A silly approach given how unreliable eye and ear witness testimony is. I'm amazed by how many people on this forum think witness accounts are the end all, be all when it comes to evidence. No matter what someone wants to believe about the JFKA, they can probably find and a witness to support it. If we are to believe witnesses, the JFKA happened dozens of different ways.
Try again - how does the "wealth of evidence" you presented demonstrate that the sound of the shots could have caused a startle reaction at Zapruder's location.
That's the issue at hand.
Just what I need. A recommendation from a guy who doesn't think Oswald fired the shots that killed JFK.
There is zero evidence that Oswald actually took the shots and lots of evidence suggesting he didn't.
You believe that because Oswald's rifle was found at the scene, that is evidence he actually took the shots. As much as this is going to blow your mind, it is
not evidence Oswald actually took the shots.
Because you're not too bright you cannot understand how this can be true.
Like all true Nutters, you don't realise that what you think about this case is actually a THEORY. Your delusion convinces you that it is a FACT Oswald took the shots.
It is not a fact, its just a theory.