A bullet For The President: John F. Kennedy

“Lee Harvey Oswald was not connected with the CIA as an agent or in any other capacity.”

A formal denial. But the very existence of a separate 201 file suggests otherwise — he was the subject of close attention.

FBI, final conclusion after 25,000 interviews: “Oswald acted alone.”

A phrase that sounds more like a verdict than the result of an investigation.

Soviet report from Minsk: “Oswald works at a factory, married to Marina Prusakova.”

A dry registration, but it is precisely this marriage that connects him with people close to the KGB. Both systems — Soviet and American — kept Oswald within their field of attention. But the question remains: was he a pawn or an agent? In this game, Oswald may have been an object of interest to both intelligence services at the same time. But who ultimately used him last? And who turned off the lights when the game came to an end?

September 1963. Oswald travels to Mexico, where he visits the Cuban consulate. He attempts to obtain a visa to travel to Cuba, but encounters bureaucratic obstacles.

“Oswald visited the Cuban consulate in Mexico City on September 27, 1963, and again on September 28” — from a CIA report.

At the consulate, Oswald states that he intends to travel to Cuba and then to the Soviet Union. However, Cuban diplomats tell him that he needs permission from the Soviet authorities in order to do so.

“Oswald stated that his ultimate destination was the Soviet Union and that he wanted to travel through Cuba” — from a CIA report.

Despite his attempts, Oswald is unable to obtain a visa to travel to Cuba. This frustrates him, and he returns to the United States without achieving his goal.

“Oswald was unable to obtain a visa to travel to Cuba and returned to the United States” — from a CIA report.

Some researchers have suggested that Oswald may have maintained connections with the Cuban regime. However, the evidence for this theory remains disputed and insufficient.

“Some researchers have suggested that Oswald may have maintained connections with the Cuban regime” — from an article in The Washington Post.

“Oswald’s motives for traveling to Cuba remain unclear” — from an article in The Washington Post.

San Francisco — “US Radar.” Oswald briefly works for a company associated with electronics and radio equipment manufacturing. However, his stay there is short-lived: instability and a lack of career prospects force him to look for other options.

“He returned to America with a dream, but found himself a man without a stable job, without friends, with ideas that few people understood” — researcher Robert Edwards.

Then Dallas — the Texas School Book Depository. In 1963, Oswald gets a job at the textbook warehouse, where he sorts and packs books. Colleagues note his withdrawn and secretive nature:

“He was quiet, withdrawn, almost invisible among his colleagues. No one could have imagined that this modest warehouse worker would end up at the center of the tragedy of an entire nation” — historian Michael O’Brien.

“Oswald seemed like an ordinary worker, but he always kept to himself, did not make friends, and hardly spoke” — a witness from the Texas School Book Depository.

“He did his work exactly as required, without showing initiative. But at the same time, he gave the impression that he was thinking deeply and secretly” — journalist John Marlow, Washington Post.

Lee Harvey Oswald’s life in the United States is severely constrained by circumstances that do not correspond in any way to his inner needs and ideals. His low-paying jobs, social isolation, and constant instability create a psychological gap between who he is on the inside and who he is forced to be in reality.

Immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy, the name Lee Harvey Oswald becomes synonymous with the crime. Newspapers scream about his “lone attack,” and the police quickly announce that the shooter has been found. But the deeper you delve into the details, the more clearly a disturbing picture emerges: Oswald was too weak, too nervous, and too unprepared to carry out such a precise and bloody act. One of the first doubts came from eyewitnesses. Witnesses in the Dallas area claimed that they saw “another man” getting into a car with a rifle. Mr. Hughes, a tenant in a neighboring house, made notes for the police:

“I saw him clearly. He raised the rifle and carefully put it into the car. Oswald? No. Not in his build, not in his walk. Too tall, too confident… Oswald didn’t look or move like that.”

Another witness, Oswald’s neighbor, Mr. Carter, recalled:

“Lee was never careful with weapons. Once he spilled cartridges right on the table, trembling with nerves. He could not have prepared a rifle for the assassination of the president. I tried to help him; he was almost crying from confusion.”

Colleagues and friends describe Oswald as a person who was easily influenced and directed:

“He was like a puppet on strings. He always followed the instructions of those above him, never showed initiative… If someone used him, he wouldn’t even have understood what he was doing,” one of his colleagues said.

Even security service personnel who later gave interviews to journalists admitted to having doubts:

“We knew that Oswald was nervous and impractical. He could not have organized the assassination on his own. Someone used him as cover, as a scapegoat.”

There is a theory that Oswald was part of a group, but that his role was not to fire the shots, but rather to create a convenient image of the shooter for the public. This “ideal victim” was lonely, withdrawn, and easily agitated — a man whose mistakes and nervousness made him easy to control. One of the diaries of Dallas journalists contains a strange note:

“It doesn’t matter who fired. Oswald is the perfect victim. Nervous, lonely, easily directed. Everything can be pinned on him, and no one will ask uncomfortable questions.”

The question of the rifle from which the heart of the American nation — John F. Kennedy — was killed remains one of the most controversial issues in the history of the investigation. The Mannlicher-Carcano M91/38 became a symbol of the Warren Commission’s version, while at the same time giving rise to dozens of critical analyses and conspiracy theories. The key question is: could Oswald, a man with average shooting skills, have fired three accurate shots alone within 5.6 seconds from this rifle, under the conditions of the noisy, chaotic movement of the motorcade in Dallas? To answer this question, it is necessary to delve into the technical and historical aspects of the rifle, as well as to assess Oswald’s actual level of training.

So, the Carcano rifle was developed in Italy at the end of the 19th century. The M91/38 model was a short, lightweight version of the standard M91, using 6.5×52 mm ammunition. It was adopted by the Italian army in 1891 and remained in use until the Second World War. The characteristic features of the M91/38 model were: length — approximately 102 cm, weight — 4.3 kg, a six-round magazine, and a four-power optical sight. For a shooter without serious training, this rifle was not considered a high-precision weapon — its accuracy decreased significantly at distances of more than 100 meters. Oswald acquired the rifle through a mail-order purchase under the name “Alek Hidell.” The package included an inexpensive optical sight whose quality of manufacture was poor. The low stability of the sight caused the mount to shift after each shot, requiring readjustment. Accurate shooting, especially with this rifle, required regular practice and good positional stability. At distances exceeding 200 meters, the Carcano rifle lost a significant degree of accuracy. In the Kennedy case, the distance to the target was approximately 72 meters, which was technically within the rifle’s capabilities. But the important question remains: was Oswald able to aim the sight correctly, taking into account the movement of the limousine and his own lack of experience? Mannlicher-Carcano is a bolt-action rifle that requires effort and time to reload. According to the official version, Oswald fired three shots in 5.6 seconds. This means that he had to fire, reload the rifle, aim accurately, and fire the next shot — repeating the process three times. Numerous experiments conducted as part of independent investigations showed that for an untrained shooter, accomplishing this was impossible without significant practice. Even experienced shooters with good skills noted that three such shots required at least 8—10 seconds. This adds further doubt to the version that Oswald acted alone. Lee Harvey Oswald had experience serving in the U.S. Marine Corps, where he received firearms training, but his results were not outstanding. In one of the tests, he demonstrated an average level of accuracy and did not receive a high qualification. In addition, doctors and experts who analyzed his physical condition pointed to unstable health and less-than-exceptional physical fitness. Experts agree that although the weapon was technically capable of firing at a distance of 72 meters, the combination of factors — the sight, reloading, shooting conditions, and Oswald’s skills — makes the official version extremely questionable.

Dr. Philip Marshall, a weapons expert, wrote: “The Warren Commission’s version of three shots in 5.6 seconds with a Mannlicher-Carcano requires a very high degree of shooter training, which Oswald, judging by his records, did not possess.”

After Kennedy’s assassination, numerous independent shooters attempted to reproduce the shots from the Mannlicher-Carcano M91/38 under conditions approximating those on the day of the assassination. These experiments were conducted by various organizations, including research groups and investigative journalists. In 1978, as part of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), a test was conducted: experienced shooters attempted to fire three shots in 5.6 seconds from a position similar to Oswald’s alleged shooting position in Dallas. The results were ambiguous: only a few experienced shooters were able to complete the task, and even then — with prior preparation and training. In most cases, the shooting time exceeded 7 seconds, which contradicts the official version. This gave supporters of alternative theories grounds to claim that there may have been several shooters.

Detail from the HSCA report: “The experiments showed that firing three accurate shots within the specified time was extremely difficult, even for trained shooters.”

A key argument in the discussion is an audio recording made by a police officer at the time of the assassination. Analysis of the sound waves showed that the number of shots may have exceeded the official three. Dr. Donald Cahill, an acoustics specialist, stated:

“Analysis of the sound signals indicates the presence of at least four shots, which calls into question the lone-shooter theory.”

Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.

Текст предоставлен ООО «Литрес».

Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на Литрес.

Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.