What cannot be taken seriously is this make-believe storyline. This pseudo evidence is unbelievable. Another back door attempt to add another shooter to the assassination, for no other reason than you want the assassination to be a conspiracy. Not because it was one or this post makes any sense. You are just randomly guessing at the circumstances surrounding the assassination. You are referencing make believe shots that no one heard like they were real. If you cannot explain the wound in JBC’s back and how it got there, then give it up. The rest of this is just useless mumblings.
The eyewitnesses explain by their location exactly where the first shot took place. No guessing or interpretation is required. The eyewitnesses tell you the first shot hit them both. Why do you think they are lying about it. Is that what is required to believe there was a conspiracy? Everyone is lying about everything and only you can decipher the truth?
You want to quote the HSCA but completely ignore the testimony of Thomas Canning explaining there is no explanation for JBC’s wound other that a bullet passing through JFK. You don’t have to believe Mr. Canning; anyone can look at pictures of how JFK and JBC were oriented in the car and come up with the exact same conclusion. Do you think you are not intelligent enough to look at the photos, the same as Mr. Canning, and come up with the exact same conclusion? Maybe it is time to admit SBT is the answer or not and keep chasing your tail.
IOW, your emotional attachment to the lone-gunman theory prevents you from being objective. You dismiss the HSCA's science-based and reenactment-confirmed blur analysis of the Zapruder film because it proves there were four shots at the absolute bare minimum. (The HSCA photographic experts admitted there were seven blur episodes that exceeded the threshold of 2 percent of the field of view and exceeded the threshold of 10 for frame-to-frame departure from smooth panning.)
You ignore the undeniable evidence of the Rosemary Willis reaction in the Zapruder film, which proves a shot was fired before Z162. She slowed down, stopped, and turned to look back because she heard a gunshot. Her slowdown starts no later than Z162, and by Z187 she has completely stopped and is looking back toward the TSBD and the Dal-Tex Building. The girl's reaction meshes perfectly with the blur episode that starts at Z156.
Canning's trajectory analysis was a joke. I am surprised to see anyone citing it after everything we now know about it, not to mention the fact that it was superseded by the far more sophisticated and far more data-driven 2023 Knott Laboratory trajectory analysis, which proved that JFK and Connally were not SBT aligned. I take it you don't know that Canning assumed that JFK was hit at or just before Z190. Anyway, Canning's analysis has been rendered irrelevant by the Knott Lab trajectory analysis. I suggest you read up on the Knott Lab analysis:
https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-lab-uses-forensic-science-to-refute-warren-commission-findings-on-jfk-assassination/Getting back to Canning's trajectory analysis for a moment, Canning ignored the HSCA medical panel's finding about the magic bullet's trajectory. The HSCA's forensic experts determined from the back wound's abrasion collar that the bullet struck the back at a slightly
upward angle. Canning simply ignored this. Also, Canning found that he could not get his vertical trajectory lines to match up if he used the location for the back wound determined by the HSCA's medical panel--because it was nearly 2 inches lower than the bogus location given by the autopsy doctors. Canning brushed aside this problem as a meaningless "experimental error." Canning had to resort to manipulation to make the horizontal trajectory work as well: He had to assume that Connally was positioned so far to the left that his right shoulder was practically in the middle of the jump seat. Frame 224 alone visibly refutes any attempt to move Connally that far to the left.
