A Closer Look…

[Charles Collins]

Bennett was cited by the WC as a witness for the first shot missing JFK.  But he was never called by the WC and this is unfortunate  because he gave a statement on 23Nov63 that is different from his original notes taken at the time on 22Nov63. His original notes (CE1024 at 18H542) state:

• "At this point I heard a noise that immediately reminded me of a firecracker. I immediately, upon hearing the supposed fire cracker, looked at the Boss's car. At this exact time I saw a shot that hit the Boss about 4 inches down from the right shoulder; a second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the Boss's head."

That would appear to be a reference to two shots only but it is not entirely clear.  He heard a firecracker and saw a shot "that hit" JFK about 4 inches down from the right shoulder.

However, in his later statement he did say that he looked to the right at the crowd after the first shot and then looked at the President:

"At this point I heard what sounded like a fire-cracker. I immediately looked from the right/crowd/physical area/ and looked towards the President who was seated in the right rear seat of his limousine open convertible. At the moment I looked at the back of the President I heard another fire-cracker noise and saw the shot hit the President about four inches down from the right shoulder. A second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the President's head."

Of course Jerry is already on record saying that Hickey standing up could not see JFK so he will have say that Bennett couldn't see JFK either.  But I disagree. Both said they saw JFK on the second and third shots and I see no reason for them to make that up.  Hickey said the first of the last two occurred while JFK was leaning to the left and appeared to miss JFK.  Bennett in his statement said that the second shot struck JFK in the back.

Human memories typically do not account for all of the little details. I prefer the photographic record so that I can see with my own eyes that Glen Bennett was looking back and up towards the TSBD around the Z186 time frame. Bennett wrote his notes on the plane back to DC. That was before the details of JFK’s wounds were known. So it seems to me that he must have seen JFK at the time that he was shot. I haven’t tested his lines of sight. However, if you look at the photos that show Glen Bennett before and after the Betzner photo, you will see that he was typically looking out to the side and up. He would have had restricted views due to the agents on the running boards. However, it appears he was looking between, ahead of, and behind them and doing the best he could. I would think that he could have found a similar space between the passengers in front of him to view JFK. But, again, I haven’t tested that idea. At any rate I believe it is significant that Glen Bennett appears to be looking back toward the TSBD at that point in time. That (along with all the other apparent reactions already indicated in this thread) certainly seems to me to support the idea of an early missed first shot. I haven’t noticed any photos indicating the agents looking back behind them (other than the photos taken during the time frame of the shots). I believe that they were trained to scan the crowds, etc that they were approaching looking for threats and unusual activities, etc.

[Andrew Mason]

Cite. Please.

Nope. I have never thought anyone in the Queen Mary couldn't see JFK.

You seem to think I'm pretty nefarious, using a, per you, 6.86º angle on the limo overhead when it's really, again per you, 9.5º.

Perhaps I misinterpreted your previous views such as:
"Hickey isn't "standing"; he's propped against the back seat. Even if "several feet" above the top of Kennedy's head, Hickey could barely see Kennedy over the QM's sun visor."

If you are saying that he couldn't see the hair, how could he see the rest of him?  As I say, I see no reason to believe that Hickey or Bennett could not see JFK. At z271, JFK is leaning quite far to the left and forward.  If Hickey could see the top of JFK's head, I don't see why he could not see this:

The fact is that Hickey reported seeing JFK's hair fly up on the second shot but cause no damage. He said it was a very short time before the third shot.  Only the hair on his right side moves. No hair on anyone else moves at all. This is not a gust of wind because it lasts for about one fifth of a second.  No gust of wind could be that short. There is nowhere else that JFK's hair flies up like that. 

[Andrew Mason]

That doesn't translate into "Jerry is already on record saying that Hickey standing up could not see JFK".

I said Hickey couldn't see the flutter of Kennedy's hair because it would have been out of Hickey's viewpoint. Practically what I said in the post you cited:

    "The view to the area of the hair flutter is blocked because
      Kennedy's head is slanted forward, away from Hickey's LoS."

It's because Kennedy's head leaned forward such that caused the little lock of hair to dangle and be puffed in a small way by the wind. I duplicated an agent standing and called him "Hickey Standing" (the surrogate's head is about a foot higher than Hickey's head in the Altgens Photo) and I made Kennedy's head lean forward to illustrate Hickey's impossible view-line to the hair flutter.

Yet he said he saw it and it was NOT the shot that caused JFK to be struck in the head, which was the third shot.  How is it even possible that the unusually short and very local blast of air occurs just to the right of JFK's head lifting his hair at the point in time that it Hickey places it, IF he hadn't seen it?  That makes no sense. And it fits with Greer, Tague, the wounds, the shot pattern, the first shot hitting JFK etc. etc. 

Dave Powers was more to the behind of Kennedy than Hickey. Even Powers wouldn't be able to see to the hair flutter when Kennedy's head was sharply tilted forward and tilted a bit toward Jackie.

It's a tiny amount of hair in the Z270s that bounces up 1/2 inch for one frame and then falls downward, none of it visible to Hickey. Not to mention that Hickey would have to turn around to face forward (he's looking backward in Altgens, taken Z255) between Z255 and Z273 (about one second), locate Kennedy and observe that minor hair flutter.

Your argument that he was at the wrong angle to see it isn't very persuasive. He was looking down onto the top of JFK's head. Why would he not be able to see what he said he saw?  Can you duplicate this in 3D?

I don't like you misusing my words and placing fake lines on my graphics, so this will be our last one-to-one exchange for awhile.

The "fake" line was yours:



I just extended it to measure it. 

I hope the break will allow you to come up with new descriptive epithets for the 3 shot 3 hit scenario. "Mason-nut theory" and "Bat__it crazy" and "Sponge-Bob Squarepants" were all very good but getting a little worn with age.  I expect you can do better.

[Dan O'meara]

Yet he said he saw it and it was NOT the shot that caused JFK to be struck in the head, which was the third shot.  How is it even possible that the unusually short and very local blast of air occurs just to the right of JFK's head lifting his hair at the point in time that it Hickey places it, IF he hadn't seen it?  That makes no sense. And it fits with Greer, Tague, the wounds, the shot pattern, the first shot hitting JFK etc. etc. 

Your argument that he was at the wrong angle to see it isn't very persuasive. He was looking down onto the top of JFK's head. Why would he not be able to see what he said he saw?  Can you duplicate this in 3D?
The "fake" line was yours:



I just extended it to measure it. 

I hope the break will allow you to come up with new descriptive epithets for the 3 shot 3 hit scenario. "Mason-nut theory" and "Bat__it crazy" and "Sponge-Bob Squarepants" were all very good but getting a little worn with age.  I expect you can do better.

As Jerry has demonstrated beyond doubt - it was impossible for Hickey to see the slight ruffle of JFK's fringe from where he was positioned.
It was physically impossible.
This has been demonstrated beyond any question.

Rather than tackle Jerry's comprehensive demonstration of this impossibility, all you can manage is "yet he said he saw it".
You fail to comprehend that, if it was impossible for Hickey to see the fringe ruffle your demented theory requires, then he must have been talking about something else when he referred to JFK's hair moving.
It is the only conclusion that can be drawn.
Your demented "logic" - that Jerry's faultless demonstration must be wrong because you think Hickey said he saw JFK's fringe ruffle - says all anyone needs to know about the quality of your approach to this matter.

[Andrew Mason]

As Jerry has demonstrated beyond doubt - it was impossible for Hickey to see the slight ruffle of JFK's fringe from where he was positioned.
It was physically impossible.
This has been demonstrated beyond any question.

Rather than tackle Jerry's comprehensive demonstration of this impossibility, all you can manage is "yet he said he saw it".
You fail to comprehend that, if it was impossible for Hickey to see the fringe ruffle your demented theory requires, then he must have been talking about something else when he referred to JFK's hair moving.
It is the only conclusion that can be drawn.
Your demented "logic" - that Jerry's faultless demonstration must be wrong because you think Hickey said he saw JFK's fringe ruffle - says all anyone needs to know about the quality of your approach to this matter.

You seem to be unable to understand the significance of this fact: the very thing that you say he couldn't see but which he said he saw actually occurred - at the time he said it occurred and just as he described. It also occurred at the same time as JBC starts moving forward BEFORE he falls back onto his wife.  It also occurred at the same time as Greer said he heard the second shot and - almost simultaneously turned around to see JBC falling back onto his wife.  It also occurred at the same time that 45+ witnesses said the second shot had to have occurred if the head shot was the last shot.  It also occurred at the very moment that the MC could have been fired if the shooter was trying to fire the MC as rapidly as possible (2.3 seconds before the head shot). 

Cases are not solved by logic. They are solved by evidence.  So it is not logic, demented or otherwise, that causes me to conclude that Hickey saw what he said he saw at the time of the second shot. It is an abundance of independent, consistent bodies of mutually consistent evidence.

As far as Jerry proving that Hickey could not see the top of JFK's head and, therefore, the hair on the top of the right side of his head, I have seen no demonstration by Jerry or anyone showing this, faultless or otherwise.  Cite?

[Jack Nessan]

Hickey did see JFK’s hair fly forward but only after the bullet struck. At least he did on 11/22. Actually, it is exactly what everyone saw. Andrew knows this because it has been explained to him many many many times. 

SA Hickey: 11/22 

“The president was slumped to the left in the car and I saw him come up. I heard what appeared to be two shots and it seemed as if the right side of his head was hit and his hair flew forward.”

[Andrew Mason]

Hickey did see JFK’s hair fly forward but only after the bullet struck. At least he did on 11/22. Actually, it is exactly what everyone saw. Andrew knows this because it has been explained to him many many many times. 

SA Hickey: 11/22 

“The president was slumped to the left in the car and I saw him come up. I heard what appeared to be two shots and it seemed as if the right side of his head was hit and his hair flew forward.”

Jack, you seem to have missed the part of his 30Nov63 statement that says:

"The first shot of the second two seemed as if it missed because the hair on the right side of his head flew forward and there didn't seem to be any impact against his head.  The last shot seemed to hit his head and cause a noise at the point of impact which made him fall forward and to his left again."

In Hickey's 22Nov63 statement he was describing the effects of two separate shots without specifying what happened on each shot.