Here's a correction OP for 50 Reasons, 50 Years OP

[William Seger]

168. BTW, Re: Fiester as an "expert"

In searching to see if I could find anything by Fiester where she actually seemed to be aware of the 2.5" forward snap (since you can't seem to find one), I came across this thread on the JFK History Forum where a poster named Robert Harris questions Fiester's conclusion about where the "second shooter" must have been located. (Bolo Boffin brought up these same points in another thread.)

One thing I noticed is that Fiester is not actually a ballistics expert, as you disingenuously claimed, but rather as a "certified crime scene investigator" who claims, "My expertise is in crime scene reconstruction, which includes trajectory reconstruction." But given that claim of expertise, it's rather remarkable (and not in a good way) that, as Harris points out, neither of the two shooter locations she posits is physically possible: The overpass is not high enough for a shot to clear the windshield, and from the "south knoll," Jackie would have blocked the shot. Harris demonstrates the first point with some clear language and simple geometry, but Fiester didn't understand it. Instead she apparently thought he was making some point about a presumed entry/exit angle. When he explained it again, she disappeared from the thread.

So, your "expert" is not really an expert in the field you claim, and in the field that she does claim expertise in, she doesn't appear to be very good at it.

Fail.