The ‘magic bullet’ theory that describes how a single bullet killed John F Kennedy and injured another has been cast into doubt by an ex-Secret Service agent.
Paul Landis, now 88, was in close-proximity to the then president on 22 November 1963, as the motorcade, also carrying First Lady Jackie Kennedy, and Texas Governor John Connally Jr and his wife drove through Dealy Plaza in Dallas.
A series of gunshots were then fired and Mr Kennedy was hit in the head and neck, while the Texas governor was hit in the back.
For decades, and after the Warren Commission government inquiry into the incident, it was decided one of the bullets struck the president from behind before exiting from the front of his throat and hitting Mr Connally Jr.
This became known as the ‘magic bullet theory’.
Image: Pic: AP
One of the reasons why the commission reached these results was due to a bullet found on Mr Connally Jr’s stretcher when he arrived at Parkland Memorial Hospital after the shooting.
The conclusion, that a single bullet could cause so much damage and lead to the conviction of Lee Harvey Oswald, has caused decades of speculation among conspiracy theorists for 60 years.
Image: The limousine carrying the wounded president races toward the hospital. Pic: AP
Mr Landis’ account now challenges the Warren Commission, as he claims it was him who had found a bullet lodged in the back of the seat of the presidential limousine where Mr Kennedy was sitting.
He spotted the bullet after the motorcade arrived at the hospital, and put it on the stretcher carrying the president. He now guesses Mr Kennedy and Mr Connally Jr’s stretchers somehow collided, meaning the bullet was shaken from one to the other.
“It was a piece of evidence, that I realised right away. Very important. And I didn’t want it to disappear or get lost,” he told The New York Times.
His account is detailed in his upcoming memoir, The Final Witness, but Mr Landis has been reluctant to speculate on the larger implications his memories might have.
In an interview with The NY Times, he said: “At this point, I’m beginning to doubt myself. Now I begin to wonder,” not confirming, if he believes there was more than one bullet or gunman.
Image: Lee Harvey Oswald. Pic: AP
Mr Landis theorises that the bullet which struck Mr Kennedy in the back, for some reason, fell out before the president’s body was removed from the limousine and did not penetrate deeply enough to also hit Mr Connally Jr.
James Robenalt, a Cleveland lawyer and author of several books of history, has deeply researched the assassination and helped Mr Landis process his memories.
“If the bullet we know as the magic or pristine bullet stopped in President Kennedy’s back, it means that the central thesis of the Warren Report, the single-bullet theory, is wrong,” he told The NY Times.
He added that if Mr Connally Jr was hit by a separate bullet, then it seemed possible it was not from Oswald, who he argued could not have reloaded a gun that fast.
Mr Landis’ revelations have prompted even more questions rather than answering them.
Firstly, the account in the memoir differs from two written statements he filed a week after the assassination, in which he said he only heard two gunshots, not three The NY Times reported.
Image: The Kennedy family at the president’s funeral in Washington. Pic: AP
Secondly, he did not mention going into the room where Mr Kennedy was taken at the hospital, writing that he “remained outside by the door” when the first lady went in.
Mr Landis said he did not realise his memory differed from his original account until 2014, but that he did not come forward as he said he thought he made a mistake putting the bullet on the stretcher.
“I was afraid. I started to think, did I do something wrong? There was a fear that I might have done something wrong and I shouldn’t talk about it,” he said.
The severity cannot be overstated, if an additional 50% tariffs are levied on all Chinese goods it will decimate trade between the world’s two biggest economies.
Remember, 50% would sit on top of what is already on the table: 34% announced last week, 20% announced at the start of US President Donald Trump’s term, and some additional tariffs left over from his first term in office.
In total, it means all Chinese goods would face tariffs of over 100%, some as high as 120%.
It’s a price that makes any trade almost impossible.
China is really the only nation in the world at the moment that is choosing to take a stand.
While others are publicly making concessions and sending delegations to negotiate, China has clearly calculated that not being seen to be bullied is worth the cost that retaliation will bring.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:50
Tariffs: Xi hits back at Trump
The real question, though, is if the US does indeed impose this extra 50% tomorrow, what could or would China do next?
There are some obvious measures that China will almost certainly enact.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Further export controls on rare earth minerals (crucial for the development of high-tech products) are one example. China controls a huge proportion of the world’s supply, but the US would likely find workarounds in time.
Hiking tariffs on high-impact US products such as agricultural goods is another option, but there is only so far this could go.
The potentially more impactful options have significant drawbacks for Beijing.
It could, for instance, target high-profile American companies such as Apple and Tesla, but this isn’t ideal at a time when China is trying to attract more foreign investment, and some devaluation of the currency is possible, but it would also come with adverse effects.
Other options are more political and come with the risk of escalation beyond the economic arena.
In an opinion piece this morning, the editor of Xinhua, China’s state news agency, speculated that China could cease all cooperation with the US on the war against fentanyl.
This has been a major political issue for Mr Trump, and it’s hard to see it would not constitute some sort of red line for him.
Other options touted include banning the import of American films, or perhaps calling for the Chinese public to boycott all American products.
Anything like this comes with a sense that the world’s two most powerful superpowers might be teetering on the edge of not just a total economic decoupling, but cultural separation too.
There is understandably serious nervousness about how that could spiral and the precedent it sets.
Donald Trump’s trade tariffs on what he calls “the worst offenders” come into effect at 5am UK time, with China facing by far the biggest levy.
The US will hit Chinese imports with 104% tariffs, marking a significant trade escalation between the world’s two largest superpowers.
At a briefing on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Donald Trump “believes that China wants to make a deal with the US,” before saying: “It was a mistake for China to retaliate.
“When America is punched, he punches back harder.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:54
White House announces 104% tariff on China
After Mr Trump announced sweeping levies last week – hitting some imported goods from China with 34% tariffs – Beijing officials responded with like-for-like measures.
The US president then piled on an extra 50% levy on China, taking the total to 104% unless it withdrew its retaliatory 34% tariff.
China’s commerce ministry said in turn that it would “fight to the end”, and its foreign ministry accused the US of “economic bullying” and “destabilising” the world’s economies.
More on China
Related Topics:
‘Worst offender’ tariffs also in effect
Alongside China’s 104% tariff, roughly 60 countries – dubbed by the US president as the “worst offenders” – will also see levies come into effect today.
The EU will be hit with 20% tariffs, while countries like Vietnam and Cambodia see a 46% levy and 49% rate respectively.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:03
What’s going on with the US and China?
Since the tariffs were announced last Wednesday, global stock markets have plummeted, with four days of steep losses for all three of the US’ major indexes.
As trading closed on Tuesday evening, the S&P 500 lost 1.49%, the Nasdaq Composite fell 2.15%, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 0.84%.
According to LSEG data, S&P 500 companies have lost $5.8tn (£4.5tn) in stock market value since last Wednesday, the deepest four-day loss since the benchmark was created in the 1950s.
Image: Global stock markets have been reeling since Trump’s tariff announcement last week. Pic: AP
Meanwhile, the US president signed four executive orders to boost American coal mining and production.
The directives order: • keeping some coal plants that were set for retirement open; • directing the interior secretary to “acknowledge the end” of an Obama-era moratorium that paused coal leasing on federal lands; • requiring federal agencies to rescind policies transitioning the US away from coal production, and; • directing the Department of Energy and other federal agencies to assess how coal energy can meet rising demand from artificial intelligence.
At a White House ceremony, Mr Trump said the orders end his predecessor Joe Biden’s “war on beautiful clean coal,” and miners “will be put back to work”.
The severity cannot be overstated, if an additional 50% tariffs are levied on all Chinese goods it will decimate trade between the world’s two biggest economies.
Remember, 50% would sit on top of what is already on the table: 34% announced last week, 20% announced at the start of US President Donald Trump’s term, and some additional tariffs left over from his first term in office.
In total, it means all Chinese goods would face tariffs of over 100%, some as high as 120%.
It’s a price that makes any trade almost impossible.
China is really the only nation in the world at the moment that is choosing to take a stand.
While others are publicly making concessions and sending delegations to negotiate, China has clearly calculated that not being seen to be bullied is worth the cost that retaliation will bring.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:50
Tariffs: Xi hits back at Trump
The real question, though, is if the US does indeed impose this extra 50% tomorrow, what could or would China do next?
There are some obvious measures that China will almost certainly enact.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Further export controls on rare earth minerals (crucial for the development of high-tech products) are one example. China controls a huge proportion of the world’s supply, but the US would likely find workarounds in time.
Hiking tariffs on high-impact US products such as agricultural goods is another option, but there is only so far this could go.
The potentially more impactful options have significant drawbacks for Beijing.
It could, for instance, target high-profile American companies such as Apple and Tesla, but this isn’t ideal at a time when China is trying to attract more foreign investment, and some devaluation of the currency is possible, but it would also come with adverse effects.
Other options are more political and come with the risk of escalation beyond the economic arena.
In an opinion piece this morning, the editor of Xinhua, China’s state news agency, speculated that China could cease all cooperation with the US on the war against fentanyl.
This has been a major political issue for Mr Trump, and it’s hard to see it would not constitute some sort of red line for him.
Other options touted include banning the import of American films, or perhaps calling for the Chinese public to boycott all American products.
Anything like this comes with a sense that the world’s two most powerful superpowers might be teetering on the edge of not just a total economic decoupling, but cultural separation too.
There is understandably serious nervousness about how that could spiral and the precedent it sets.