The First Shot

[Dan O'meara]

If that is the case, the WC, HSCA, Bugliosi etc. were preposterous for thinking it possible.  Ok.  What about John McCone's anecdote about the soldier who had a very gradual reaction to being fatally shot through the chest?

In McCone's anecdote did the soldier have a gradual reaction then suddenly have an extreme and rapid physical reaction?
Please cite where the WC, HSCA, Bugliosi etc. describe a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme and incredibly rapid reaction.
Please provide any example from anywhere that describes something remotely similar to a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme and rapid reaction.
If you can't you must start to question the validity of the point you're trying to make.

Or accept the far more plausible explanation - the sudden, extreme and rapid physical reactions we see starting at z225 are reflex reactions to being shot at z223.

[Dan O'meara]

A key part of the model I'm presenting is that John Connally is shot through at the same time and by the same bullet that hits JFK. There are two key differences to the traditional SBT. Firstly, it's the first of the three audible shots fired during the assassination. There is no missed first shot and, although some researchers will never let go of their cherished models, I feel this thread has successfully argued against a missed early shot.
Secondly, this has got nothing to do with CE 399. There is no Magic Bullet. I believe the bullet that passes through both men fragments on contact with JBC's wrist. The question then becomes - is it possible for a rifle bullet to pass through two men? I doubt there are many who would question that possibility.
I will be putting emphasis on the Z-film as the 'priority' evidence against which secondary evidence, such as witness statements, must be interpreted and not the other way round - witness evidence driving the interpretation of what we see in the Z-film.

The close-up of the Z-film below focusses on JBC. It begins with him looking to his right, towards the people lining Elm St. He has a quick look to his left then resumes looking to his right. By z167 JBC has completed his turn to the left and is looking towards the crowds to his right. He stays in this position, looking towards the crowd to his right, as he passes behind the Stemmons sign:



The pic below shows JBC as he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign. He seems composed and untroubled, certainly in no physical discomfort. It appears he is in the same position as when he passes behind the sign.



So after his turn to the left (@ z160's), JBC is looking to his right (from z167 onwards), towards the crowds on his right. He stays in this position as he passes behind the sign and is in the same position as he emerges from behind the sign, looking composed and untroubled.

From this seemingly relaxed position JBC undergoes a rapid and extreme reaction. He is holding his Stetson hat which is resting in his lap. Between frames z222 and z228 the Stetson suddenly leaps up to his face. This action takes approximately one third of a second. It is incredibly quick. Up to this point the hat has been resting in his lap then suddenly, at exactly the same moment JFK is making his incredibly rapid movements, JBC also "decides" to make an incredibly rapid movement of his own:



This movement is so rapid it's difficult to see exactly how high the Stetson gets. In the zframe below (z228), the whitish blob in front of JBC's face is the Stetson.



It has moved from a resting position on his lap in z222 to being up in front of his face in z228. The speed of this movement can be measured at 0.33 seconds - one third of a second! It is an incredibly rapid physical movement from a resting position. It is clear this extreme and rapid physical reaction is in response to some kind of stimulus. It cannot be considered coincidental that JFK is undergoing extreme and rapid physical movements at exactly the same moment.

[Dan O'meara]

Just to put the speed of JBC's physical movement in some kind of context. The following quote is taken from an article entitled
"Reaction time aspects of elite sprinters in athletic world championships":

"The best reaction times were registered at the age of 26-29 years for males (0.150 ± 0.017 seconds)"

By the time it takes an elite sprinter to react to a starter's gun, JBC is about half way through his movement.
It is mind-boggling that this middle-aged man, from a state of rest, is suddenly engaged in such an extreme physical movement.

[Dan O'meara]

An even more mind-boggling aspect of JBC's extreme and rapid physical reaction being discussed is that the first part of this movement is downwards

I lifted the following Gif from the superb site hosted by Vincent Van, "The Little JFK Page on the Prairie" [http://users.skynet.be/mar/Eng/jfk-eng.htm#sommet]
There is a small white area in front of JBC, just above the door of the limo. It is clearly seen in z222 and is part of JFK's right shirt cuff (for confirmation of this visit Van's site). In z223 the cuff has disappeared, this action happens in a tiny fraction of a second.



We are seeing JBC's shirt cuff suddenly disappearing below the top edge of the limo door. It is my opinion that this is the moment the bullet strikes JBC's wrist after having passed through his torso but for the moment I would like to make the point that at z223 JBC's hand has been forced further down than it's normal resting position.
This makes the movement from z224 to z228 even more startling as JBC's Stetson travels from down by his lap to in front of his face in approximately 0.22 seconds - less than a quarter of a second!!

[Dan O'meara]

The Gif below starts at z222 and finishes at z250.
At the start we can see JBC's cuff as discussed above. As the film rolls JBC's wrist is forced below the limo door frame then his arm suddenly springs up incredibly rapidly. From that moment on his hand is held at what appears to be a very unnatural angle (IMO), as if the wrist is no longer providing support for the hand. Consistent with the massive trauma to his wrist caused by the bullet.



I will return to this Gif as there are many other interesting aspects to it, JBC's 'jacket bulge' in particular.
Also of interest is JBC's WC testimony in which he states - "... immediately, when I was hit, I said, "Oh, no, no, no."
I believe this is shown in the Z-film.

[Andrew Mason]

In McCloy's (corrected: not McCone's) anecdote did the soldier have a gradual reaction then suddenly have an extreme and rapid physical reaction?

Yes. McCloy  (corrected: not McCone's)  was standing beside him when he was hit.  The soldier remained standing and said, "I think I've been shot". He then fell over and collapsed (corrected: not "died").

Please cite where the WC, HSCA, Bugliosi etc. describe a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme and incredibly rapid reaction.

They all concluded that JFK could have been shot in the neck well before z223.  The WC said he was likely hit between z210 and z225 (WR 105). Bugliosi concluded he was hit "within a split-second of Z210" (Reclaiming History). The HSCA concluded he was hit at z190 (6 HSCA 43).

[Dan O'meara]

Yes. McCone was standing beside him when he was hit.  The soldier remained standing and said, "I think I've been shot". He then fell over and died.

This is not a gradual reaction followed by a sudden and rapid physical reaction. When I asked...
"In McCone's anecdote did the soldier have a gradual reaction then suddenly have an extreme and rapid physical reaction?"
...the answer is NO, this did not happen, instead of the contradictory nonsense you came up with.

They all concluded that JFK could have been shot in the neck well before z223.  The WC said he was likely hit between z210 and z225 (WR 105). Bugliosi concluded he was hit "within a split-second of Z210" (Reclaiming History). The HSCA concluded he was hit at z190 (6 HSCA 43).

So not one of them described a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme and rapid reaction. When I asked you to...
"...cite where the WC, HSCA, Bugliosi etc. describe a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme and incredibly rapid reaction."
...your answer should have been - I can't cite anything like that as there is no example of that anywhere.

Your proposed model of a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme, and rapid physical reaction is utter nonsense but you won't admit it. In your defence of the nonsensical you end up talking nonsense.
Is it so hard to accept that the sudden, extreme and rapid physical reactions displayed by both JFK and JBC at exactly the same moment, are in response to a shot at z223?

[Andrew Mason]

This is not a gradual reaction followed by a sudden and rapid physical reaction. When I asked...
"In McCone's anecdote did the soldier have a gradual reaction then suddenly have an extreme and rapid physical reaction?"
...the answer is NO, this did not happen, instead of the contradictory nonsense you came up with.

Sorry, I meant McCloy, not McCone.  (3 HSCA 605): "Cutter turned to me at a certain point, sort of hesitated and said, 'Jack, I think I'm shot,' and in a little while, he collapsed."  (another correction; it appears he did not die, he just collapsed). 

Why can a person who has been shot in the neck not have a moment of hesitation before having a sudden reaction when he realizes that he cannot breathe?

So not one of them described a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme and rapid reaction. When I asked you to...
"...cite where the WC, HSCA, Bugliosi etc. describe a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme and incredibly rapid reaction."
...your answer should have been - I can't cite anything like that as there is no example of that anywhere.

Your proposed model of a gradual reaction followed by a sudden, extreme, and rapid physical reaction is utter nonsense but you won't admit it. In your defence of the nonsensical you end up talking nonsense.
Is it so hard to accept that the sudden, extreme and rapid physical reactions displayed by both JFK and JBC at exactly the same moment, are in response to a shot at z223?

If I followed your posts correctly, the argument you made against a shot earlier than z223 is:
1. the response we see in JFK after z225 is an extreme physical reaction;
2. that response is to being shot through the neck;
3. that JFK's visible reaction after z225 could not have been preceded by a less intense reaction over a period of a second or so after being hit at z195 or z210; and
4. to suggest otherwise is preposterous.

I simply pointed out that when the WC, HSCA and Bugliosi, all of whom could see JFK's actions after z225, concluded that the shot was or could have been about a second earlier than z223, they were suggesting that "otherwise" was a reasonable possibility.  I, therefore, said, ok, the WC, HSCA and Bugliosi were being preposterous. That is not my opinion, of course. That is simply the logical conclusion that follows from your argument.