LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments

[Joe Elliott]

According to the evidence (Gayle Newman and the Connallys in particular) JBC's shoulders did move like that before he was hit. He moved them in response to hearing the first shot, but not thinking he had been hit by it. So what you see in the zfilm fits with JBC and JFK reacting to the first shot.

As always, I'm not that interested in eyewitness testimony. Not when I can see for myself as many times as I like. Unlike the eyewitness who could only experience it once and were not expecting to see anything.

Question: Which Zapruder frames are you talking about where JBC's shoulders move like that before he was hit, in response to hearing the first shot?

The frames I am talking about are:
  z223- . . . : Where we can see the start of JBC's right shoulder moving forward.
  z223-z225: Where we can see JBC's coat move, the "lapel flip" or the "coat bulge" (I can't tell which) in frame z-224.
  z225- . . . : Where we can see JBC suddenly jerk his right hand upward, bring his hat into view by z-226.

Question: What frame numbers correspond to each of the shots you think were fired?

I believe the frame numbers that correspond to the three shots were:
  z153: First shot miss.
  z222: Second shot (SBT).
  z312: Third shot (head shot).

[Joe Elliott]

What is it that makes people think that sarcasm makes for good arguments?

Look all you like, but don’t pretend there’s anything objective about the “reactions” you think you see. People use what they think are “reactions” to justify shots in a whole bunch of different frames. Absent a recording turning up, there is no way to verify any of them.

Sarcasm aside, what is the point of anyone looking at the evidence, so they can decide for themselves, if they are going to assume that they are seeing what they expect to see?

How LNers are different from most people, is that there are a lot of things that line up with a shot at z-222:

* The movement of Connally's "soon to be hit" right shoulder from z-223 forward.
* The movement of Connally's "soon to be hit" coat from z-223 through z-225.
* The jerking up of Connally's "soon to be hit" right wrist from z-226 through z-232.
* The jerking up of both of JFK's "hit well before" elbows starting at z226, where both elbows are held high (and more or less locked in place) through z-312.
* The Zapruder camera blurring at z-227.
* The alignment (as far as we can tell) of the sniper's nest, JFK's neck wounds and Connally's back wound right around z222.

A fantastic set of coincidences, if the SBT is false and a bullet did not strike both, right about at z-222.

[John Iacoletti]

There’s nothing coincidental about it. People who believe in a single bullet see what they consider simultaneous reactions, and people who believe in separate shots see separate reactions.

[Andrew Mason]

Sarcasm aside, what is the point of anyone looking at the evidence, so they can decide for themselves, if they are going to assume that they are seeing what they expect to see?

How LNers are different from most people, is that there are a lot of things that line up with a shot at z-222:

* The movement of Connally's "soon to be hit" right shoulder from z-223 forward.
* The movement of Connally's "soon to be hit" coat from z-223 through z-225.
* The jerking up of Connally's "soon to be hit" right wrist from z-226 through z-232.
* The jerking up of both of JFK's "hit well before" elbows starting at z226, where both elbows are held high (and more or less locked in place) through z-312.
* The Zapruder camera blurring at z-227.
* The alignment (as far as we can tell) of the sniper's nest, JFK's neck wounds and Connally's back wound right around z222.

A fantastic set of coincidences, if the SBT is false and a bullet did not strike both, right about at z-222.

I don't see why it would be a coincidence for both men to react to the first shot. They are both reacting to the same stimulus. So they are not independent events. A coincidence would be events having independent causes occurring at the same time.

[Joe Elliott]

Sarcasm aside, what is the point of anyone looking at the evidence, so they can decide for themselves, if they are going to assume that they are seeing what they expect to see?

How LNers are different from most people, is that there are a lot of things that line up with a shot at z-222:

* The movement of Connally's "soon to be hit" right shoulder from z-223 forward.
* The movement of Connally's "soon to be hit" coat from z-223 through z-225.
* The jerking up of Connally's "soon to be hit" right wrist from z-226 through z-232.
* The jerking up of both of JFK's "hit well before" elbows starting at z226, where both elbows are held high (and more or less locked in place) through z-312.
* The Zapruder camera blurring at z-227.
* The alignment (as far as we can tell) of the sniper's nest, JFK's neck wounds and Connally's back wound right around z222.

A fantastic set of coincidences, if the SBT is false and a bullet did not strike both, right about at z-222.

I don't see why it would be a coincidence for both men to react to the first shot. They are both reacting to the same stimulus. So they are not independent events. A coincidence would be events having independent causes occurring at the same time.

Don't see any coincidences?

How about Connally's initial reactions being related to his wounds?

* The forward movement of Connally's right shoulder, both the location and direction of the bullet corresponding to the location and direction of Connally's movement.
* The movement of the right side of Connally's coat, again, near the location of the bullet exiting Connally's chest.
* The movement of Connally's right wrist, again, near the location of the bullet striking the wrist.

* There is also the jerking up of JFK's elbows right at the time, although, yes, this could be the result of JFK being wounded, while Connally was reacting to hearing this same shot. Although it would be strange that Connally movements correspond to Connally's wounds that would occur about three seconds later, movement of his shoulder, coat and wrist.

* And the coincidence of the lining up of the sniper's nest, JFK's neck wound and Connally's back wound. LNers were fantastically lucky that this movement of Connally occurred in the z220's, when these wound locations line up so well with the SBT. It would have been far better for CTers if these movements started after z-240, when these locations were not lined up.
* And the coincidence of the Zapruder camera jiggle at z-227, corresponding with a shot at z-222.

These may all be coincidences. But if so they are real coincidences that support the SBT. If there were plotters behind this assassination, they were very lucky to have so many things fall their way. Not at least seeing some coincidences shows how strong your bias is.

[Andrew Mason]

Don't see any coincidences?

How about Connally's initial reactions being related to his wounds?

* The forward movement of Connally's right shoulder, both the location and direction of the bullet corresponding to the location and direction of Connally's movement.
* The movement of the right side of Connally's coat, again, near the location of the bullet exiting Connally's chest.
* The movement of Connally's right wrist, again, near the location of the bullet striking the wrist.

* There is also the jerking up of JFK's elbows right at the time, although, yes, this could be the result of JFK being wounded, while Connally was reacting to hearing this same shot. Although it would be strange that Connally movements correspond to Connally's wounds that would occur about three seconds later, movement of his shoulder, coat and wrist.

All of this is consistent with what JBC said he did in reaction to the first shot.  He said he turned around in an attempt to see JFK.  Not only is his turn from z228 to z270 consistent with what he said he did, there is no other time where he makes any attempt at all to see JFK.

* And the coincidence of the lining up of the sniper's nest, JFK's neck wound and Connally's back wound. LNers were fantastically lucky that this movement of Connally occurred in the z220's, when these wound locations line up so well with the SBT. It would have been far better for CTers if these movements started after z-240, when these locations were not lined up.

But the JFK neck wound trajectory and the right armpit of JBC never align with the SN, so I think it is a stretch to call that a coincidence.  The path through JFK was right to left at an angle of at least 9 degrees to the car direction at z222. Over the distance between JFK and JBC (at least 24") the bullet would have traveled 24 (tan 9)=3.8 inches farther left.  If JFK's neck at z222 (assuming he was leaning over the right side of the car and miraculously in the ensuing 2 frames moved about 3 inches farther left) was 8 inches inside the car, JBC's right armpit would have to be 12 inches inside the car.  Do you really think JBC was that far inside the car?

* And the coincidence of the Zapruder camera jiggle at z-227, corresponding with a shot at z-222.

These may all be coincidences. But if so they are real coincidences that support the SBT. If there were plotters behind this assassination, they were very lucky to have so many things fall their way. Not at least seeing some coincidences shows how strong your bias is.

Again, movement of both men in response to the first shot is not a coincidence. They are not independent events.  It is what the evidence said occurred.  But the evidence also says that JBC was not hit in the back by it.

[Andrew Mason]

Mason's trying (it's pathetic, really) to move Connally's torso wounding down from the Z220s to Z272, where he thinks the Connally-falling-towards-Nellie movement (that began in the Z240s) is a "sailing forward" movement by Connally caused by the bullet's impact at Z272.

Oh yeah, his Z270s bullet just missed the President's head, causing his hair to flutter. Also, the left visor, that's been flapping from wind-flow over it all along Elm, moves in connection with his Z270s shot.

Yeah, my "bats__t crazy" theory, as you have called it, is that the evidence means something. You seem to think that it is wrong to accept the evidence for what it says.

I am not the first person to think that the shots may actually have been 1........2....3  with the last two in rapid succession.  It seems the FBI thought this for several months after the assassination just based on the evidence, as this Warren Commission model demonstrates:


The three strings show the shot paths. It is derived from the evidence and indicates where the president's car was located when each of the shots occurred. I reached the same conclusion long ago just following the evidence and only discovered this model recently (it appears to have been posted in October 2013).

Of course, the model was made for the WC before the "experts" and the Connallys themselves started thinking they could see things in the zfilm and before the FBI's "reconstruction" in May 1964.

One only needs to see one of Mason's SketchUp SquarePants graphics to see he doesn't understand perspective and spatial alignment. His Pet Theory was quite clever at one time but it never panned out.

It never panned out for you because you refuse to accept the evidence that the last two shots were closer together, or that the first shot struck JFK in the neck, or that Hickey saw what he said he saw, or that Greer turned around immediately "almost simultaneously" after the second shot as he said he did, etc.  You think that all the dozens of witnesses who said that the last two shots were in rapid succession were wrong.  I don't.