The First Shot

[Tom Graves]

@Andrew: I don’t see how the Willis girl can react to a loud shot at Z190 ish and look back by Z200 while none of the SS agents reacted to that shot at the same time.

I thought possibly that the actions of umbrella man and DC man could be focusing the SS agents attention , but I really don’t see how even that distraction would prevent them from hearing the same noise that Willis girl seems to be responding to around Z190.

I’m not even certain what exactly the Willis girl heard at Z190.

I think we can agree that it is not likely that any loud shot from the MC rifle was fired prior to Z 186 yes? ( due to Betzner)

I do not think that Willis dad who snapped the photo about Z205 can be nailed down to having heard the shot instantaneously at Z205.

Therefore I think 1 sec later , a shot at Z223 could be just as likely the shot that Willis heard and associated it with taking photo at Z205.

Seven prime witnesses to the sounds of the first, missing-everything, shot, five of whom were passengers in the limousine, moved their heads rapidly within half-a-second of each other between Z-140 and Z-150.

Why do you suppose they did that?

[Royell Storing]

Seven prime witnesses to the sounds of the first, missing-everything, shot, five of whom were passengers in the limousine, moved their heads rapidly within half-a-second of each other between Z-140 and Z-150.

Why do you suppose they did that?

   A shot from the bushes/shrubs/garden.

[Tom Graves]

A shot from the bushes/shrubs/garden.

When the limo was so close to the TSBD?

[Dan O'meara]

Quote:
"Perhaps I've misunderstood but I was under the impression that, as far as your 'study' is concerned, ALL relevant witness testimony has been completely ignored, with no explanation as to why this should be the case.
I could accept your "excessive testimony variability" argument if the testimony of the witnesses in question supported such an early shot. But, with the possible exception of Rosemary Willis, they don't.
To the casual observer it looks like you avoided using their witness testimony because it reveals that your interpretation of their actions was nothing more than wishful thinking or projection.
Didn't it give you pause for thought that the witnesses you were using uniformly disagreed with your interpretations of their 'reactions'?



To be clear the Perception time study’s intent was to use only human reactions to ascertain the timing of the first shot. It had nothing to do with testimonies or ignoring testimonies or disregarding testimonies, it had nothing to do with testimonies period. A testimony analysis is something completely different and that is what I was referring to wrt to the Anchored testimony analysis. Which happened to support the ~z124 timing.

If you want to insist that I ignore all relevant testimonies for the Anchored testimony test, that’s incorrect, but it’s true I did not consider testimonies that did not meet a criteria of an Anchored Testimony (hence I am guilty in one respect since I did not consider a lot of testimonies relevant because they did not meet the criteria for that particular type of analysis being conducted), and that has nothing to do with what I expected testimonies to say or not. I ignored testimony that would have agreed well with the placement I expected, like Tina Towner and Howard Brennan, because they did not meet the criteria of an Anchored Testimony.

The anchored testimony looked at any testimony around that time specifically identifying the President/President limo at the time of hearing the first shot. I don’t recall finding or using any presidential limo anchored testimony coming from the vice presidential car. I think the position of the Presidential limo at the first shot is quite important to understanding the line of sight the sniper had from the sniper’s nest to the Presidential limo when taking the first shot.

Now as far as why people on the street did not react like those in the limo, consider the following. First consider the reactions of those in the limo. The reactions of those in the limo were voluntary reactions, and appeared to be reactions consistent with sound localization attempts after a surprising loud sharp sound behind and above them, all reactions were within 0.55 seconds which is indicative of a common stimulus and is predicted by a Perception Time distribution model.  Since there was probably not a lot of great new visual stimulus at that time to grab their attention, they likely simply all looked around and wondered “What the hell was that”. Many believed it was a firecracker but looked around anyway. Some people further on down Elm did the same thing but with not as much head motion. This is what James Tague said he also did, glance around up there for the idiot throwing a firecracker that happened about 5 seconds before the second shot sounded. These were all voluntary reactions to a surprising stimulus.

Now consider yourself as a bystander up on Elm on the side of the road as the Limo went by. You came to Dealey Plaza to see the President, and many also wanted to see Jackie and her dress. You waited over an half an hour for the motorcade to show up. Right as they were approaching or driving by you, a firecracker is shot off. At that time there was a ton of visual stimuli right in front of you with the President and Jackie and the limo; do you ignore that intense visual stimuli right there in front of you, or do you follow the audible stimulus and turn around to spend time trying to find what kid threw a firecracker. Net, do you ignore the sound as an annoyance and keep your attention on the Limo. If folks look for the kid with the firecracker they totally miss JFK and Jackie go by, their whole intent for the day. What would you do at that time if you did not consider the perceived firecracker a personal threat, look for the kid that threw the firecracker or continue to look at JFK and Jackie?

I encourage you to develop your theories using your choice of testimonies, maybe others will build on what you are doing. You may find the exact meaning of the testimony “They had just turned the corner, straightened up… heading down towards the underpass” with respect to the Presidential limo position, or from what you find may also apply to the vice president car, and perhaps others as well.

In the meantime, I will look for other analysis on this question as well. At this point the anchored testimony results, the perception time analysis from the z-film, the Dorman film evaluation, the overall timing of all three shots using Zapruder startle reaction time ~210ms, and some extended Jiggle analysis, all point to an early shot before z133 being triggered around z124.

To be clear the Perception time study’s intent was to use only human reactions to ascertain the timing of the first shot.

This is not strictly true.
It seems you have started with the assumption that there was a missed early shot.
You have then gone looking for evidence in the Zapruder film that can pin down when this assumed missed shot might have occurred.
In short, you have projected your assumed conclusion onto the Zapruder film.
This is clearly an invalid method when trying to establish when the first shot occurred.

You must have noticed early on that the recollections of the witnesses you were using in your study were all completely at odds with your pre-determined conclusion. This should have set alarm bells ringing. Instead, you have insisted that these troublesome testimonies can be dispensed with as your method - assuming the conclusion of your study - is infallible.
It should also have been a concern to you that your witnesses were, uniformly, supporting a first shot much further along in the Z-film.
Jackie Kennedy was completely unaware there had been a first shot (so she was hardly startled by it) until John Connally started "screaming", something that does not happen until AFTER the limo has emerged from behind the Stemmons sign.
Both John and Nellie Connally insist JFK was hit by the first shot. Again, something that is only apparent AFTER the limo has emerged from behind the Stemmons sign.
Roy Kellerman recalls that the first shot did not occur until the limo had moved beyond the buildings (TSBD building) and was in an open space. Again, much further along than your proposed first shot.

But the witness that really should have given you pause for thought is George Hickey.
In the Z-film we see Hickey lean over to his left and he appears to look down towards the road or, possibly, at the crowd.
You have interpreted this as his response to a very loud shot coming from his right rear!!
Luckily, we have Hickey's description of the moment of the first shot in which he reacts as we would expect him to react to a loud shot coming from his right rear - he immediately turns to his right rear, so he is scanning the TSBD building:

"I heard what seemed to me that a firecracker exploded to the right and rear. I stood partially up and turned to the rear to see if I could observe anything. "

As we might expect, he wasn't the only Secret Service agent who responded similarly to the sound of the first shot. Two other agents  - Ready and Landis - also recall their response to the first shot:

Landis - "I heard what sounded like the report of a high-powered rifle from behind me, over my right shoulder...", "My first glance was at the President, as I was practically looking in his direction anyway...", "I immediately returned my gaze, over my right shoulder."

Ready - "I heard what appeared to be fire crackers going off from my position. I immediately turned to my right rear trying to locate the source but was not able to determine the exact location."

However, when we analyse the Z-film we don't see this movement. We see all three agents until Z207 (shown below) and we do not see any of the agents turning to their right rear in response to a shot coming from their right rear - the direction we would expect a shot from the SN to come from;



Fortunately, we do have photographic evidence of these three agents making their immediate turns to the right rear in response to the "explosion" of the first shot:



This is how the testimonial record and the film/photographic record should be integrated.
It is further evidence pointing to a first shot somewhere between z207 (the last time we see the agents in the Z-film) and z255 (equating to Altgens 6).
Have a read through this thread and you will encounter a mountain of evidence pointing to a first shot at z222/z223.
The agents have not reacted to the explosive first shot by z207. This is 4.5 seconds AFTER your proposed shot at z124. I'm sure you can appreciate how non-sensical this is.

You may find the exact meaning of the testimony “They had just turned the corner, straightened up… heading down towards the underpass” with respect to the Presidential limo position, or from what you find may also apply to the vice president car, and perhaps others as well.

You misunderstand the relevance of this testimony.
It is not a question of where the Presidential limo is in relation to these cars. It is purely an issue of where the Vice Presidential (VP) car and the Vice Presidential follow-on (VPFO) car are at the time of the first shot.
When we examine z133, the first Z-frame that has the Presidential limo, we can see the VP and VPFO cars in the background AND THEY ARE STILL ON HOUSTON STREET.



Remember, your proposed first shot, at an imaginary z124, is even earlier than this so the cars in question would be even further down Houston Street.
The point is this...ALL 10 occupants of the VP and VPFO cars place these vehicles ON ELM STREET at the time of the first shot. It appears both cars have completed the turn onto Elm Street from Houston. When we refer to Mark Tyler's mapping program, the first time this is the case is around z222.
As I say, this is only part of the mountain of evidence pointing to a first shot atz222/z223. This is the shot that causes JFK to stiffen, throw his bunched-up hands towards his throat, radically extend his elbows upwards, then slump to the side.
At his website, Pat Speer has collected 44 witness statements referring to one or more of these movements by JFK as a response to the first shot.

Obviously, we have a different opinion as to when the first shot took place. This thread has been my attempt to get some kind of consensus regarding such a basic issue. That hasn't really worked out.

[Royell Storing]

  The "reactions" or "lack-there-of" is a frequent proffer for the Zapruder Film being nothing more than a 1963 cut and paste. Those of you that worship the Z Film need to slow your roll with the reaction stuff. You're actually damaging that which you hold dear.

[Brian Roselle]

Dan,
How this perception time thing got started is that around the 50th anniversary there were a lot of TV shows on the JFK assassination. A couple of the shows talked about the HSCA’s estimate on the first shot timing based on what was determined then to be a startle reaction by John Connally, his major head rotation right, starting at z162.
I recognized this as not being a startle reaction, as major head rotations are voluntary reactions not startle reactions.
There were a number of testimonies that indicated an earlier shot. The fact that the method used by the HSCA for the first shot was incorrect, indicated that there should be better indicators of the first shot on the film, and there were a number testimonies that said it was noticeably earlier. This was the basis for closer inspection of the film and finding the other people reacting about the same time. This whole thing did not start with a random witch hunt early on the film.

After the method was developed I wanted to look at some other independent methods as verification that the prediction was correct.
Other methods I looked at appeared to agree or support the early timing the perception time method predicted either directly or indirectly. These included a Dorman film examination, some shot timing modeling when using a standard startle reaction latency time of 0.21 seconds for Zapruder, an Extended Jiggle analysis that indicated the first shot was not between z136 and z227, some Anchored testimony analysis, and given there was nothing between the rifle and the limo at z124, it is quite unlikely a surviving fragmented bullet striking and deflecting from something way up on Elm caused the Tague curb mark. Evaluating the Tague incident indicated the curb mark was likely from the missing chunk of the third shot that hit JFK in the head.

I’m sure all of these studies have been shared here over the years, but they tend to get lost over time. I kept a summary I'll share here. I particularly liked the Dorman film analysis since its pretty impactful and it gives Elsie a little credit for capturing something useful when it has trashed by so many researchers.

The summary of what I have shared before can be found at:
https://sites.google.com/view/auxiliary-prt-study-analysis/home

I hope this helps explain the various Basis used for validating the shot timing.

[Tom Graves]

Dan,
How this perception time thing got started is that around the 50th anniversary there were a lot of TV shows on the JFK assassination. A couple of the shows talked about the HSCA’s estimate on the first shot timing based on what was determined then to be a startle reaction by John Connally, his major head rotation right, starting at z162.
I recognized this as not being a startle reaction, as major head rotations are voluntary reactions not startle reactions.
There were a number of testimonies that indicated an earlier shot. The fact that the method used by the HSCA for the first shot was incorrect, indicated that there should be better indicators of the first shot on the film, and there were a number testimonies that said it was noticeably earlier. This was the basis for closer inspection of the film and finding the other people reacting about the same time. This whole thing did not start with a random witch hunt early on the film.

After the method was developed I wanted to look at some other independent methods as verification that the prediction was correct.
Other methods I looked at appeared to agree or support the early timing the perception time method predicted either directly or indirectly. These included a Dorman film examination, some shot timing modeling when using a standard startle reaction latency time of 0.21 seconds for Zapruder, an Extended Jiggle analysis that indicated the first shot was not between z136 and z227, some Anchored testimony analysis, and given there was nothing between the rifle and the limo at z124, it is quite unlikely a surviving fragmented bullet striking and deflecting from something way up on Elm caused the Tague curb mark. Evaluating the Tague incident indicated the curb mark was likely from the missing chunk of the third shot that hit JFK in the head.

I’m sure all of these studies have been shared here over the years, but they tend to get lost over time. I kept a summary I'll share here. I particularly liked the Dorman film analysis since its pretty impactful and it gives Elsie a little credit for capturing something useful when it has trashed by so many researchers.

The summary of what I have shared before can be found at:
https://sites.google.com/view/auxiliary-prt-study-analysis/home

I hope this helps explain the various Basis used for validating the shot timing.

Sound logic and mythology.

The synchronized juxtaposition of the Dormer, Zapruder and Secret Service clips with superimposed sounds at "Z-124" and Z-222(?) is impressive.

Thank God for Brownie push-button cameras.

https://sites.google.com/view/dorman-zapruder-sync-on-elm-st/home

[Zeon Mason]

And to think that we ALL missed that little detail of Hickeys movement atZ140-145 where he was LEANING to HIS LEFT and his head was NOT looking back at TSBD.

Dan posted that Z film video clip at the very 1st page of  thread and we ALL missed this critical detail that totally destroys any further attempt by LNs to try to use the  Z143 movement of SS agent Hickey to support Hickeys WC testimony of having looked BACK when he heard the 1st shot.

LOL it’s embarrassing really to miss such a detail after all these years 😳

So there are only a few options left for the dedicated LN to still argue for a loud shot from the TSBD shooter prior to Z207. I’m listing them from best to worst (imho):

A.  Andrew Masons 1st shot at Z190 ish theory that caused Willis girl to stop running by Z200. It requires accepting a 2 sec (approx)  delayed reaction of all the SS Agents to a Z190 ish  1st shot and a 2 sec delayed reaction by JFK from being hit by that shot. The TSBD shooter also chose to shoot thru tree foliage. Andrew will argue that the tree foliage was minimal and was not a factor🤔. And also that JC was not hit by the bullet that hit JFK and that the abrupt right shoulder rotation and forward motion of JC simultaneous with JFK lurching forward at Z223-225 is only a reaction of JC hearing a shot.🤨


B. The conventional LN argument that because JFK and Jackie have turned their heads looking to the right side of the JFK limo, from Z160-Z170, that this was a reaction to hearing the loud shot from the TSBD shooter which shot missed the limo entirely and may have struck the road to the right side of the JFK limo. Virgie Rachley is a witness used to support this idea because she thought she saw something hit the road ahead of the limo. The reason for the shot missing to the right side of the JFK limo could be due to the MC rifle scope being mounted left side of the stock and having probably lost its original zero. The argument is made that the shooter realizing this , then switched to using the iron sights. The problem with this theory is the shot patten is not the 1….2..3 pattern that majority of witness heard.

C. The Max theory that there was a 1st loud shot at Z140 or so that hit the traffic light because the TSBD shooter decided to abandon his original plan of arranging the boxes to be used as a rifle support and he  would simply lean over from the box he was sitting on. He chose instead to impromptu stand up for his 1st shot?

D. Tom (the KGB expert) theory that the 1st shot  was fired even before Z133 ( around Z124 ??)3 shots fired over a 10 sec span, never mind that Harold Norman described Boom Click Click sequence was only 4 secs total. Um… Flat earth theory anyone?

E. Jack Nessans  Only 2 shots fired theory. Never mind that over 2/3rds witness heard shots and that 3 shells were found in the SN floor and ignore that Harold Norman heard 3 shots also.