The First Shot

[Dan O'meara]

If nothing else you seem to have convinced yourself as to where the shot took place. If you want the shot to be at Z223, you certainly can have it. All you have to do is ignore some witness statements, place credibility on distance estimation provided by others, and ignore what is readily seen in the Zapruder film. It really does not matter as long as you place it by those witnesses that I provided you with. The book ends to when the shot was fired are Jean Newman and the Chisms. After that anyone can look at the Zapruder film, Willis 5, Bronson 3, and other snapshots and make their own assessments. It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

Again, nothing but unsupported opinion.

It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

What evidence leads you to this opinion?

If it's just a case of "it looks that way to me", you needn't respond.

[Andrew Mason]

You appear to have carried those mistakes through to your own method of measurement. That's how we now have Mason's Voodoo Geometry.

Ok. I do owe you an apology, Jerry. Your model is fairly accurate. It is really your positions of the two men, that I question. 

limo_interior_with_measurements_CAD.jpg

When I did my Sketchup model I used measurements and inferences to determine the dimensions of the doors and rear seat depth:



In your critique of my model, you drew depth of the rear seating compartment in my model incorrectly. The arrow goes back to the back of the rear seat back. 

Here is my determination of the seating positions of the two men based on the best photo taken during the motorcade (on Main St.) using sight lines projected to the edges of the left rear hand-hold:



You have JFK 's midline 6 inches from the right side of the car, by my measurement.  He needs to be farther left in the position I have shown.  This is where the sightline to the right of the right side of the left rear hand hold passes just through a bit of his hair in the back.  You have JBC's position too far left.  The sight line to the left edge of the left hand-hold grazes the right side of his head.

So, on Main Street at least JBC's midline was only about half a head left of JFK's midline.

[Dan O'meara]

[Jack Nessan]

Again, nothing but unsupported opinion.

It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

What evidence leads you to this opinion?

If it's just a case of "it looks that way to me", you needn't respond.

It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

What evidence leads you to this opinion?

Your "evidence". No other conclusion can be reached. It was all just your opinion.

[Dan O'meara]

It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

What evidence leads you to this opinion?

Your "evidence". No other conclusion can be reached. It was all just your opinion.

Your "evidence". No other conclusion can be reached.

??
WTF is that supposed to mean??


You've stated you believe the first shot happened between z210 and z214, when JBC and JFK were behind the Stemmons sign.
You say you know this "based on Zapruder frames". Obviously this is utter nonsense and I keep asking you to clarify this statement
This will be the fourth time I've asked you to provide some kind of evidence to support this incredibly weak proposal.
Rather than do that [and I'm not saying you're a lazy researcher] you say it's the evidence I have provided for a first shot at z222/z223 that has led you to this 'revelation' and that "no other conclusion can be reached",

Really?

You made this statement:

"...I think it was a little earlier [than z222/z223] because you can use the Zapruder film with the aid of a few pieces of information and the witness statements to clarify where it actually took place."


I've asked you what in the Z-film are you using to come to this watery opinion?
What "few pieces of information" are you using?
What witness statements have you re-interpreted to reach this bogus conclusion?
Instead of providing one tiny scrap of evidence to support any of this [and, again, I'm not saying you're a lazy researcher], you simply say it's the evidence I have provided that demonstrates the first shot was at z222/z223.
And that there's no other way this evidence can be interpreted.
Even though it clearly demonstrates the first shot was around z222/z223.

I get the impression you're not going to do any work regarding the subject of this thread - when the first shot occurred.
You're just spouting some silly opinions based on nothing.
Maybe you've got nothing better to do and that's fair enough.
Or, and I think this is far more likely, you're completely out of your depth here and shouldn't really have stuck your beak in.

Get out of bed and start your own thread about how many shots there were.
It's not a massive effort and you might even enjoy it.
If you do, my first questions would be - why did the conspirators need to fake three shots? Why not just have two shots?

[Andrew Mason]

The positions are virtually the same as shown on my previous post.  The sight line from the left edge of the right hand-hold to the corner of the glass side panel passes through the front 1/4 to 1/3 of JFK's head.  The sight line from the edge of JFK's left shoulder passes to the left side of JBC's head and intersects the right sunvisor just a tad right of its centre:

This shows that Jerry's positions of both men are wrong. They are in very similar positions shown in the Sisco photo on Main Street. Here is the difference:

[Andrew Mason]

Just Mason strapping on his defense attorney cowboys and misrepresenting everything. How can my 3D model be "wrong" when it's not meant to show how the men were seated in the Sisco Photo or a still from the Powers film?



In this one Powers still, Kennedy is leaning towards his left (as in the Sisco Photo). Notice how high up his right shoulder is.



Now compare the angle of the President's shoulders in the Altgens05 Photo when Kennedy is seated upright, seconds before the turn onto Elm.

ok.  How is this for the positions of the men in Altgens #5 on Houston:

You have JFK a bit too far forward.  You can see that all but the cervical spine is pressed into the seatback.  The yellow lines show the sightlines for JFK's shoulders and turned head. The blue lines show the sight lines for JBC's head only since we cannot see his shoulders.

Does Mason not know the President was assassinated on Elm Street, and not Main?

He wasn't assassinated on Houston either.  Houston is just around the corner from Main.