Mitchell Severson]

Bob, have you thought of publishing your work on the limitations of the WCC ammunition? I know Morley and Bradford at 'JFKFacts" are always looking for new ideas/research. This certainly qualifies. You'd have to get under their very small word limit, but I think that very different group of readers would benefit. I imagine he gets decent traffic as well.

[Jim DiEugenio]

I invited Bob to submit an article on this subject for CTKA.

We do not have a word limit.

Have not checked my in box there lately so I do not know if he replied.

[Bob Prudhomme]

Hello Jim

I received your e-mail from the CTKA. Stupid me, I saw the name JIM D at the bottom and did not make the connection that it was you. LOL. I've been looking at putting all the materiel about the WCC ammunition together in one essay but, as you said, an essay is a bit more involved than just posting on a forum, and I've felt a little intimidated by the whole matter. I almost wish I could employ the services of a very well organized editor to simply gather everything up and coalesce it into one coherent argument.

[Jim DiEugenio]

Well, Seamus Coogan's first essay on Hankey was 54 pages long.

I got it down to 35 very readable pages.

It took me four nights and about three hours per.

SO I hope I don't have to do that with you.

That was his first essay though. He is much better now.

[Magda Hassan]

I invited Bob to submit an article on this subject for CTKA.

We do not have a word limit.

Excellent!

[Drew Phipps]

Bob:

Would you apply your firearms expertise to the Army ballistics tests run on CE 139? It sure looks to my layman's eye that the results the army shooters got were noticeably different from the FBI results.

WC testifying expert: Ronald Simmons
WC exhibits: 582, 583, 584

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6057[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]6058[/ATTACH]

[Bob Prudhomme]

Hi Drew

It's hard to really discern much just from looking at the three targets. Were they aiming at the heart or the head? How many shots with scope and open sights were fired? From what I can see, it looks like only one open sight shot actually hit the target. Was there much text to help explain this?

The one I find most intriguing is the layout of Elm St., and the fact that one of the targets was shot at 270 feet, or 90 yards, and another target was shot at 264 feet, or 88 yards; a mere 2 yard (6 feet) difference. It would be very interesting to know why these two distances were chosen.

If the limo was travelling at 10-12 mph, as we are told, it would cover, in the space of a second, 14.6-17.6 feet. As it requires a minimum of 2 seconds to reload and fire a rifle, there should be at least 30 feet between the impact of two shots unless, of course, the limo had stopped or come to a near stop.

This is rather fascinating, as there are eyewitness accounts (Moorman, Altgens) of the fatal head shot taking place further down Elm St. than the location depicted in Zapruder film frame z313.

And while it is also believed that the Polaroid taken by Mary Ann Moorman was also at the exact moment of z313, this may also not be true. Watch this recent interview with Ms. Moorman, paying particular interest to what she has to say beginning about 1:30.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgNF-sPW8YI

[Drew Phipps]

The WC testimony of Mr. Simmons is very interesting. He recounts the difficulty of working the bolt of c2766 (which could be compensated for with dry runs), as well as talking about an unusually quick trigger action (which generally could not). Depending on which of the many Oswalds you follow, he either got plenty of practice at the range, or almost none.

His Army shooters managed the feat in less time than Oswald but with less accuracy, and they were NRA "masters." One guy, some sort of gun prodigy, managed three shots in less than 5 seconds. Simmons's results are tallied in fractions of a degree, which then moved out to the appropriate yardage, showed accuracy figures better than the FBI; but it looks to me that the shots did NOT consistently go "high and to the right." Compounding the strangeness, he did not ask his shooters to fire at any particular part of the silhouette target.

I've only done a preliminary scan of his testimony and will work on it a bit more. The good news is that we have pictures (CE 582, 583, 584) of the actual silhouette targets used from the view of the shooter (and the plywood upon which the targets were mounted), unlike the previous FBI tests where the exhibits are not pictures of the silhouette targets Frazier claimed he used (instead appear to be hand drawn).

I will review your link as well.