Marilyn Sitzman

[Jack Nessan]

  Altgens also disputed where they placed him there on Elm St inside Dealey Plaza. He claimed he was further East on Elm St. His claim was based on his camera settings. He said based on where they were placing him on Elm St vs his camera settings, his picture of JFK through the Limo windshield with the TSBD doorway in the background would have never come out. Altgens also testified that after crossing Elm St, he then followed law enforcement UP the Knoll. None of this is captured on any JFK assassination images.

How is this post, in any stretch of the imagination, even remotely relatable to Altgens stating he only heard two shots while standing in full view, alongside the street, staring into the car as JFK was shot twice.

If you can prove there was three shots Royell by all means get after it.

[Jack Nessan]

The earwitness/eyewitness debates remind of "The Invisible Gorilla." You are asked to count how many times the people dressed in white pass the basketball. In the middle of the video, a gorilla walks in. More than half of the viewers miss the gorilla, and many insist there was no gorilla when informed there was. There are many similar tests where some outrageously dressed character runs into a classroom, shoots the professor several times, and runs out. The students' recollections are all over the map.

The JFKA is like "the killer in the classroom" times 100, and Dealey Plaza is an almost perfect echo chamber.

https://www.npr.org/2010/05/19/126977945/bet-you-didnt-notice-the-invisible-gorilla

I really don't know how anyone misses the gorilla, but the giraffe is trickier.

This is not about just seeing but seeing and hearing. Maybe the Gorilla story is not relevant when two senses are involved. An echo chamber would result in more shots not less. Like hearing three when there was only two.

A way better analogy is Group Think where people are influenced by the majority into something they know is wrong. Like Walter Cronkite stating within minutes of the assassination "three shots fired at the motorcade", Not everyone in the car with Merriman Smith agreed with that news bulletin. 

An argument took place on Air Force One between the passengers (news reporters and Secret Service), on the flight back to Washington, about was there two shots or three. Three shots was never a fact.

The WC and HSCA understood it by referencing the Medias Influence into inflating the number of shots reported.

[Royell Storing]

How is this post, in any stretch of the imagination, even remotely relatable to Altgens stating he only heard two shots while standing in full view, alongside the street, staring into the car as JFK was shot twice.

If you can prove there was three shots Royell by all means get after it.

   The point is, Altgens disagreed with the WC "Company line" on many points and said so on-the-record. Why you are veering to me and how many shots I believe were fired is both puzzling and flattering.

[Jack Nessan]

   The point is, Altgens disagreed with the WC "Company line" on many points and said so on-the-record. Why you are veering to me and how many shots I believe were fired is both puzzling and flattering.

Altgens disagreed with the WC

Exactly how was he disagreeing with the WC? They asked him how many shots, and he told them. Are you sure the problem isn’t the fact he is disagreeing with your odd theory.

Why you are veering to me and how many shots I believe were fired is both puzzling and flattering.

Do not be to flattered. If you think Altgens was wrong stop talking about it and prove it.

 

[Charles Collins]

Forget the dented lip. This is not about the dented lip or the mark from the magazine follower. Wrong indentation and mark.

Read the book. Pages 140-146 and the foot notes to the chapter on page 178. This is about the "chamber mark" as noted by the FBI, nothing else, CE 543 lacks the "chamber mark" the 30+ others do not.

Funny Josiah knew of a key piece to the puzzle back in the mid 60’s, puts it into print in his book Six Seconds in Dallas, but apparently does not understand the relevance and significance of it because he cannot weave it into a conspiracy. In 1967, he felt it proved there was a shot from somewhere else that LHO only fired twice. He must have given up on that theory. Josiah giving up on his theory in no way diminishes the importance of his observation. He is the only person to view all these shells that were fired in the rifle, compare them, and write about them.

The bottom line based on his observations, CE 543 is the only shell that lacks the indentation referred to as the “chamber mark” by the FBI, whereas the next 30+ shell casings including the unfired cartridge all exhibit to some degree the “chamber mark”. The “Chamber Mark” is not the dented lip.  They are completely different, as is the mark from the magazine follower. READ THE BOOK.

On page two of the thread Josiah Thompson asked Thomas H. Purvisabout that chamber mark in the thread that Lance provided the link to. Here’s part of his answer:

Since CE543 did not show indications of the dent and the live round did, then this tended to serve as further circumstantial evidence that CE543 came from the first shot fired in the assassination shot sequence.


Thomas provides what seems to me to be a reasonable answer READ THE THREAD.

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/9276-an-unfired-cartridge/page/2/

[Jack Nessan]

On page two of the thread Josiah Thompson asked Thomas H. Purvisabout that chamber mark in the thread that Lance provided the link to. Here’s part of his answer:

Since CE543 did not show indications of the dent and the live round did, then this tended to serve as further circumstantial evidence that CE543 came from the first shot fired in the assassination shot sequence.


Thomas provides what seems to me to be a reasonable answer READ THE THREAD.

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/9276-an-unfired-cartridge/page/2/

I could care less about Thomas Whoever. Why would you care what that clueless dufus thinks instead of reading the pages in the book for yourself? Afraid to find out it is really that simple? After all the hype for 60 years it is a letdown to realize this is the answer, prepare yourself. If you will read the pages from his book. You will know why even the dumbest of people can figure out why that is not correct and is absolutely baseless, and by using his own analysis no less. Josiah, by chance, stumbled onto the answer to the JFK assassination 60 years ago, and proved it, but what he proved was that it was not a conspiracy with real live hard evidence, which is sadly lacking in the whole story. He was right about what he interpreted about the shells in his book. What he interpreted was verified by the FBI. Maybe the bigger question is how this escaped the HSCA firearms experts who supposedly examined everything collectively.

 There are at least 11 other first shot shells in the group of 30+ shells Josiah observed. Including CE557 which were the test shells fired by the FBI when they first received the rifle. His observation was the shells in CE 557 and all 30+ shells exhibited the chamber mark. No exceptions. The fact that CE 141, the unfired cartridge, has the chamber mark proves there is an anomaly in the chamber making the indentations. That was his point. Once you read and understand what he observed you will no longer want to spend time chasing your tail with all this other useless nonsense.   

I have the pages from his book that are relevant on a PDF but I do not think that I can just post them.  READ THE BOOK.

The book Phantom Shot proves what is in Six Seconds in Dallas and Six Seconds in Dallas proves what is in Phantom Shot.

[Charles Collins]

I could care less about Thomas Whoever. Why would you care what that clueless dufus thinks instead of reading the pages in the book for yourself? Afraid to find out it is really that simple? After all the hype for 60 years it is a letdown to realize this is the answer, prepare yourself. If you will read the pages from his book. You will know why even the dumbest of people can figure out why that is not correct and is absolutely baseless, and by using his own analysis no less. Josiah, by chance, stumbled onto the answer to the JFK assassination 60 years ago, and proved it, but what he proved was that it was not a conspiracy with real live hard evidence, which is sadly lacking in the whole story. He was right about what he interpreted about the shells in his book. What he interpreted was verified by the FBI. Maybe the bigger question is how this escaped the HSCA firearms experts who supposedly examined everything collectively.

 There are at least 11 other first shot shells in the group of 30+ shells Josiah observed. Including CE557 which were the test shells fired by the FBI when they first received the rifle. His observation was the shells in CE 557 and all 30+ shells exhibited the chamber mark. No exceptions. The fact that CE 141, the unfired cartridge, has the chamber mark proves there is an anomaly in the chamber making the indentations. That was his point. Once you read and understand what he observed you will no longer want to spend time chasing your tail with all this other useless nonsense.   

I have the pages from his book that are relevant on a PDF but I do not think that I can just post them.  READ THE BOOK.

The book Phantom Shot proves what is in Six Seconds in Dallas and Six Seconds in Dallas proves what is in Phantom Shot.

Thomas H. Purvis’ posts in that thread indicate to me that he is knowledgeable and his explanation makes good sense to me. I imagine that Josiah Thompson thought so too. Otherwise, why would Josiah bother to ask him the questions? You are welcome to your own opinions as far as I am concerned Jack. I just disagree. If we all thought alike we wouldn’t have much of anything to discuss. I will private message you with a place you can send me the pdf. I will read the relevant pages with an open mind if you do that.