31. A Houston shot would not have been a better option than Elm St.

Some people, including former Minnesota Governor, Actor and Professional Wrestler, Jesse Ventura, have made the argument that Oswald had a better shot when President Kennedy’s limo was coming toward him on Houston Street, rather than away from him on Elm Street. According to these people, the only reason Oswald (or someone else in the sniper’s nest) waited until the limo was on Elm, is because the shooter in the nest wanted JFK to be caught between multiple shooters, who were set up around Elm. The films, Executive Action (1973) and JFK (1991), both describe this with the Jim Marrs term, “triangulation of fire,” assuming there were three shooters, but other conspiracy theorists like to claim even larger numbers.

Computer model simulating Oswald’s view of the motorcade.
Photo of Elm Street from the sniper’s nest, with boxes stacked up to hide Oswald from any potential witnesses on the sixth floor.

The orientation of the boxes in the sniper’s nest, along with the account of the eye witnesses, confirms the fact that Oswald had no intention of trying to shoot the President on Houston. Whether they could see his face or not, all the witness agreed that the shooter was lined up for a shot on Elm, and they assumed he was a Secret Service Agent, or some other member of law enforcement, or they saw him too late to do anything about it. Does this suggest that Oswald was waiting for President Kennedy to be surrounded by other shooters, as conspiracy theorists wish to believe? No. Given that it was so easy for a few people in various locations to spot Oswald and no eye witnesses spotted any other armed men, the most reasonable answer is that there were no other shooters. Also, given the fact that no genuine evidence has ever been produced that points to any other shooters in any location other than Oswald’s “nest,” the most reasonable answer is that there were no other shooters.

So why did Oswald focus on Elm Street and ignore Houston? I asked this question of Ed Cage, a JFK assassination expert and Vietnam Veteran with extensive weapons experience, and he insisted that Elm was the best option Oswald had.

Besides the obstacles in way (like the windshield and crossbar at in the middle of the car, where an optional roof could be attached), and the fact that it’s harder to tack an object coming at you, the most important fact here is that firing directly at the President’s limo would likely expose the shooter immediately to the Secret Service Agents and other members of law enforcement facing the same direction as JFK. They would have opened fire on Oswald and stopped him from getting off more than one shot.

Like so many assertions made by conspiracy theorists, the “fact” that a Houston shot would be better is simply taken on faith, because it helps explain the false narrative they want to believe. The actual facts do not matter, because they only serve to distract true believers from their predetermined conclusions.


Return to the complete list of 55 reasons to accept that Oswald acted alone.

1 thought on “31. A Houston shot would not have been a better option than Elm St.

Comments are closed.

Create your website with WordPress.com
Get started
%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close