The Silent Witness, Mary Moorman, Finally Shares Her Story Almost 50 years After The Murder Of JFK

reply to post by Rising Against
Yes your probably right because even for someone like myself knew that 20 minutes would be pretty much impossible for a newspaper......thanks
.

Dont bother,as I said take a ruler and a panorama picture of dealy plaza a split second before the president is struck in the head---not the throat shot,then pretend jackie is made of china and if you hit her with a bullet you die yourself----now draw lines from the presidents head before he is hit and slowly do a 360degree circle around him EXCLUDING ANY DEGREES THAT WOULD HIT JACKIE,you now have reduced the possible snipers positions by a VERY LARGE MARGIN.

In texas they dont shoot women,PERIOD.At least one shooter was homegown,one was a russian or cuban,and one was an american ex-military not named oswald.

The cop that has a video of his strange marching stride posted on the net is the commie shooter,he marches like a russian soldier,exactly,and my friends he is carrying a rifle in attention position as he marches,no one else was carrying a rifle in a police uniform that day they all had shotguns.

The american ex-military shooter did the most homework,he was the one in the sewer who took a quartering shot to the right of jackie with his shot line.

To that shooters left up in the repository the homegrown shooter,the local---not oswald,he just watched the shot,took a shotline that came from directly behind the president and to jackies right side in the opposite direction of shooter one.

The third shooter,the ruskie was in the building to the left of the repository if you stood where the shot there was taken,I dont know the name of the building,he took a shotline that put his round again to jackies right side in a quartering shot from the opposite direction of shooter numberone in the sewer.

Just so you know this is a gift.

Mary Moorman isnt telling all of the truth she knows so I gift you these positions.

This was easy to solve based on location,in Texas they dont shoot women,in another area I might have missed this one,but not here boys.

Now someone start looking in the building to the left of the repository and get some face recognition tech on the bloody commie marching away with our evidence in his hands.

Three shooters none were oswald ,two were American,one local and one an import,one was a non-american either russian or cuban.

Plausible deniability from three angles,sounds political to me,as in a politicians mind forgot the fourth dimension which is where I happen to live,ha ha ha.

So there it is ,now will a real sniper please log on here and give me some feedback on these positions and this rational of using jackie to sniff out the shooters,and also EXPLAIN WHY ALL THREE SHOT LINES FELL TO JACKIES RIGHT HAND SIDE IN A THREE DIMENSIONAL ACTION?

Originally posted by TWILITE22
reply to post by Rising Against

 

Yes your probably right because even for someone like myself knew that 20 minutes would be pretty much impossible for a newspaper......thanks
.

Maybe this is just me here but she does seem very genuine in what she says and IMO she's hardly in a position to come forward like this and flat out lie to us. I could be wrong and of course I'm still slightly skeptical of her but on the whole I do believe what she says to be honest.

This being so, I still do think she may have made a slight mistake here.

I'd suppose in that type of situation, a huge learning curve, details like time may get elongated or shortened. The brain would probably be resetting some of its acceptance-levels, so would have a little less attention on putting completely accurate time-stamps on events.

reply to post by Rising Against

I have climbed down into that drain. The cover is plastic and os pulled up all the time by the homless guys giving "tours". Even taking into account the added layers to the road, I found that it would be hard to aim in the direction of the limo, let alone aim high enough to hit the president.

reply to post by JohnnyG2012

I found that it would be hard to aim in the direction of the limo, let alone aim high enough to hit the president.

Over the years a lot of renovation has occurred near and with-in this storm drain making it much smaller. When JFK was passing by however, it was much larger and would've been a very easy shot to make for an assassin. Almost a perfect shot in fact. It even led out to behind the grassy knoll which is where Lee Bowers saw cars wandering about as if looking for something prior to the assassination, before one of the cars stopped and some of the passengers got out, this being an off-limits area it was quite odd as no one should have been here.

Anyway, here's a snippet of a post by Jim Marrs, another researcher of this case, where he discusses the storm drain shot. You might find it interesting reading:

I have heard about the possibility of a shot from the storm drain for many years and even met the daughter of a woman who said she and friends witnessed someone firing from the drain opening. But the mother refused to be interviewed and I have been unable to substantiate this story. I have always hesitated to discuss the storm drain because many years ago one of the earliest and best researchers, Penn Jones Jr., editor of the Midlothian Mirror, was ridiculed incessantly. Debunkers said he was claiming that Kennedy was shot "from a sewer." I have myself stood down in the storm drain which is located a mere six feet from the point of Kennedy’s fatal head shot. I could comfortably stand in this drain (I’m not too tall being 5’7”) and it would have been an easy pistol shot to a person sitting upright in an open convertible. Some witnesses said that one of the shots sounded hollow, had a ringing sound to it. And it could have been possible to leave the storm drain via a large drain pipe which connected to an opening behind the wooden picket fence on the notorious Grassy Knoll. But did a shot come from this drain? At the moment, there is not enough evidence to state yes, but it remains an interesting premise.

An interesting sidebar to this speculation is the fact that in the 1980s a section running vertically down the Grassy knoll collapsed. The Dallas Street Dept. found that someone had dug up a section of this drain pipe and cut away a piece about 2 feet X 4 feet and replaced the cut section. But instead of welding the section back, whoever did this simply replaced the section on the pipe and over time it gave way causing a collapse at that point. There was some speculation that perhaps an assassin had stashed his weapon in the drain pipe and was retrieved surreptitiously at a later date. This drain was connected to the storm drain at the foot of the Grassy Knoll.

JFK Jr. had announced to close friends he was planning to enter politics and run for the Senate from New York but he had not made this public. This, of course, would have placed him head to head against Hillary Clinton, who just announced she was going to run for the New York Senate seat. Since, Hillary was the first American First Lady to attend the secretive Bilderberg meetings, she obvious was the choice of the New World Order gang. Against this backdrop we learn that JFK Jr, by all accounts an excellent pilot who had always flown with an instructor in previous flights, sudden flew alone that night, got lost and dove into the sea. However, an early Coast Guard press release stated the FAA had last heard from him when he was 13 miles out on approach to the airport. This means he was not lost and was descending for a landing. Moments later, his plane dropped off the radar screen and was not recovered for two days despite the fact that the type of aircraft he was flying had an emergency transponder. Something caused his plane to lose altitude very rapidly. And according to the National Transportation Safety Board’s investigation report, the fuel switch on his plane was in the “off” position. Was he assassinated? The evidence to me indicates… most assuredly. How remains a mystery.

(Source)

reply to post by Rising Against
Maybe it's just me ,I was expecting Mary to come out with something more explosive,something that would have been,solid to put this story to rest.She should be an example to the people in Washington to tell the truth It's really a shame that the documentation of our history has to be so full of lies and conspiracy theories.Honestly I don't know how these people sleep at night have they no honor?What will be the legacy we leave to our children's children?A bunch of lies?Is there any truth to the history we know?

I hope one day the people that know the truth of these times in history will grow some balls,like Mary, and come forward with the real story instead of lies and and the fairy tales we are currently being fed.......................sorry for the rant but I feel a little better now.

reply to post by TWILITE22

sorry for the rant but I feel a little better now.

No, you make a good point.

It's because the truth has proven to be so elusive though, that we need to constantly research, analyse, and see more stuff like what Mary has given us. Sure, it may not blow this whole case wide open, but she does confirm a few things for us still - things which need confirming, even if it's almost 50 years later.

So, I'm very grateful for this interview and I'm glad I was able to get it up. Hopefully It'll answer a few questions for some others too. If not, at least we have a new perspective on the case and from someone who was in a great position to give it.

reply to post by Rising Against


OK! I've watched 40 minutes of the interview and here's a few questions before I forget them!

I wanted to say that Mary says she heard a sound at the same time she was taking the picture, and then what she believed to be firecrackers.

I can't find the link, but a few days ago it was explained why we have trouble hearing when we are concentrating on a task requiring visual attention; both senses use the same "canals" and if you concentrate on your eyes, you will hear less, and inversely... My idea on what she heard is in two parts.

First, it was all the same sound of shots, but her concentration on photographing JFK may have impaired her hearing enough that she can't say it sounded like a firecracker.

Second, since the last two shots were fired quickly, not evenly spaced, and sounded like firecrackers, it could be proof that TWO different weapons have been used in the assassination. Like a rifle and a handgun.

Proof of that, alas, could only be found in the dispersion of JFK's skull fragments. If shot from two different angles or more, the splatters would form different alignments.
I think it was the first time I heard about that...

And I'm a big fan of Dexter, go figure...

Back to watching!
__________

I just watched part 5... Her acquaintance and knowing of almost everyone present while the assassination happened... It gives the impression Dallas is a 500 people village!

reply to post by NowanKenubi

First, it was all the same sound of shots, but her concentration on photographing JFK may have impaired her hearing enough that she can't say it sounded like a firecracker.

It's a nice theory but I respectfully disagree.

Reason being, 1.) Mary certainly wasn't the only witness to hear what sounded like firecrackers but ones we now know to be shots and 2.) Witnesses remember hearing the firecracker sounds at different points in the assassination and from different locations. This alone debunks the idea Mary is alone in hearing the sound of a firecracker due to her concentration on taking the picture.



Here's just a couple who heard firecrackers to prove It wasn't just Mary:

George Hickey

"After a very short distance I heard a loud report which sounded like a firecracker"

(Source)

Malcolm Summers

"Summers told police in a deposition at the time of the assassination he thought someone had set off a firecracker "

(Source)

Clint Hill

"And I heard a noise from my right rear, which to me seemed to be a firecracker."

(Source)

John Ready

" I heard what sounded like fire crackers going off"

(Source)

Merriman Smith

“Suddenly, we heard three loud, almost painfully loud cracks. The first sounded as though it might have been a large firecracker. But the second and third blasts were unmistakable."

(Source)

reply to post by Rising Against


I didn't say she was alone to hear the sounds, but that she may not be able to say if they were the same since she was concentrating on taking the picture. Because she says she heard a sound, and then what looked like firecrackers.
Two words to describe the shots she heard. Since she didn't say firecracker for the first shot, I take it it was different because it was a different firearm that was being used. Or she can't say because she was concentrating on the picture.

I'd be surprised if it was reported that she alone heard the shots...

reply to post by NowanKenubi


Now, in reply to your second point...

Second, since the last two shots were fired quickly, not evenly spaced, and sounded like firecrackers, it could be proof that TWO different weapons have been used in the assassination. Like a rifle and a handgun.

I really do think so, yes.

Here are some of the witnesses who claimed to have heard 2 shots in rapid fire thus debunking the Lone Gunman theory (as Oswald couldn't fire this quickly):

Special Agent Rufus Youngblood.

“There seemed to be a longer span of time between the first and the second shot than there was between the second and third shot.” “ ... from the beginning at the sound of the first shot to the second or third shot, happened with a few seconds

(Source)

Linda Willis.

“Yes, I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together. When the first one hit, well, the President turned from waving to the people, and he grabbed his throat, and he kind of slumped forward, and then I couldn’t tell where the second shot went.”

(Source)

Special Agent George Hickey (in reference to the second and third shots).

“At the moment he was almost sitting erect I heard two reports, which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound than the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them.”

(Source)

Special Agent William A. McIntyre.

“The Presidential vehicle was approximately 200 feet from the underpass when the first shot was fired, followed in quick succession by two more. I would estimate that all three shots were fired within five seconds. After the second shot, I looked at the President and witnessed his being struck in the head by the third and last shot.”

(Source)

Special Agent Sam A. Kinney.

“I saw the President lean toward the left and appeared to have grabbed his chest with his right hand. There was a second of pause and then two more shots were heard ... “

(Source)

Mayor Earle Cabell.

“There was a longer pause between the first and second shots than there was between the second and third shots. They were in rather rapid succession.”

(Source)

Roy Kellerman

Described the shots as a “flurry.” Two of the shots were often described by witnesses as so closely spaced that they seemed “simultaneous” and had “practically no time element between them.” Additionally, there is a substantial amount of testimony, presented in this article, that describes the later shots as sounding different from the first shot.

(Source)

Not forgetting people like Lee Bowers who I discussed at length in this thread here.

reply to post by Rising Against


Regarding the newspaper extra edition, I did a few searches this morning about that. I was hoping that somewhere out there, someone might have mentioned how quickly it went to press. No luck.

I did find an interesting newspaper story. Kennedy Alive Editions

While walking through an antique swap meet I found a box of newspapers. Just glancing at them I noticed a few nice John F. Kennedy assassination papers and what I thought was a normal "Robert F. Kennedy Shot" paper. Being an avid Kennedy collector, I bought the box of papers.

When I got home I started to catalog the papers on my computer. Eventually, I got to the "KENNEDY SHOT; CONDITION CRITICAL" paper. I looked at the date, November 22, 1963, but I thought it should have been dated June 5, 1968 -- Robert Kennedy shot. At first I thought it was a typo but as I looked closer it wasn't Robert Kennedy shot; it was John kennedy shot.

Now here's the interesting part:

What was even stranger was the the paper below this "Kennedy Shot" paper, in the box, was a "Kennedy Slain" paper of November 22, 1963. It was a Los Angeles Herald Examiner 2:00 pm edition. Yes, both were the 2:00 pm editions with different headlines. I couldn't believe it so I called the offices of the Herald Examiner to ask about the papers. In conversation with two different departments and the City Desk, no one works there now who worked there 26 years ago. The only information I could obtain was that if the important news was happening in the middle of the printing they would "stop the presses" and change the headline if necessary. They said this is probably what happened.

I really wish the person that posted the information above had included photos of each paper. Also at that link is user submitted listings of other "alive" headlines from newspapers.


For the paper that Mary saw, maybe they already had a print run prepped for 2p. The president was in town that day and I'm sure they were just waiting for a headline to run with.

And I do agree that Mary is mistaken on the time that passed while she was in the press conference room. And there would have been 'time' before she got there. I don't think she meant to imply that from the time of the shooting to buying the paper that only 20mins had elapsed.

Excellent thread RA.

The only question I have is how would the secret service or any other fed would of known who took pictures if no one volunteered that information?

Hm. I don't know on which thread to put this answer!

I followed the link about Lee Bowers and when I got to the Zapruder film, I decided to check it again. The picture you had put about the location of everyone with the colored circles and Xs (!) was the first time I had a clear view of where it happened, speaking in terms of relational space between the actors of the event.

In the Zapruder film, we can't see the moment JFK is hit the first time because he was hidden by the road panel at the bottom of the screen. Frankly, before today, I didn't know he had been hit in the upper torso, or throat. I always thought the first shot was the one where we see his head exploding from the shot.

Well, if Oswald did shoot from the library, it seems to me he chose the most awkward position to shoot, seeing the position of the building with the road, add to that the car was moving away... It would have been more logical to chose the one right in front of the road, where it becomes straight for some distance before going under the overpass.

It would have been helpful in concluding the origin of the first shot if Mary Moorman had taken her picture a few seconds earlier, BUT... since, in the Zapruder film we see Kennedy holding his throat, it is indicative that he was shot from the front, not from the back. Because then, he would have put his hands on the back of his neck if he was shot from behind. It would have been a reflex, but here we see him holding with both hands his throat.

Anyway, the shot to the head clearly shows it came from the front. And if it was true the bullet made all the piercing and bouncing the commission said it did, it would have barely made a bruise on his forehead for loosing too much velocity in the process of getting there.

Or Oswald should be in the Guinness for being the only human to have hit that many targets with one magic bullet.

EDIT: I won't edit! I learned! LOL Dang!

I have (what may be a very STUPID) question. Was Mary using a Polaroid Land camera - if that's the right model...the one that spits out photos immediately??? If I remember correctly, in order to use one of those you have to swipe some sort of chemical gel or something onto the photo right after it prints.

If the camera wasn't one of those...how did she take the photo home with her on the 22nd? In 1963 I don't remember too many "1-Hour Photo" places. It took time for film to be developed...I'm just confused. Could someone maybe enlighten me??

reply to post by NowanKenubi

It would have been more logical to chose the one right in front of the road, where it becomes straight for some distance before going under the overpass.

Well, I won't go into this in too much detail for 2 reasons: 1.) I really want to try and focus on Mary Moorman and her interview here as I feel It's important and 2.) I'm writing a thread as we speak on this very issue you brought up.

What I will say though is this: Here is the best image I could find currently online showing where Kennedy was struck with the appropriate angle coming from the TSDB as well as the Dal-Tex building - this being where I personally suspect is where the first shot was fired from:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/91d1c09e82ed.jpg[/atsimg]

(The Dal-Tex building is the building to the right hand side.)

You should already notice here that the TSDB has a bit of an angle, which doesn't make sense when looking at the injury sustained, but the Dal-Tex building has an almost perfect trajectory, particularly the third floor. I believe it even fits perfect with the trajectory of the shot which struck the curb near James Tague.

Here's a fantastic video going into detail on this very issue, as well as the angles of both buildings, the autopsy of JFK proving the shot came from behind, and of course the possibility of a potential shooter here:

reply to post by Jansy


They discuss the camera Mary used at length near the very beginning of the interview.

reply to post by Rising Against


Thank you. Haven't had a chance to watch yet...will though! Thanks for your efforts!

Originally posted by Jansy
reply to post by Rising Against

 

Thank you. Haven't had a chance to watch yet...will though! Thanks for your efforts!

Thank you. Oh, and if you look underneath each video in the opening post, you can see a quick guideline to which points are being discussed and when. I highlighted when they started discussing the camera too so feel free to just skip to that.