The First Shot

[Walt Cakebread]

If you could Walt, please deal with the arguments being presented.

I thought this was the perfect opportunity to point out that there was a tree between The sixth floor window and JFK at the time he was hit in THE THROAT.

[Dan O'meara]

I thought this was the perfect opportunity to point out that there was a tree between The sixth floor window and JFK at the time he was hit in THE THROAT.

No Walt, this is not the perfect opportunity for your incoherent ramblings.
Over 160 witnesses reported THREE CLEARLY AUDIBLE SHOTS (more than 75% of all witnesses who reported on the shots)
I am trying to establish when the first of these THREE CLEARLY AUDIBLE SHOTS occurred.
Obviously, this is not a topic for flakes who have gunmen all over the place firing a range of weaponry, it's for those who accept credible evidence.
It's important to establish when the first of these THREE CLEARLY AUDIBLE SHOTS occurred as there is no consensus on such a fundamental issue.
If you have a comment to make about the evidence I've presented lets hear it.

[Andrew Mason]

My own proposal.
It can be seen from the above image that both cars are now travelling on Elm after having completed the turn off Houston. There can be no doubt that this is the only theory that comes anywhere close to fitting the witness statements of the 10 occupants of these vehicles.
Yet further corroboration, if any were needed, that the first shot was the one that struck JFK in the throat around z223.

I agree with your reasoning and your conclusion that by z223 there has only been one shot.  I know you think that there was a shot at z223 based on the belief that the change in the appearance of JBC's jacket is caused by a bullet. 

But how do you explain the movement of JFK's left arm from a full wave in z193 to a clenched fist in front of his neck at z224.  The arm movement and fist clench had to have occurred before the shot, if the shot was a z223.  How do you explain that?  Pre-cognition?  And how would the bullet exiting his neck not strike the fist or arm?

The evidence you have provided is equally consistent with a first shot about a second earlier. Also, the Secret Service film shows that Oswald would have had a clear view of JFK without obstruction by the oak tree by the time he was between the lamp post and the Thornton sign, which is before z200. Karen Westbrook was standing opposite JFK at about z225 according to Roberdeau's map.  She said (22 H 679): "The car he was in was almost directly in front of where I was standing when I heard the first explosion." If the President was directly in front of her at the time of the shot, as you suggest, the car would have been almost past her not almost directly in front of where she was standing as she stated.  Jane Berry, who was about 20 feet farther east according to Roberdeau's map and opposite JFK at z200, said the first shot occurred just as the car was passing her.  That puts the first shot around z200.  TE Moore said that by the time the President had reached the Thornton Freeway sign, a shot was fired.  JFK was opposite the Thornton sign at z200.

[Dan O'meara]

I agree with your reasoning and your conclusion that by z223 there has only been one shot.  I know you think that there was a shot at z223 based on the belief that the change in the appearance of JBC's jacket is caused by a bullet.

I have presented a multitude of arguments in this thread demonstrating the first shot occurred at z223. The radical bulging of the right side of JBC's jacket caused by the bullet exiting his chest is just one piece of evidence confirming my "belief".
The latest argument, based on the work of Pat Speer and Mark Tyler, refutes all other theories regarding when the first shot occurred, including your own (unless you've changed it again).

But how do you explain the movement of JFK's left arm from a full wave in z193 to a clenched fist in front of his neck at z224.  The arm movement and fist clench had to have occurred before the shot, if the shot was a z223.  How do you explain that?  Pre-cognition?  And how would the bullet exiting his neck not strike the fist or arm?

This has been explained at length in this thread and has nothing to do with pre-cognition.

The evidence you have provided is equally consistent with a first shot about a second earlier. Also, the Secret Service film shows that Oswald would have had a clear view of JFK without obstruction by the oak tree by the time he was between the lamp post and the Thornton sign, which is before z200.

"The evidence you have provided is equally consistent with a first shot about a second earlier."

So you're now changing your theory to a first shot around z205?

What are you basing that on?

[Walt Cakebread]

No Walt, this is not the perfect opportunity for your incoherent ramblings.
Over 160 witnesses reported THREE CLEARLY AUDIBLE SHOTS (more than 75% of all witnesses who reported on the shots)
I am trying to establish when the first of these THREE CLEARLY AUDIBLE SHOTS occurred.
Obviously, this is not a topic for flakes who have gunmen all over the place firing a range of weaponry, it's for those who accept credible evidence.
It's important to establish when the first of these THREE CLEARLY AUDIBLE SHOTS occurred as there is no consensus on such a fundamental issue.
If you have a comment to make about the evidence I've presented lets hear it.

Obviously, this is not a topic for flakes who have gunmen all over the place firing a range of weaponry, it's for those who accept credible evidence.

I could not be in more agreement...  And the plat of Z223 presents, not merely credible evidence , but  irrefutable evidence that there was a tree between the sixth floor window and President Kennedy at the time he was stuck in THE THROAT....(Z 223)

[Dan O'meara]

Obviously, this is not a topic for flakes who have gunmen all over the place firing a range of weaponry, it's for those who accept credible evidence.

I could not be in more agreement...  And the plat of Z223 presents, not merely credible evidence , but  irrefutable evidence that there was a tree between the sixth floor window and President Kennedy at the time he was stuck in THE THROAT....(Z 223)

Below is the graphic demonstrating JFK was clear of the oak tree by z225 (110 milliseconds after z223)



Provide evidence that a sniper's view from the south-east corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD was blocked by the oak tree @223.
Don't just bluster your way through it, provide actual evidence to support your claim.

[Dan O'meara]

Kennedy's right hand is cupped and may be in the process of forming a fist (which it appears to be by Z226). But that would only represent the passage of one frame to get the hand cupped. You're talking about Kennedy needing 30 frames or almost two seconds just to cup his hand if he was shot in the mid-Z190s.



I don't think Moore could see to the President slumping Z228ff. His statement says he saw the President "slump" on the first shot. Kennedy leans forward in the Z170s, within a second of the Connally's rightward head-turns, which they said occurred when they heard the first shot. Moore wasn't side-to the limousine (he was almost directly behind) so his impression of Kennedy having "reached the Thornton Freeway sign" seems not based on anything comparative.

Surprised you showed up here, Jerry, but not surprised you've completely ignored the latest evidence I've provided to support a first shot at z223.
All 10 occupants of the VP car and VP follow-up car are in agreement on this single point - that both cars have completed the turn off Houston and are travelling on Elm Street.
All 10 statements corroborate each other on this point.
You're theory (which I've catered for) is a first shot around z160. Let's have a look at Mark Tyler's mapping program for around z160:



As we can see, the VP car (#7) has not fully completed it's turn onto Elm St. and the VP follow-up car (#8) is still on Houston St.
This positioning for a first shot is completely refuted by the witness statements of ALL 10 OCCUPANTS of the two vehicles.
A first shot around z160 is completely refuted by this evidence.
If you feel there is a glaring weakness with the evidence I've used or the methodology I've used I would like to discuss it.
If you don't believe there is any weakness, isn't this the kind of solid evidence that should be informing your opinion about when the first shot occurred?
Are you just going to carry on believing the same thing, even when confronted by such evidence?
Surely it's the evidence that should be informing your opinion.
Surely that is the bedrock of wanting to know what really happened that day in Dealey Plaza.