The First Shot

[Dan O'meara]

As far as the possibility of a shot at 190, it's not just the blur analysis and eyewitness evidence that places the first shot at this time, but the photo analysis. One of the most overlooked facts about the case is that the HSCA photography panel concluded a shot rang out before Kennedy went behind the sign...and that they came to this conclusion before the acoustics panel came to their conclusion a shot at Z-190 was probable.

Dave Powers said Kennedy jerked off the side of the car when hit. Kennedy's head and arm movements as he heads behind the sign suggest he was hit at this time. His movements at this time certainly don't look natural. And the failure of Dale Myers etc to acknowledge this and to insist he continued calmly waving at this time is perplexing, to say the least.

The first point is about Jiggle/blur analysis of the Z-film.
You would not disagree that only a very loud noise would cause such blur/jiggle.
You would also agree that, according to the vast majority of ear-witnesses, only three clearly audible shots rang out.
But would you agree that more than three instances of blur/jiggle during the Z-film makes the use of this analysis to determine when shots occurred completely redundant?
Another observation of the HCSA panel was that JFK 'froze' before going behind the Stemmons sign.
This is not shown in the Z-film.
The 'biggest' revelation was that JFK made a startling head turn to his left just before passing behind the Stemmons sign.
This has been completely refuted in this thread. JFK made no such head turn.
This leaves you with witnesses like Willis and Powers but I will hold up witnesses like Brandt and Templin who are absolutely adamant the first shot hit Kennedy after the limo had passed their position.
This rules out a first shot at z190 as does JFK's reaction to being shot as seen in the Z-film.

[Charles Collins]

The first point is about Jiggle/blur analysis of the Z-film.
You would not disagree that only a very loud noise would cause such blur/jiggle.
You would also agree that, according to the vast majority of ear-witnesses, only three clearly audible shots rang out.
But would you agree that more than three instances of blur/jiggle during the Z-film makes the use of this analysis to determine when shots occurred completely redundant?
Another observation of the HCSA panel was that JFK 'froze' before going behind the Stemmons sign.
This is not shown in the Z-film.
The 'biggest' revelation was that JFK made a startling head turn to his left just before passing behind the Stemmons sign.
This has been completely refuted in this thread. JFK made no such head turn.
This leaves you with witnesses like Willis and Powers but I will hold up witnesses like Brandt and Templin who are absolutely adamant the first shot hit Kennedy after the limo had passed their position.
This rules out a first shot at z190 as does JFK's reaction to being shot as seen in the Z-film.

Dan, witness accounts will never cause visual evidence such as the Zapruder film to be ruled out. The opposite is going to happen every time.

[Jerry Organ]

Well, he is a Pulitzer Prize winning photographer. so that makes him somewhat of a star. That also indicates that he has some good observational skills.  But I have to thank you for pointing out Malcolm Kilduff whose later statements I was not aware of until you kindly pointed it out. Funny how that is: the more one digs, the more evidence one finds that the shot pattern was 1.....2...3.

You're welcome. BTW, I'm not denying a majority of witnesses felt a certain way about the shot spanning and that they were honest in their reporting. I just don't think we should use such samplings from any shot-spanning group. It's a minor detail likely not measured in real time.

Also: "1.....2...3" looks pretty evenly-spaced to me.

I don't have to explain.  Her testimony speaks for itself:
"Miss WILLIS. Yes; I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together. When the first one hit, well, the President turned from waving to the people, and he grabbed his throat, and he kind of slumped forward, and then I couldn’t tell where the second shot went."

With this you have to explain how "a little bit of time" and "two real fast bullets"  work out to 1.....2..3. Josiah Thompson couldn't explain it either:

    "Linda Kay Willis told me she thought the shots were evenly spaced,
     while earlier she had told the Warren Commission she thought the
     last two were bunched."

All you have to do is look at the Zapruder film to see JFK doing exactly what Linda Willis said she saw...AFTER the first shot and before "two real fast bullets together".  So, despite what your suspicions may be from your photo analysis, she was able to see that.

The Zapruder film shows she can't see Kennedy at all during the time of your first shot.

I don't know what you think you are seeing in Altgens #6 but it looks to me like something is blocking a clear view of the right side of the back seat to the right of Lady Bird. What else could that be?  We can see the top/side of the back of Johnson's head but we can't see Younblood's head anywhere.

What else could that be? How about Johnson left arm reaching forward to grip or rest on the top of the front seat? The dark upright shape in front of Johnson's head is the back of Youngblood's head. Youngblood is turned to his right talking to Johnson who's leaning in to listen.

You're talking about Youngblood being able to morph like the android in Terminator 2.

It is absolutely impossible to tell what direction Greer is looking in the Altgens photo.  There is just shadow.

Greer can see Connally by just moving his head. And the pattern of the shape above the steering wheel is consistent with Greer's head.

But if you look at the zfilm during this time his chest and shoulders do not move at all.

Yeah, sure. Greer shirt front doesn't change shape about the late Z-240s.

Greer shirt front "normal".

Greer's shirt front changes width.

As the car progresses relative to the camera, the front seat area becomes narrower. Greer's shirt, if unchanged, should be getting narrower between Z246 and Z253. Instead the opposite occurs.

The second shot at z271 is consistent with:
1. JBC sailing toward the front before falling back on his wife

Connally begins to fall back towards Nellie.

More of Connally's chest is visible (due to leaning away from the car interior) and he's much closer to Nellie, who hasn't moved.

2. change in appearance of JBC's cuff from z271-272

Since Z271 has directional blur, how about we compare Z272 to a clearer frame?

3. movement of the sunvisor z271-272

The sun visor wobbles more before reaching the lamp post than after. So ad nauseam.

4. JFK's hair flying up from z273-276 as reported by Hickey.

Just that Hickey (and Kinney) can't possibly see to that area of the head at that moment. This is such an old chestnut.

5. Greer turning back immediately AFTER the second shot and seeing JBC falling back onto his wife. That does not begin until z278.

Wrong again. Connally actually moves across more of the width of the car before Z278 than after.

It is also now corroborated by secret service interviews as recounted by Gerald Blaine in his book The Kennedy Detail who reported that the second shot occurred as Clint Hill stepped off the runningboard and ran to the President's car.

LOL. You've shown your hand.

[Dan O'meara]

Dan, witness accounts will never cause visual evidence such as the Zapruder film to be ruled out. The opposite is going to happen every time.

I couldn't agree more with you Charles, for me the Z-film is the benchmark against which witness evidence should be tested.
You're idea of a shot @ z130's has been utterly refuted in this thread using the Z-film but it seems to have made little difference to your point of view.

[Charles Collins]

I couldn't agree more with you Charles, for me the Z-film is the benchmark against which witness evidence should be tested.
You're idea of a shot @ z130's has been utterly refuted in this thread using the Z-film but it seems to have made little difference to your point of view.

Can you cite a witness account that I have used in an attempt to rule out what can be seen in the Zapruder film?

And specifically what is it that you believe is shown in the Zapruder film that would “utterly refute” the shot around the Z133 time?

[Dan O'meara]

What do we see in the Willis photo that proves it was taken simultaneously with the first shot?

I see some things that suggest it was taken well after the first shot:

• Mrs. Kennedy and the Connallys are looking to their right; all said they turned their heads in reaction to hearing the first shot; the Connallys beginning in the Z160s and Mrs. Kennedy in the Z170s.
  

The reason they are looking to their right is because the crowds are to their right, there is just an empty space to the left with the odd person to their right. Watch the Z-film, as they enter the area with no-one to their left heads turn right. Why would they be looking into an unoccupied area?

Willis05 was taken at Z202. Willis himself stated:

    "Mrs. Kennedy was likewise smiling and facing more to my side of
     the street. When the first shot was fired, her head seemed to just
     snap in that direction ... she turned to the right toward him."

I like the way you criticise Willis so much but are willing to quote him when necessary. You've missed that Jackie's head turn to the right begins @ z174 further undermining Willis' observations.

• Agent John Ready is looking off to his right; he also said he did this in response to the first shot.
  

I'm pretty sure we've been here before.
Ready does not say he turns to the right.
He says he turns to the right rear. He says he looks behind him.
It's mildly annoying you won't be corrected on this.

My timing of the Willis photo is that it was taken about 2.4 seconds after the first shot and 1.14 seconds before the second shot. If it happened that way, the Willis photo was "simultaneous" with the first two shots, but not a particular shot. Willis was sort of telling the truth, Ted Cruz-style.

To imagine the SS agents riding on the follow up car took so long to react is ridiculous. It's utterly ridiculous. We see the reaction in Altgens 6, it matches perfectly with their own testimony and is confirmed by other testimony. This has been dealt with at length in this thread but you refuse to deal with it.[/list]

[Dan O'meara]

Can you cite a witness account that I have used in an attempt to rule out what can be seen in the Zapruder film?

And specifically what is it that you believe is shown in the Zapruder film that would “utterly refute” the shot around the Z133 time?

Start at the beginning of this thread. The testimonies of the SS agents riding in the follow up car alone refutes it. You have not dealt with any of the arguments presented in this thread that rule out a shot so early.

[Charles Collins]

Start at the beginning of this thread. The testimonies of the SS agents riding in the follow up car alone refutes it. You have not dealt with any of the arguments presented in this thread that rule out a shot so early.

I already addressed your opinion about this. You disagreed. And now you claim that I haven’t dealt with it. Your interpretation of the instant in time depicted in the Altgens photo is your opinion. And your opinion of that, in no way whatsoever, utterly refutes the evidence that has been presented suggesting a shot around Z133. I have good company in my assessment. See Max Holland’s documentary “The Lost Bullet” for a better presentation than I can provide on my own. The main difference between his and my viewpoints is that he believes the bullet hit the traffic signal which caused it to miss the target. While I believe the likelihood of interference in the sniper’s nest caused an inadvertent shot (before the shot was fully aimed).