The Shot That Missed

[Dan O'meara]

 Is this statement no longer true?

O"Meara: The overwhelming majority of "ear-witnesses" heard three shots only.
That is a fact.

Another fact, the majority of the eyewitnesses stated there was only two shots, second shot head shot, etc.

Once again,  do you think the witnesses who could only hear  know more about the assassination than the people who could see and hear.

The fact I quoted is from the work of Pat Speer. Speer has done a comprehensive study of the witness statements concerning the assassination, specifically regarding the shots, and concludes:

"...we’ve looked at the words of 294 witnesses to see if they add up to something. Of this 294, 89 failed to tell us much that would indicate when and how the shots were fired. Of the remaining 205, 102 made statements suggesting there were three shots fired, with the first shot being heard between Z-190 and Z-224 and the last 2 shots being heard in rapid succession after a short pause. Another 57 made statements suggesting that the first shot was heard between Z-190 and Z-224, but made no statements indicating the last two shots were bunched together. Another 13 heard the last two shots fired closely together, and yet another could only swear to hearing two shots, but thought there may have been a third, which was wholly consistent with the last two being fired closely together. This means that 173 of the 205 witnesses described the shots in a relatively consistent manner. "


!60 of the 205 witnesses who reported something related to the shots, reported there was three shots.
When you say:

"Another fact, the majority of the eyewitnesses stated there was only two shots, second shot head shot, etc."

Where are you getting this 'fact' from?
Are you just making this up?

[Jack Nessan]

Drain states there was only three live cartridges total in his statement. That is all.


Drain doesn’t state any such thing. He is conveying that the bolt action only needed to be cycled twice to fire three shots. Here is his statement again:



I highlighted the sentence you are referring to.

1. If the shell in the chamber was empty (as you contend), then it wouldn’t be ready. Now would it?

2. Drain goes on to describe what happened to three different bullets, not just two.

3. Drain simply doesn’t mention the fourth cartridge (found in the rifle after the shooting). He is discussing the shots. Not the condition of the rifle when it was found afterwards.

Drain does not support whatever point you are trying to make. He is trying to tell you there was only two shots. If you can read there is more than three live cartridges being discussed it is only because you want to. Good luck with it.

[Jack Nessan]

The fact I quoted is from the work of Pat Speer. Speer has done a comprehensive study of the witness statements concerning the assassination, specifically regarding the shots, and concludes:

"...we’ve looked at the words of 294 witnesses to see if they add up to something. Of this 294, 89 failed to tell us much that would indicate when and how the shots were fired. Of the remaining 205, 102 made statements suggesting there were three shots fired, with the first shot being heard between Z-190 and Z-224 and the last 2 shots being heard in rapid succession after a short pause. Another 57 made statements suggesting that the first shot was heard between Z-190 and Z-224, but made no statements indicating the last two shots were bunched together. Another 13 heard the last two shots fired closely together, and yet another could only swear to hearing two shots, but thought there may have been a third, which was wholly consistent with the last two being fired closely together. This means that 173 of the 205 witnesses described the shots in a relatively consistent manner. "


!60 of the 205 witnesses who reported something related to the shots, reported there was three shots.
When you say:

"Another fact, the majority of the eyewitnesses stated there was only two shots, second shot head shot, etc."

Where are you getting this 'fact' from?
Are you just making this up?

Pat Speer did an excellent job of compiling the witness statements. I have not looked at it in years but read his analysis as to how many times he refers to three shots with the last two being close together as really having been only two shots.

Separate the eye witnesses from the ear witnesses. A different picture of the assassination emerges. The initial statements of the eyewitnesses was there was only two shots. Altgens, the only news reporter that was an eye witness, reported what he saw and heard and his news bulletin was broadcast on TV. His bulletin was that there was only two shots. Unfortunately Walter Cronkites stating what Merriman Smith reported, an earwitness, was reported first and then continuously repeated and ended up coloring the statements of many witnesses.

[Charles Collins]

Drain does not support whatever point you are trying to make. He is trying to tell you there was only two shots. If you can read there is more than three live cartridges being discussed it is only because you want to. Good luck with it.

Good luck with your nutty idea that there were only two shots fired.

[Jack Nessan]

Good luck with your nutty idea that there were only two shots fired.

As opposed to a thread talking about a shot that there is absolutely no proof of ever having even been fired? A shot that cannot be explained or defined? A shot that is purely faith based with no substance?

In their conclusions both the Warren Commission and HSCA postulated there was only two shots having been fired and the witnesses stated by the witnesses were influenced by the media coverage.

Now would be a good time to provide all your proof there ever was a third shot

[Charles Collins]

As opposed to a thread talking about a shot that there is absolutely no proof of ever having even been fired? A shot that cannot be explained or defined? A shot that is purely faith based with no substance?

In their conclusions both the Warren Commission and HSCA postulated there was only two shots having been fired and the witnesses stated by the witnesses were influenced by the media coverage.

Now would be a good time to provide all your proof there ever was a third shot

Do you even know the difference between evidence and “proof”?

[Jack Nessan]

Do you even know the difference between evidence and “proof”?

Can you provide either?