I’ve never been interested in reading about the JFK assassination, but after hearing this book mentioned by a couple people I respect, I decided to check it out.
The book describes the efforts of weapons expert Howard Donahue to review the ballistics evidence. Donahue formed a novel argument that contradicted the Warren Commission Report, which he doggedly pursued in subsequent decades.
The Argument
Donahue argues that Kennedy was shot in the head by the accidentally-fired weapon of a Secret Service agent in the car behind him. According to Donahue, the sequence of events is: Lee Harvey Oswald fired two shots (not three as the Warren Commission Report concludes). The first missed but a ricochet hit Kennedy in the back of the head. Kennedy exclaims “by God I’m hit”. Oswald’s second shot hits Kennedy in the lower neck / top of the spine and the bullet continues forward, exiting Kennedy’s body and hitting Governor Connally in the seat ahead of him (this is what is commonly known as the “magic bullet”). At this point the Secret Service agent reached for his AR-15, it accidentally discharged, and hit Kennedy in the back of the head.
Conspiracy Theories Dispelled
Before getting to his own explanation of what happened, Donahue rebuts some of the most common conspiracy theories. He argues that there is no unexplained mystery about the “magic bullet”. Oswald’s 6.5mm Carcano rifle had a “full metal jacket” that would keep the bullet intact as it entered and exited Kennedy’s body. Also, it was powerful enough to continue at a high enough speed to push through and hit Governor Connally. Donahue also rejects that the bullet made an “impossible right turn” as many conspiracy theorists argue, as this argument was based on an incorrect understanding of where Connally was positioned.
Donahue also rejects that any of the shots could have come from in front of the vehicle, or from the "grassy knoll", as it is not consistent with the ballistic evidence.
Donahue also points out that other experts showed that Kennedy’s backward lurch is not inconsistent with a shot from behind, and in fact simulations showed that the backwards lurch is what would be expected to happen.
It’s regarding the other two shots where Donahue disagrees with the Warren Commission Report. Donahue believes Oswald only fired two shots instead of three. Donahue’s belief that Oswald’s first shot was a miss is also a point of disagreement; the Warren Commission Report states that Oswald’s first and third shots were hits, and it was the second shot that was a miss.
The Evidence
The single most persuasive and simple piece of evidence in favor of this argument is from comparing the wounds and bullet fragments from the shot that hit Kennedy in the neck and the shot that hit him in the back of the head. The shot which hit Kennedy in the neck is completely consistent with Oswald’s weapon. The bullet stayed intact and went cleanly through Kennedy’s body. But the shot that hit Kennedy in the back of the head burst after impact, fragmenting into tiny pieces and causing huge damage in the brain. This type of impact is consistent with the bullet from the AR-15 held by the Secret Service agent, but not from the Carcano rifle Oswald used.
Donahue, and author Bonar Menninger, also argue that the entry point and exit point of the shot to the back of the head is consistent with being fired from where the Secret Service agent was located, but not from the position of Oswald.
Donahue also points out that several people remarked that they smelled gunpowder, which would be unlikely to do from Oswald’s weapon which was hundreds of feet away and upwind.
Donahue’s argument that Oswald’s first shot was a miss which ricocheted and hit Kennedy in the back of the head is consistent with Kennedy exclaiming “my God I’m hit” as one person in the vehicle recalls him saying. But him having the capacity to say this would be improbable if he was hit with the more damaging neck shot.
What Happened After the Shot
The book is vague on what is purported to happen after the shootings. At times it is pointed out that the Secret Service acted in shifty ways that may have been due to trying to conceal evidence of an agent’s misfire. Robert Kennedy is implicated too: the author and Donahue argue that some of his actions were suspicious and seemingly were done to prevent a full investigation. The argument is that RFK felt that it would mar his brother’s legacy to die from an accident.
But at other times it is argued that perhaps few or maybe even no one knew that the Secret Service agent’s weapon was fired. In fact, it is argued that it is possible that the agent himself didn’t realize his weapon was fired.
I think Donahue felt like exploring the cover-up was beyond his expertise and just stuck with the ballistics analysis, which is understandable. But it did make it frustrating to have these issues that are still unresolved even if you believe Donahue’s argument.
Evidence Against
I can’t think of a better way to put this, but the strongest argument against this theory is just … “really???” Nobody noticed that somebody shot a weapon a few feet away from them? Or if they did they all conspired to keep quiet?
A trained agent had a misfire happen to them, at this exact time, and the misfire happened to hit Kennedy right in the back of the head?
It would be understandable to just say this is too crazy and ignore it.
It’s also worth noting that 3 shells were found in the Book Depository. The most obvious explanation for this would be that Oswald fired 3 shots, as the Warren Commission Report claims. Donahue has an answer for what he thinks happened, that I won’t try to explain. It may be plausible but doesn’t fare well from an “Ockham’s Razor” point-of-view.
It also seems crazy that Robert Kennedy would have helped suppress this investigation. I can believe him lying to protect his brother’s perceived legacy, but in the immediate aftermath of the assassination I imagine he was very angry and just wanted to do whatever it takes to get to the bottom of what happened.
And in general, I’m always suspicious that conspiracies can survive this long. Eventually someone that doesn’t have a vested interest in keeping the secret will spill the beans.
And it’s hard to believe this could happen without a conspiracy. For one thing, there would be the ejected shell from the AR-15 that somebody would have found.
Counter-arguments
The author and Donahue have responses to the above. Gun accidents are more common than you would think (at least in those days). It is possible that people did not realize one of the shots was from the agent, given the confusion of the events. Consider how many witnesses reported seeing or hearing things that were obviously wrong, like hearing two or four shots instead of three. And in fact, one of the agents said in an interview right after the assassination that he saw the agent holding his AR-15 and thought he fired it.
And we don’t know how often a conspiracy can hold together, since any conspiracy that does hold together, we wouldn’t know about.
Final Thoughts
This reminds me of the Sherlock Holmes adage: “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”. I think that’s how Donahue and Menninger would think about this. They would say there is no way the bullet from Oswald’s location could have hit Kennedy at that spot on his head, and there is no way Oswald’s gun could have done that kind of damage. The only possible location of the shot was behind the car, and the only weapon in that location was from the Secret Service agent.
But I think a good response is that it might be more likely that you missed something – that there is some explanation for why what you thought was impossible really is possible.
Overall, I’m not sure whether I believe this. The ballistic evidence does seem strong, but I’m not sure it’s enough to shake all the concerns mentioned. I wish someone smart who disagrees with this argument would try a thorough debunking, but I don’t see one. The book and its argument have not really received a ton of attention, which is surprising to me given the persuasiveness along with the huge amount of interest in the assassination. I hope that changes eventually and someone takes up a more thorough examination of this argument.
I’ll also say I thought the book was extremely well written. It was concise and easy to follow. And I appreciated that the author was honest about the weakest points of the argument.
There is a 2013 documentary based on this book: JFK: The Smoking Gun. I thought it was a nice supplement to the book. Being able to visually see everything was great. But it focused more on speculating about the Cover-Up and came across as kind of tabloidy. I’d recommend just going straight to the book if you want to learn about this.