General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy believed President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. [View all]AntiFascist
(12,792 posts)the SBT would be more believable if it were explained by a more typical type of sniper shooting from the Dal-Tex building, which also would have been from the rear. A mafia-related individual was apprehended who had been on the third floor of the building "making a phone call" and was there on oil industry business. One of his offices happens to have been very close to both Guy Bannister's and the office Oswald worked out of in New Orleans, further framing an argument for conspiracy involving Oswald. A NASA expert analyzing the possible trajectory of JFK's head wound testified under oath that the Dal-Tex building was a likely candidate, particularly within a plausible degree of error. JFK would have been more in line, both vertically and horizontally, with Connolly from the point of view of the Dal-Tex building.
The Single Bullet theory itself seems a bit fuzzy. The FBI report of the autopsy clearly states that the bullet that was found must have worked itself out of the entry wound in JFK's back during the course of resuscitation. Of course, the x-ray's show evidence of other wounds inside the throat. Here is testimony of a doctor who witnessed the treatment of JFK, who was very familiar with bullet wounds, claims that he could not tell if the front wound, that had been cut open in the course of a tracheotomy, was either an entry or exit wound:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/akin.htm
Here is even a research paper from 2010, published on the NIH government website, showing evidence of "the execution of a coverup to eliminate neurotoxin evidence":
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20547008
My point is that there are many possible conspriracy scenarios. The HSCA was critical of the Warren Commission for not seriously investigating the possibility of conspiracy (even without the dictabelt audio evidence, which came to light later). Who are we to argue with them?