JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: Jerry Organ on February 06, 2023, 11:12:52 PM ---Tom Dillard was sitting a few feet in front of Jackson. Reitzes writes:
"Tom Dillard, Dallas Morning News, said, "the three [shots
were] approximately equally spaced." (6H163-64) In 1986
Dillard told Richard Trask, "As distinct as I know I'm talking
to you, I'm as convinced there were three clear shots. [snip]
I thought they were fairly evenly spaced." (Trask, pp. 440-41)
(My abridgement)
--- End quote ---
Dillard is one of 10 witnesses who gave statements that were available to the WC indicating that the shots were about equally spaced. Keep in mind that immediately after the shots he was trying to take a photo of the window from which Bob Jackson said he saw a rifle being withdrawn.
--- Quote ---Linda can't see the President's right hand nor if he grabbed his throat. At least in the Z150s, she can see the President. But that's over two seconds before your first shot.
--- End quote ---
Ok. Let's discount Linda because you think the 14 year old girl was lying....
--- Quote ---Right. Mr. Cabell had an odd sense of time (15 seconds total):
"Mr. CABELL - Well, I would put it this way. That approximately
10 seconds elapsed between the first and second shots, with
not more than 5 seconds having elapsed until the third one.
Mr. HUBERT - Two to one ratio?
Mr. CABELL - Approximately that. And again I say that, as you
mentioned, as a matter of being relative. I couldn't tell you the
exact seconds because they were not counted."
And he said he wasn't actually counting off the seconds between either of the spans.
--- End quote ---
You conveniently omitted the question he was asked, which was:
* Mr. HUBERT. Could you estimate the number of seconds, say, between the flrst and second shots, as related to thenumber of seconds between the second and third shots? Perhaps doing it on the basis of a ratio?
--- Quote ---I don't quite see how that describes the spanning between the three shots. Could have been three evenly-spaced shots.
--- End quote ---
Ok. I'll break the sentence: ""Then a moment and then two more shots in rapid succession." down for you: "Then a moment" refers to a pause after the first shot. "and then two more shots" refers to two shots occurring after the "moment". "in rapid succession." refers to the spacing between the last two shots indicating that they occurred without the pause that occurred for a moment after the first shot and before the next.
--- Quote ---So you don't know if the string actually represents a specific sequence of shots.
--- End quote ---
So you don't know how to recognize sarcasm.
--- Quote ---Here's how the use of Sneed affects Dave's tally:
* Shots One-and-Two Closer Together ... 2
* Shots Evenly-Spaced ... 8*
* Shots Two-and-Three Closer Together ... 5You haven't got much to complain about.
--- End quote ---
It is not just Sneed. Reitzes uses statements in several other much later sources such as O'Donnell's book (1972), Zeliger (1992), CNN (2003), Trost/Bennett (2003), Turner (2001), Biffle (2000), Weisberg (1976), Savage (1993), Mark Lane (1968), Thompson (1967) and Trask (1994).
--- Quote ---Unlike what he said to Sneed, Moore's 1964 statement says nothing about the shot-spacing. You just think you can make it fit using your bias of shot-spacing.
--- End quote ---
I don't count TE Moore as a 1......2...3 witness. He just mentioned hearing the last two after hearing the first. I just pointed out that he said that the first shot occurred much later (by the time JFK reached the Thornton sign), which means the first shot did not miss.
--- Quote ---Even if he had fully stood and got his head turned around in one second, Hickey couldn't see where Kennedy's hair fluttered. It's a tiny amount of hair in the Z270s that bounces up 1/2 inch for one frame and then falls downward. You really think a 1/18th second event made this much of an impression on Hickey: "the hair on the right side of his head flew forward".
--- End quote ---
So it is just an interesting coincidence that only JFK's hair on the right side flies up about 2 seconds before the head shot, just as Hickey described but, you say, did not see. Just a lucky guess?
--- Quote ---Yet the Zapruder film--when it begins to reveal Greer's head clearly in the late-Z270s--shows Greer already faced fully backward. By the Z280--when you claim Greer first turned his head sharply backward in reaction to your Z272 shot--Greer is not initiating a backward head turn, but instead is coming out of a backward head turn.
--- End quote ---
He is still turning rearward after z283 and does not come out of the rearward head turn until z291. Here it is in slow motion:
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: Jerry Organ on January 30, 2023, 11:31:48 PM ---It's your interpretation of the evidence that I think is wrong. Evidence, per se, is not wrong.
So now you're down to divining what some string on the FBI model at the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas means.
You don't know when those strings were placed or for what reason. You don't even know if they represent a sequence of shots. Could be the string to the Z190s merely shows the gap in the tree foliage that was centered around Z186, which the Commission offered as an early shot option to JFK (the WC instead favored the Z210-220s for the SBT shot). The Z290s string might be their best guess for where the car was at Z313. The Z340s string some idea for a shot fired after the head shot.
--- End quote ---
Actually, the full set of photos that is available in the National Archives contains captions. The captions explain that the cars represent the locations of the President's car when shots one, two and three were fired. The strings show the trajectories from the SN at that time:
Martin Weidmann:
--- Quote from: Jerry Organ on March 06, 2023, 09:51:08 PM ---Since they have the head shot at either Z290 or the Z340s, you have to wonder if they had a surveyor or other expert place the strings. Or was it some kind of good-faith best-estimate thing. The Z-frames in the Hearings start at Z171, meaning the Commission apparently didn't think the first shot occurred prior to that.
Did you notice the two white cars in the foreground are even further away from the Depository than they are in photos of the model from the Museum? I think the model is some generalization that no one should base anything on. Also risky to base a theory on eyewitness reconstruction.
--- End quote ---
I think the model is some generalization that no one should base anything on.
I agree
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: Martin Weidmann on March 06, 2023, 10:49:59 PM ---I think the model is some generalization that no one should base anything on.
I agree
--- End quote ---
Three points:
1. The model shows that Jerry's pejorative rejection ("bats__t crazy") of my "theory" that the first shot occurred between z190 and z200 when the car was between the lamp post and the Thornton Freeway sign ie. here:
is, in fact, rejection of a serious working hypothesis of the FBI and WC - at least in January 1964.
2. The model shows that it is quite reasonable that a shot at that time from the SN through JFK's neck exiting on a right-to-left downward trajectory would go to the left side of JBC's jump seat. With JBC turned to the right was he was from z190-200, the bullet could easily have missed the right side of his torso and implanted itself butt-first in the thigh.
3. It shows that Arlen Specter's demonstration of the trajectory:
is not consistent at all with the actual trajectory from the SN through JFK at any time while the car was passing along Elm St. before JFK shows signs of having been hit in the neck.
Andrew Mason:
Jerry:
I am not sure how or why you think this:
--- Quote from: Jerry Organ on March 09, 2023, 01:55:05 AM ---
--- End quote ---
is the same seating position as this:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version