My research suggests that both groups fail to understand the situation properly, and after reading this, will hopefully move closer to a middle position.
The main rifle used in the cafe was a Colt AR15 SP1 carbine. This had a 4x20 Colt handle scope mounted on the carry handle. The scope is generally sighted in at 100m, confirmed by a contact of mine who used the exact same rifle in competitions before April 1996. This experienced shooter said the scope would be utterly useless at the close ranges inside the cafe, and would block the view of the target. This opinion is supported by other evidence: for example, some sports shooters install backup iron sights at 45 degrees on the barrel, for this exact type of test - see photos.
Neither my contact nor Martin's AR15 had backup iron sights.
So the scope was useless inside the cafe, actively hindering the shooter from acquiring a quick sight picture, particularly from making 19 accurate shots in 21 seconds, as proven by the video tape soundtrack.
So even if Martin was an experienced shooter with the scoped AR15 (which I doubt), the close range inside the cafe negated it completely.
So, was the shooter a "special forces" type marksman? I don't believe this is necessary either. Point Shooting is a technique taught to infantry in many armies around the world, allowing a shooter to make aimed shots without using the sights. There are instructional videos on youtube, if you wish to learn it.
Any soldier or marksman who was trained in point shooting, would be able to make the fast, aimed shots demonstrated inside the cafe.
Martin was not trained in point shooting. He had fired less than 20 rounds through his AR15 and had never fired the shotgun as he was afraid of the recoil. His interest in firearms was collecting the guns used by his movie heroes, not actually shooting them.
Further, there is no DNA from the lunchtime utensils or cup used by the shooter to prove he was there. Interrogated by police, he repeatedly says that he could not afford the entry fee to Port Arthur, despite wanting to go in, so he drove past.
The guilty plea that John Avery maliciously betrayed and manipulated his client into making is the only reason Martin is in prison. If the evidence could be cross examined, there is no way a guilty verdict would be delivered.
My novel uses witness statements and court documents to create a plausible alternative to the official story.
Amazon Paperback
https://tinyurl.com/y8uulhsd
https://tinyurl.com/y8uulhsd
Kindle
https://tinyurl.com/ycr883g9
https://tinyurl.com/ycr883g9
Lulu Paperback, if Amazon paperback is too expensive
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/OskarZim
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/OskarZim
No comments:
Post a Comment