Did you happen to notice that when I quoted JBC's WC testimony, I posted both the question and the answer. Why didn't you do that. Then we would know what he was responding to.
What I noticed was that although we were discussing Connally's recollections about the timespan between the first two shots, you avoided the WC testimony specifically dealing with that question?
Why did you do that?
It was down to me to post the relevant testimony and point out how devious you were being. Here is the relevant testimony again, the question and the answer:
Mr. SPECTER. What is the best estimate that you have as to the time span between the sound of the first shot and the feeling of someone hitting you in the back which you just described?
Governor CONNALLY. A very, very brief span of time...and the thought immediately passed through my mind that there were either two or three people involved or more...or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle. These were just the thoughts that went through my mind because of the rapidity of these two, of the first shot plus the blow that I took..."The point being made is that JBC can't stress enough how short the gap between the two shots is. Connally was a hunter who knew his rifles. If he was describing someone using a bolt action rifle he would have understood how quickly one of those could be used. When he says that he thought there were two or three people firing or someone was using an automatic rifle, he is describing shots taking place far quicker than a single person using a bolt action rifle.
Over and over again he uses phrase and imagery to express that it was a 'split second' gap between the two shots:
"A very, very brief span of time"
"two or three people involved"
"an automatic rifle"
"the rapidity"
Elsewhere he uses the same imagery and phrasing to describe the shots in general:
"extremely rapid"
"a very short period of time"
"It seemed like a split second"
"Fast, my God it was fast."
"A very, very brief span of time"
"unbelievably quick"
"Snapped his fingers three times rapidly"
Have you noticed how you ignore this very obvious part of JBC's description of the shots.
Why is that? Why don't you accept this part of his testimony?
Is it because it shoots down your silly little notion about when the first shot occurred?
I bet it is.
In any case when he described the time span to the WC, he said 10-12 seconds. I wouldn't describe snapping your fingers 3 times in that time span as rapid.
Not even you are so stupid as to describe that as rapid.
Snapping his fingers three times rapidly takes a lot less time than 10 to 12 seconds.
Over and over JBC emphasises how rapidly the shots were, even you can't deny this.
The reason you ignore this constant emphasis on rapidity is because this is yet another thing about JBC's testimony that blows your silly little notion out of the water. You desperately cling to his comment about 10 to 12 seconds as if this is the only thing he ever said about the timing of the shots.
The fact that he simultaneously remembers the shooting as very rapid yet taking such a long time can be explained without reverting to your strategy of ignoring the vast majority of his statements and clinging on to just one.
You most certainly did take the quote out of context and when pressed on it, you only gave partial context. Why don't you post a link to the report you are citing so the rest of us don't have to guess at what it says.
The "split second" quote is taken from an FBI report where JBC is asked about the timing of the shots. It is not taken out of context. It is very much in context. I don't believe you understand what 'context' means. You are using words and concepts you are not familiar with.
If you want to find out more about what JBC stated about the shooting I have already provided all the information you need to do that.
Get off your lazy Bahookie and do your own research.
He doesn't say "a split second". He gives a vague estimate of "A very, very brief span of time". How many seconds is that? JBC first turned in reaction to the first shot at Z164. He was struck less than 3 and a quarter seconds later. That seems rather brief to me. I've never been shot out but it it wouldn't surprise me that when that happens, things would seem to speed up for the person being shot at.
I've already provided the "split second" quote. You can try to wish it away all you want.
JBC doesn't just say" a very, very brief span of time". It's just so devious to try and present it like that. Your underhand tactics are so childish. As already stated, he constantly provides imagery and phrases that stress how short this timespan was. To compare it to an automatic rifle demonstrates he is talking about a timespan less than one second. As is comparing it to two or three people shooting at him. As is using the phrase "split second".
JBC is clearly talking about a timespan that is too short to be describing a single man using a bolt action rifle.
You can deny this all you want because it destroys your silly idea about an early missed shot.
Why did he testify it was about 10-12 seconds?
10-12 seconds according to his testimony.
This is the only interesting point you make and you don't even realise you're making it.
10 to 12 seconds is way longer than ALL of the other descriptions he gives about the shooting.
However, there is a rational solution to how he can simultaneously report the shooting be unbelievably rapid and 10 to 12 seconds.
Not a bad guess. I have it at just under 9 seconds.
Your ignorance about this topic is almost complete. Your opinion about it means less than nothing.
That's easy. It wasn't as fast as him snapping his fingers 3 times. The Z-film indicates his 10-12 second estimate was pretty close. About a second too long.
Then why does he snap his fingers rapidly?
Why do all the descriptions you ignore stress how rapidly the shots were?
Tom Graves would argue with you on that point. To me, there is solid evidence the shooting took place in just under 9 seconds. 163 frames which works out to 8.9 seconds.
Less than nothing.
Do you seriously think he heard 3 separate shots from a fully automatic weapon?
Do you really think he doesn't know what an automatic rifle is?
Do you think you know what he really meant?
It's called sensory overload. The brain can only process so much information at a time and the bullet struck JBC before the sound of the shot reached him. Connally understood this perfectly when he testified to to the WC:
Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any idea as to why you did not hear the second shot?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, first, again I assume the bullet was traveling faster than the sound. I was hit by the bullet prior to the time the sound reached me, and I was in either a state of shock or the impact was such that the sound didn't even register on me, but I was never conscious of hearing the second shot at all.
Obviously, at least the major wound that I took in the shoulder through the chest couldn't have been anything but the second shot. Obviously, it couldn't have been the third, because when the third shot was fired I was in a reclining position, and heard it, saw it and the effects of it, rather--I didn't see it, I saw the effects of it--so it obviously could not have been the third, and couldn't have been the first, in my judgment.
The brain can only process so much information at a time You are the living proof of that
How long is "barely any time"?
Less than one second.
Probably due to your willful blindness to what the Z-film shows.
Please give an example of my "willful blindness".
Is this like you refusing to see Connally NOT turning to look over his right shoulder?
He said he had started turning back to his left when he felt the bullet hit him. He continued making that turn for about a half second during which time he also flipped his injured right arm into the air. After that reaction, he started turning and dipping back to the right. He remembered that. He had no memory of flipping his arm upward even though we clearly see him doing that in the Z-film, not coincidentally at the very same frame JFK flipped both of his arms upward.
This is mostly devious nonsense.
He stated that he was looking to his left when he was aware of being hit - "just left of center" was his actual description. Your devious attempt to avoid this statement is par for the course.
Just to reiterate - in the Z-film JBC is only turned to his left at two points. One is around the z160's when he is clearly not shot. The other is in the z230's AFTER he has been shot. It is at this point that JBC believes he was hit but the Z-film shows clearly that he had already been hit
He got most things right but a few wrong. He misjudged the frame he was struck at because he was looking for the reaction remembered making, not the involuntary arm flip he had no memory of. He also believed for whatever reason that JFK had been hit by the first shot. I don't know why he believed that because by his own admission he couldn't see JFK when he turned.
I just gave you my answers. You're not entitled to ones you like.
He got most things rightName 3 things he got right that are shown in the Z-film.
In fact, just name one. Surely even you can do that.
Topic: The First Shot (Read 637492 times)