Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The First Shot  (Read 122110 times)

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
    • SPMLaw
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1272 on: May 05, 2023, 01:58:55 PM »
Advertisement

All five witnesses - Templin, Brandt, Newman, Burney and Dishong - report that the limo/JFK had passed their position by the time of the first shot.
Four of the five make unequivocal statements regarding this.
In Reply#1245 you try to deal with this latest disaster for your own theory. But there's no need, your theory died long before this.
You accept Templin and Brandt's statements as you can try to brush them off with the 30+ years schtick. But a look at Speer's website, at the sheer volume of their statements and the incredible detail in them, shows they are not so easily brushed off.
As for the other three - Newman, Burney and Dishong - your attempts to twist their statements to your own needs is so bizarre it's disturbing.
As I say, you don't need to try so hard. You can let go now.
All I did was point out that others to their left, such as Berry, Thornton, and  Woodward gave more specific statements that do not agree with your interpretation. Even the Chisms, who put the first shot just after JFK turned and waved (z172-180) don't agree with your interpretation.  You still haven't explained why you reject Roberdeau's position for Burney, by the way.  And why do you put so much weight on people who gave statements 30+ years later as to the exact position of the car (Templin, Brandt, Dishong, Burney) while ignoring the statements of witnesses given close to the time of the event?

Quote
JEAN NEWMAN:
"I was standing right on this side of the Stemmons Freeway sign, about halfway between the sign and the edge of the building on the corner… The motorcade had just passed me when I heard something that I thought was a firecracker at first, and the President had just passed me, because after he had just passed, there was a loud report, it just scared me, and I noticed that the President jumped, he sort of ducked his head down, and I thought at the time that it probably scared him too."


"The motorcade had just passed me"
"...the President had just passed me, because after he had just passed me, there was a loud report..."

These are unequivocal statements.
JFK had passed her position when the first shot rang out. There is no other (reasonable) way to interpret these statements.
You say you don't know what "just" means. It doesn't matter. Newman is saying JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot.
"Just" indicates that he had only passed her position by a short distance when she heard the first shot. But it doesn't matter what the distance is, all that matters is that JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot.
That's it.

PEGGY BURNEY:
"When the President's car made the curve around the corner, he was smiling and waving...he was happy and Jackie was happy and smiling as they passed. The car had passed about 15 feet beyond me when I heard the first shot. I did not realize it was a shot; I thought it was a backfire. The President ducked; instinctively I told myself 'something is happening,' but nobody knew what."


"The car had passed about 15 feet beyond me when I heard the first shot."
Again, this is an unequivocal statement. I literally can't break this statement down into a simpler form. The limo carrying JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot. It wasn't in front of her, or yet to pass her - it had already passed.
Your attempts to re-interpret this statement are truly bizarre. I would urge the reader to check out Reply#1245.
There is no (reasonable) way to interpret this statement as anything other than what it is - an unequivocal statement that the limo carrying JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot.

JUNE DISHONG:
"His arm in the air waving… He drops his arm as they go by, possibly 20 feet. Suddenly--a sound. Gun shots? So hard to tell above the clamor of the crowd. The president bent forward into his wife’s lap as his arm slipped off the side of the car. Jackie circled him with her arm. Another shot. Panic among the people. Woman with children. Parents pushing them to the ground. No one knows where the shots are coming from. A cry. The President has been shot. A third shot, people scatter. I can't believe what I have seen.


"He drops his arm as they go by, possibly 20 feet. Suddenly--a sound. Gun shots?"
Of the three statements, this is the only one that is not crystal clear.
But I will have to highlight your attempt to re-interpret this statement as it shows how devious you can be with witness statements. You wrote:

"She [Dishong] said the first shot occurred "as they go by". That does not necessarily mean it was after JFK had passed her position."

Dishong did not say the first shot occurred "as they go by". This is a complete falsehood on your behalf.
Dishong clearly states that JFK "drops his arm as they go by". He has finished waving to the crowd and his arm drops as he passes Dishong's position.
After this there is a gunshot.
Her statement, in the context of the witness statements of those stood by her, should be read as follows:
After waving at the crowds to his right, JFK lowers his hand as he passes Dishong's position, after which she hears the first shot. Her mention of "possibly 20 ft" must refer to the distance of JFK/limo past her position at the time of the first shot.

Which brings us to another point. These various statements should be read together. They corroborate each other and form an interlocking matrix of information.
Your attempts to nit-pick each statement individually only reveals a certain desperation.

Just let go.
It is not a matter of nit-picking each statement.  It is a matter of looking at all the evidence.  The fact remains that your witnesses were trying to recall exact details for the first time years after the event.  It is not nit-picking to compare statements made within days of the event. 

By the way, JFK ends his wave beginning at z189.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1272 on: May 05, 2023, 01:58:55 PM »


Offline Jack Nessan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1273 on: May 05, 2023, 02:01:57 PM »
Thanks for telling us all about what John Chism was percieving.
Maybe you should give him a call and let him know as well.

All five witnesses - Templin, Brandt, Newman, Burney and Dishong - report that the limo/JFK had passed their position by the time of the first shot.
Four of the five make unequivocal statements regarding this.
In Reply#1245 you try to deal with this latest disaster for your own theory. But there's no need, your theory died long before this.
You accept Templin and Brandt's statements as you can try to brush them off with the 30+ years schtick. But a look at Speer's website, at the sheer volume of their statements and the incredible detail in them, shows they are not so easily brushed off.
As for the other three - Newman, Burney and Dishong - your attempts to twist their statements to your own needs is so bizarre it's disturbing.
As I say, you don't need to try so hard. You can let go now.

JEAN NEWMAN:
"I was standing right on this side of the Stemmons Freeway sign, about halfway between the sign and the edge of the building on the corner… The motorcade had just passed me when I heard something that I thought was a firecracker at first, and the President had just passed me, because after he had just passed, there was a loud report, it just scared me, and I noticed that the President jumped, he sort of ducked his head down, and I thought at the time that it probably scared him too."


"The motorcade had just passed me"
"...the President had just passed me, because after he had just passed me, there was a loud report..."

These are unequivocal statements.
JFK had passed her position when the first shot rang out. There is no other (reasonable) way to interpret these statements.
You say you don't know what "just" means. It doesn't matter. Newman is saying JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot.
"Just" indicates that he had only passed her position by a short distance when she heard the first shot. But it doesn't matter what the distance is, all that matters is that JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot.
That's it.

PEGGY BURNEY:
"When the President's car made the curve around the corner, he was smiling and waving...he was happy and Jackie was happy and smiling as they passed. The car had passed about 15 feet beyond me when I heard the first shot. I did not realize it was a shot; I thought it was a backfire. The President ducked; instinctively I told myself 'something is happening,' but nobody knew what."


"The car had passed about 15 feet beyond me when I heard the first shot."
Again, this is an unequivocal statement. I literally can't break this statement down into a simpler form. The limo carrying JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot. It wasn't in front of her, or yet to pass her - it had already passed.
Your attempts to re-interpret this statement are truly bizarre. I would urge the reader to check out Reply#1245.
There is no (reasonable) way to interpret this statement as anything other than what it is - an unequivocal statement that the limo carrying JFK had passed her position at the time of the first shot.

JUNE DISHONG:
"His arm in the air waving… He drops his arm as they go by, possibly 20 feet. Suddenly--a sound. Gun shots? So hard to tell above the clamor of the crowd. The president bent forward into his wife’s lap as his arm slipped off the side of the car. Jackie circled him with her arm. Another shot. Panic among the people. Woman with children. Parents pushing them to the ground. No one knows where the shots are coming from. A cry. The President has been shot. A third shot, people scatter. I can't believe what I have seen.


"He drops his arm as they go by, possibly 20 feet. Suddenly--a sound. Gun shots?"
Of the three statements, this is the only one that is not crystal clear.
But I will have to highlight your attempt to re-interpret this statement as it shows how devious you can be with witness statements. You wrote:

"She [Dishong] said the first shot occurred "as they go by". That does not necessarily mean it was after JFK had passed her position."

Dishong did not say the first shot occurred "as they go by". This is a complete falsehood on your behalf.
Dishong clearly states that JFK "drops his arm as they go by". He has finished waving to the crowd and his arm drops as he passes Dishong's position.
After this there is a gunshot.
Her statement, in the context of the witness statements of those stood by her, should be read as follows:
After waving at the crowds to his right, JFK lowers his hand as he passes Dishong's position, after which she hears the first shot. Her mention of "possibly 20 ft" must refer to the distance of JFK/limo past her position at the time of the first shot.

Which brings us to another point. These various statements should be read together. They corroborate each other and form an interlocking matrix of information.
Your attempts to nit-pick each statement individually only reveals a certain desperation.

Just let go.

Which brings us to another point. These various statements should be read together. They corroborate each other and form an interlocking matrix of information.
 
With this in mind. Jean Newman was opposite JFK at approximately Z200. The Chisms state the first shot occurred before them. They are 15 feet from Jean Newman making the latest the first shot could have occurred is Z214.

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3038
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1274 on: May 05, 2023, 04:58:13 PM »
As I recall, high school pictures of Jacob and Simmons were dug up by somebody (Linda Zambanini?). And Holt’s brother supposedly identified her in the Darnell still.

It was Tommy Graves who discovered the high school pictures and Denis Morrissette who spoke to Holt's brother. They were part of a group of researchers, including Zambanini, who agreed the three women in the Darnell clip were the women in the Z-film.

Quote
How did you determine which people in a long line of people lining Elm street are “together”?

The secret is to do some research and use a little Common Sense.
A bit like you've done in reaching your conclusion about the women in the Darnell clip.

Quote
Lots of women were wearing headscarves. But Westbrook specifically said she was wearing a blue scarf and that she still has it.

A little fact checking wouldn't go amiss.
Westbrook never specifically states she was wearing a blue scarf. She never mentions the colour of the scarf.
Westbrook specifically states that she no longer has the scarf. She wishes she still had it because that is how she identifies herself in the Z-film.
Just to repeat that - the sole factor by which Westbrook identifies herself in the Z-film is a headscarf.
That's it - the recognition of a headscarf no longer in her possession.

In her interview, Karen Westbrook Scranton comes across as a competent and honest lady trying to give her best account of what happened that day.
But she is wrong when she identifies herself as the woman in the blue headscarf.
In the pic below, labeled correctly as far as I'm concerned, Westbrook identifies herself as the woman in the blue headscarf. We know from images such as Willis 5 or taken from the Bronson film, that there are no ladies stood to her right - that is to say, no colleagues she was stood with are hidden by the Stemmons sign.



Westbrook identifies the woman to her left as her good friend Gloria Calvert (sic)[she calls her this a couple of times during the interview and Fagin doesn't correct her, although he does have to step in when she keeps referring to Billy Lovelady as "Bobby"]. I have her identified as Gloria Holt.
She makes the point that Gloria Calvery has flame red hair, which she does, it's a really striking colour:



However, both Fagin and Westbrook fail to point out that the woman in the Z-film does not have red hair at all! The woman they are talking about has blonde hair. This, alone, discounts the identification of Calvery but there's more.
Westbrook identifies the next woman along as Carol Ann Reed [I have labeled her Stella Jacobs]. The pic below shows, from left to right, Calvery, Carol Ann Reed and Carol Hughes.



It will be noted that Calvery is much taller than Reed. It must also be noted that Calvery has a bigger build than Reed, who, in comparison is quite petite. However, when we look at the Z-film, the women identified by Westbrook as Calvery and Reed are the same height and build.
Westbrook's identification of her work colleagues are already in trouble, but it gets worse.
The next woman along is identified as "the other Carol". This is a reference to Carol Hughes. The problem with this identification is that Carol Hughes stayed in the office during the motorcade. Karen Hicks was the fourth woman that day, so maybe it's a case that Westbrook has simply mistaken this woman for Hughes instead of Hicks. This is not the case as this woman has been positively identified as June Dishong. Don Roberdeau got this identification from Dishong's family.
This leaves Westbrook's identification in all sorts of problems. In her Oral History interview Westbrook is clear that all four women were stood together. In her CE 1381, she is equally clear all four were stood together - she left her office with Calvery, Hicks and Reed:
"We walked to Elm Street and stopped at a point on the north edge of Elm Street about halfway between Houston Street and the Triple Underpass. We were standing at this point when President John F. Kennedy was shot."

Similarly, in their CE 1381's Calvery, Hicks and Reed all emphasise that they were stood together watching the motorcade. When Identifying Westbrook on Elm Street we are looking for a group of four women stood together. As Dishong is the fourth woman from the Stemmons sign and there is no-one stood to the left of the woman in the blue headscarf, we are looking at a group of three women.
This rules out all the women between the Stemmons sign and Brandt and Templin.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1274 on: May 05, 2023, 04:58:13 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1275 on: May 05, 2023, 09:33:16 PM »
So your whole “common sense” argument boils down to you believing Dishong’s “family” (who weren’t there) in identifying June from the rear over Westbrook’s (who was there) identification of herself. That and your presumption that going to see the motorcade together somehow requires standing in a line shoulder-to-shoulder with each other with nobody in between.

But even if you could somehow prove that is Dishong and that the other woman is not Calvery, it tells you nothing about who the blue scarf lady is.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1276 on: May 05, 2023, 09:55:08 PM »
Incidentally, credit for first finding the school photos of Holt was given to Stan Dane. I was the one (to my knowledge) who first found the yearbook photo of the correct Sharon Simmons.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1276 on: May 05, 2023, 09:55:08 PM »


Offline Zeon Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 923
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1277 on: May 06, 2023, 01:27:07 AM »
@ Andrew Mason: The 3 witness accounts you just posted in bold print all indicate they are seeing JFK MOVING as they heard the 1st shot fired. Its “ducking, “slumping” , leaning over” etc that many witness said occurred either at the 1st shot or between shot 1 and 2.

Harold Norman has the similar sequence  of hearing the 1st shot, then seeing JFK “slump” then hearing the next 2 shots.

There has to be SOMETHING at Z226 causing JBC right shoulder to move rapidly FORWARD and rotating his body in the direction as would be expected by a bullet impacting him to right of his  centerline of mass.

That rotation is happening at approx Z 226 and with the coincidental flap of the jacket lapel at that point also, it’s a reasonable conclusion imo that it’s  bullet striking his right shoulder.

So your sequence of shots if Z 195, then Z 278 then 313, does NOT account for the SOMETHING ( imo a bullet impact) that is causing JBC right shoulder to rotate FORWARD at Z226.

The only way I can see to resolve this is that a 2nd shooter was involved who shot JBC at X226 from a different angle in which JFK is not an obstruction.

Also what about the wrist wound of JBC?

I don’t see how that could be at Z 275-278 when his right hand is up and gripping his hat because the bullet would have likely gone thru the hat as well as splatter some blood on the hat.

It works much better at  Z226 because theoretically there is a position for JBCs right hand holding the hat upside down with the rim of the hat held on top of his left thigh, the well of the hat hanging down off the LEFT side of his thigh.

In that position the bullet striking the top of his wrist and exiting the bottom of his palm goes directly into his right side inner thigh muscle Without any splattering of blood on the hat or any hole in the hat.

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
    • SPMLaw
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1278 on: May 06, 2023, 03:14:01 AM »
@ Andrew Mason: The 3 witness accounts you just posted in bold print all indicate they are seeing JFK MOVING as they heard the 1st shot fired. Its “ducking, “slumping” , leaning over” etc that many witness said occurred either at the 1st shot or between shot 1 and 2.

Harold Norman has the similar sequence  of hearing the 1st shot, then seeing JFK “slump” then hearing the next 2 shots.

There has to be SOMETHING at Z226 causing JBC right shoulder to move rapidly FORWARD and rotating his body in the direction as would be expected by a bullet impacting him to right of his  centerline of mass.
Exactly. JBC said after the first shot he turned around to his right to check on the President. What he is doing from z226 to z270 appears to be consistent with his turn to try to see JFK. 
He appears to be shouting something around z245 because his mouth opens and Jackie turns away from JFK directly toward JBC.

If you disagree, perhaps you can tell us where you see JBC turning around to see JFK.

This is all corroborated by Nellie.  Nellie said he yelled "Oh, no, no" after the first and before the second shot that she saw strike her husband. She also said she looked back at JFK and saw him with his hands at his neck after the first and before the second. She said she never looked back after the second shot. She is looking back until about z270.


Quote
Also what about the wrist wound of JBC?

I don’t see how that could be at Z 275-278 when his right hand is up and gripping his hat because the bullet would have likely gone thru the hat as well as splatter some blood on the hat.
All exit wounds are covered by clothing. The wrist is covered by a French cuff. The bullet struck the back of the radius through the French cuff and would have deflected away from the point of contact. The only blood that would result from the bullet striking the wrist would be minimal. After the wound is made the bleeding wound be significant but not the making of the wound itself.

Quote
It works much better at  Z226 because theoretically there is a position for JBCs right hand holding the hat upside down with the rim of the hat held on top of his left thigh, the well of the hat hanging down off the LEFT side of his thigh.

In that position the bullet striking the top of his wrist and exiting the bottom of his palm goes directly into his right side inner thigh muscle Without any splattering of blood on the hat or any hole in the hat.
That scenario does not fit several large bodies of evidence, particularly the 1 .....2...3 shot pattern, JFK being hit on the first shot and JBC on the second with the head shot being the third and last shot

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1278 on: May 06, 2023, 03:14:01 AM »


Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
    • SPMLaw
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #1279 on: May 06, 2023, 03:35:39 AM »
So your whole “common sense” argument boils down to you believing Dishong’s “family” (who weren’t there) in identifying June from the rear over Westbrook’s (who was there) identification of herself. That and your presumption that going to see the motorcade together somehow requires standing in a line shoulder-to-shoulder with each other with nobody in between.

But even if you could somehow prove that is Dishong and that the other woman is not Calvery, it tells you nothing about who the blue scarf lady is.
Dishong is identified by her own description of what she is wearing and by her previous self-identification to family members from photos in Life.

Dishong stated in her own hand writing:

"He drops his arm as they
go by - possibly 20 feet.
Suddenly - a sound.
Gun shots? So hard to tell above
the clamor of the crowd.

The President bent forward into
his wife’s lap as his arm
slipped off the side of the
car."

The last part is interesting. She says the right arm slipped off the car AFTER the first shot sounded. Since his right arm is not on the side of the car when he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign, his emergence there would have to be after the first shot - if Dishong was right.