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 I am surprised to see anyone citing it after everything we now know about it, not to mention the fact that it was superseded by the far more sophisticated and far more data-driven 2023 Knott Laboratory trajectory analysis, which proved that JFK and Connally were not SBT aligned.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.
MG:I take it you don't know that Canning assumed that JFK was hit at or just before Z190.Methinks it's more like that he was told that the shot occurred there, and proceeded accordingly.
MG: The HSCA's forensic experts determined from the back wound's abrasion collar that the bullet struck the back at a slightly upward angle. They determined a slight upward angle in relation to the surface of the skin at the point of impact. However, this part of your upper back slopes forward quite a bit. If you account for this slope, a shot travelling slightly "upward" in relation to the surface of the trapezius can easily become downward in relation to the cardinal directions. That is, a path that is 5 degrees "upward" in relation to the target surface is actually 10 degrees downwards cardinally if the target surface is tilted forward 15 degrees. Geometry is easy if you try. That's why Baden used the phrase "when the body is in the 'anatomical position'" in his testimony to the HSCA regarding this very matter.
MG: Canning brushed aside this problem as a meaningless "experimental error."His use of "experimental error" is a reference to a very basic concept in science and engineering: measurement uncertainty. Pierre Finck didn't do the best job at finding good landmarks to use as reference points to locate the back wound. But even had he used the standard midline/top of the head landmarks, there is still some amount of uncertainty regarding the relative positions of these landmarks, since the body is mobile. Canning was also aware that the positions of the limousine and the bodies in it cannot be exactly determined, accounting for two more levels of uncertainty. That's why he used trajectory cones rather than trying to draw a single straight line. In short, his approach was quite scientific. You do not understand this because you don't understand the underlying science anywhere near well enough to judge.
As for your repeated efforts to rehabilitate the Knott Lab thing, please stop. Again --and I keep having to repeat myself-- their own video shows that they put the rifle in the wrong side of the 6th floor window and JFKs backwound right in his centerline. If they get something so basic so completely wrong, then there is no reason whatsoever to take it seriously.
