The Accidental Shooting Hypothesis: A Closer Look at the Legacy of 'Mortal Error'

The Case Against an Accidental Shooting

Recently, I delved into the book 'Mortal Error' by W.DWORDS, which presents a compelling but controversial hypothesis. Despite its author making a rather outlandish claim that President John F. Kennedy was shot accidentally, the book offers a myriad of valuable insights and intriguing theories. More significantly, it draws attention to the flaws and unverified aspects of the official investigation into the Kennedy assassination.

The key statements made in the book fundamentally undermine the necessity of this hypothesis. For instance, Secret Service agent Hickey swore under oath that he was not even holding the AR-15 rifle at the moment of the fatal shot. Furthermore, Dave Powers, a JFK aide riding in the Cadillac, says he would have seen Hickey fire the weapon, which clearly wasn't the case. Additionally, the path of the shot, given the height of the limousine and the descent on Elm Street, makes such an accidental shooting highly improbable. No one witnessed Hickey raising the AR-15 to that height to shoot towards JFK’s head, and no entry wound was observable on the right side of JFK's skull during the autopsy or public viewing.

The Flaws in Influential Reconstructions

One of the most significant shortcomings of the official narrative, as presented in 'Mortal Error', is the heavily manipulated Zapruder film. Documentary evidence was meticulously altered, concealing crucial aspects of the assassination scene, including inconsistencies in the timeline of the shots. According to a former lab worker, substantial portions of the original footage were deliberately deleted, making it near impossible to accurately reconstruct the sequence of events. The alteration of this critical evidence skews all interpretations based on the film.

Another issue highlighted in the book is the alleged lack of an exit wound in the front of JFK's head that would correspond to the alleged entry wound from the AR-15. The absence of such an exit wound, and the fact that bullet fragments found in the skull matched those loaded by Lee Harvey Oswald, raises questions about the veracity of the claims made in the book.

Valuable Contributions to the Theory

Despite its baseless hypothesis, the book does present several valuable contributions to the debate surrounding the assassination. The author's assertion that the first shot hit the ground near the limousine and caused a ricochet that hit JFK provides a new perspective. However, his adherence to the three-shot theory, which he himself discredits, complicates his overall argument. Adding in the ricochet as an additional shot, along with the other shots that potentially struck the sign and the throat, brings the total to at least four shots, if not five. If a shot also came from the front, the number of shots would increase further.

The author further supports his argument through scientific evidence, including neutron activation tests on the bullet fragments. These tests confirmed the presence of two different types of ammunition, implying the involvement of two shooters. Regrettably, these findings have been shrouded in secrecy rather than being made public.

Conclusion: The Value of Critical Thinking

This book serves as a stark reminder of the importance of critical thinking and the necessity of scrutinizing all evidence and interpretations surrounding the Kennedy assassination. It is a testament to the fact that even when one piece of a puzzle fits, the entire image can be incomplete or even misleading without a thorough examination of all available facts.

The legacy of 'Mortal Error' lies in its challenges to the orthodox narrative, prompting further inquiry and discourse. While its hypothesis is debatable, the book's focus on the manipulation of evidence and the importance of scientific verification offers valuable insights. In the face of such pivotal historical events, transparency and the willingness to challenge existing narratives are essential for a more accurate understanding of our past.