NEW ARTICLE: JFK's Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible

[Andrew Mason]

Where is his hand seen in the Willis photo?:

I don't have any problem seeing it in the picture. Where do you think it is?

It is in front of his torso and therefore can't be seen in Willis' photo. We can see that in the zfilm.

After Z210. The second shot struck him. She is unsure even in her statement.

So I gather you also reject the Connallys' evidence that JBC was struck by a second shot before the head shot....

There is no evidence that JBC was struck by any other shot than the first shot that passed through JFK.

No evidence?  I gather you don't think that:

• Nellie's testimony that she watched JFK react to the first shot and then saw her husband hit by the second qualifies as "evidence"
• Altgens' testimony that his #6 photo (showing JFK reacting to his neck wound) was taken after the first but before any other qualifies as "evidence"
• SA George Hickey's statement that he was turned forward watching JFK for the last two shot qualifies as "evidence"
• the statements of over 20 witnesses that JFK reacted visibly to the first shot qualify as "evidence"

[Tom Graves]

It is in front of his torso and therefore can't be seen in Willis' photo. We can see that in the zfilm.
No evidence?  I gather you don't think that:

• Nellie's testimony that she watched JFK react to the first shot and then saw her husband hit by the second qualifies as "evidence"
• Altgens' testimony that his #6 photo (showing JFK reacting to his neck wound) was taken after the first but before any other qualifies as "evidence"
• SA George Hickey's statement that he was turned forward watching JFK for the last two shot qualifies as "evidence"
• the statements of over 20 witnesses that JFK reacted visibly to the first shot qualify as "evidence"

JFK's and six other witnesses' conscious reactions to the sounds of Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot were all captured on film between Zapruder frames 142 and 150.

Oswald's three shots were

1) a difficult, a steeply-downward-angled shot at hypothetical "Z-124, i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming after a 17-second film-saving pause

2) between Z-221 and Z-224 (impossible to determine precisely due to the visual obstruction of the Stemmons Freeway sign)

3) at Z-313

Total elapsed time = 10.2 seconds, more than enough time for former Marine sharpshooter Oswald to fire the second and third shots accurately from his bolt-action short-rifle.

[Andrew Mason]

JFK's and six other witnesses' conscious reactions to the sounds of Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot were all captured on film between Zapruder frames 142 and 150

...and completely reconcilable with normal head turning when passing along a street with people on both sides:

Total elapsed time = 10.2 seconds, more than enough time for former Marine sharpshooter Oswald to fire the second and third shots accurately from his bolt-action short-rifle.

And so is 6.45 seconds.  The difference is that according to all the evidence, the first shot was after z186.

[Jack Nessan]

It is in front of his torso and therefore can't be seen in Willis' photo. We can see that in the zfilm.
No evidence?  I gather you don't think that:

• Nellie's testimony that she watched JFK react to the first shot and then saw her husband hit by the second qualifies as "evidence"
• Altgens' testimony that his #6 photo (showing JFK reacting to his neck wound) was taken after the first but before any other qualifies as "evidence"
• SA George Hickey's statement that he was turned forward watching JFK for the last two shot qualifies as "evidence"
• the statements of over 20 witnesses that JFK reacted visibly to the first shot qualify as "evidence"

It is in front of his torso and therefore can't be seen in Willis' photo. We can see that in the zfilm.

Unbelievable, you know JFK was waving at Z210, what again is this post about?

What is interesting is you do know he is waving at Z210, but you thought you would just make up this nonsense in an effort to try and prove this theory? This three shot scenario is not only improbable, but also unbelievable. You never asked yourself if it made sense for two different bullets to strike JBC’s thigh? They would have fractured his thigh in this instance. All you have done is split SBT and create a second shot where there was not one.

Wouldn’t it just be easier to admit you can’t prove a third shot? Now you are proposing some kind of goofy logic to add credibility to opinions you consider are some kind of evidence to support this oddball theory. 

Nellie's testimony that she watched JFK react to the first shot and then saw her husband hit by the second qualifies as "evidence"

This is just wrong. Nellie saw JFK react to the first shot, and Nellie along with Jackie acknowledged JBC’s verbal reaction to having been struck by a bullet as having occurred after the first shot but before the second.

Altgens' testimony that his #6 photo (showing JFK reacting to his neck wound) was taken after the first but before any other qualifies as "evidence"

All the eyewitness in total were of the exact same opinion.

SA George Hickey's statement that he was turned forward watching JFK for the last two shot qualifies as "evidence"

SA Hickey saw the bullet impact JFK’s head and make his hair fly forward on the second shot. 

The statements of over 20 witnesses that JFK reacted visibly to the first shot qualify as "evidence"

Over 50+ eyewitnesses saw JFK react to the first shot. All of them stated he reacted to the first shot.

What again is the difference between your unproven three shot act and Michael Griffiths? Your theory has two bullets in JBC’s thigh and Michael has shooters everywhere, but no other bullets or fragments except for the ones matched to LHO’s carcano, are ever found.

[Andrew Mason]

It is in front of his torso and therefore can't be seen in Willis' photo. We can see that in the zfilm.

Unbelievable, you know JFK was waving at Z210, what again is this post about?

What is interesting is you do know he is waving at Z210, but you thought you would just make up this nonsense in an effort to try and prove this theory?

I notice that you are no longer insisting we can see JFK's arm in Willis' photo.  Progress. 

There is no z210. It was destroyed by Life Magazine. Besides, we can't see JFK's hand after z206.  In z206 his hand is aligned with the forearm and it is in front of him. When he was waving (e.g. prior to z193) his hand was up, perpendicular to this forearm.

This three shot scenario is not only improbable, but also unbelievable. You never asked yourself if it made sense for two different bullets to strike JBC’s thigh?

I never asked myself if it made sense because it never occurred to me that he was hit by two bullets in the thigh.  There was only one thigh wound.

They would have fractured his thigh in this instance. All you have done is split SBT and create a second shot where there was not one.

The SBT says that all wounds other than the JFK head wound were caused by one bullet. So by definition, there cannot be two SBT shots.

Wouldn’t it just be easier to admit you can’t prove a third shot? Now you are proposing some kind of goofy logic to add credibility to opinions you consider are some kind of evidence to support this oddball theory.

An oddball "theory" observed by 132 witnesses?

Nellie's testimony that she watched JFK react to the first shot and then saw her husband hit by the second qualifies as "evidence"

This is just wrong. Nellie saw JFK react to the first shot, and Nellie along with Jackie acknowledged JBC’s verbal reaction to having been struck by a bullet as having occurred after the first shot but before the second.

Nellie's testimony at 4 H 147:

SA George Hickey's statement that he was turned forward watching JFK for the last two shot qualifies as "evidence"

SA Hickey saw the bullet impact JFK’s head and make his hair fly forward on the second shot. 

No impact to the head was observed by Hickey on the second shot 18 H 762:

The statements of over 20 witnesses that JFK reacted visibly to the first shot qualify as "evidence"

Over 50+ eyewitnesses saw JFK react to the first shot. All of them stated he reacted to the first shot.

What again is the difference between your unproven three shot act and Michael Griffiths? Your theory has two bullets in JBC’s thigh and Michael has shooters everywhere, but no other bullets or fragments except for the ones matched to LHO’s carcano, are ever found.

One bullet in the thigh: CE399 (after exiting from JFK's throat).  One bullet through JBC's chest and wrist, fragmenting striking windshield and Tague.  Third bullet at z313.

[Jack Nessan]

I notice that you are no longer insisting we can see JFK's arm in Willis' photo.  Progress. 

There is no z210. It was destroyed by Life Magazine. Besides, we can't see JFK's hand after z206.  In z206 his hand is aligned with the forearm and it is in front of him. When he was waving (e.g. prior to z193) his hand was up, perpendicular to this forearm.
I never asked myself if it made sense because it never occurred to me that he was hit by two bullets in the thigh.  There was only one thigh wound.

The SBT says that all wounds other than the JFK head wound were caused by one bullet. So by definition, there cannot be two SBT shots.
An oddball "theory" observed by 132 witnesses?

Nellie's testimony at 4 H 147:


No impact to the head was observed by Hickey on the second shot 18 H 762:


One bullet in the thigh: CE399 (after exiting from JFK's throat).  One bullet through JBC's chest and wrist, fragmenting striking windshield and Tague.  Third bullet at z313.

I notice that you are no longer insisting we can see JFK's arm in Willis' photo.  Progress. 

We? I see it, you never will because you cannot admit it.

This whole story has run its course. Seriously, you thought just adding a bullet to the shot sequence would not require an explanation for what happened to the extra bullet? The bullet breaking into fragments is obviously not any kind of answer. Then to add insult to injury you are denying the Z313 shot fragmented?

AMason three shot theory:

[b]One bullet in the thigh: CE399 (after exiting from JFK's throat).  One bullet through JBC's chest and wrist, fragmenting striking windshield and Tague.  Third bullet at z313
[/b]
No broken or damaged femur from the first shot. No second bullet anywhere. No fragmentation from the headshot, despite extensive testimony to the contrary

If you are going to drag a theory out of the garbage heap of three shot theories and call it your own, how about selecting one that hasn’t been disproven in so many different ways.

Mr. SPECTER - For the purpose of this consideration, I am interested to know whether the metal which you found in the wrist was of sufficient size so that the bullet which passed through the wrist could not have emerged virtually completely intact or with 158 grains intact, or whether the portions of the metallic fragments were so small that that would be consistent with having Virtually the entire 6.5-mm. bullet emerge.
Dr. GREGORY - Well, considering the small volume of metal as seen by X-ray, and the very small dimensions of the metal which was recovered, I think several such fragments could have been flaked off of a total missile mass without reducing its volume greatly.
Now, just how much, depends of course upon what the original missile weighed. In other words, on the basis of the metal left behind in Governor Connally's body, as far as I could tell, the missile that struck it could be virtually intact, insofar as mass was concerned, but probably was distorted.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you have any idea at all as to what the fragments which you observed in the Governor's wrist might weigh, Doctor?
Dr. GREGORY - No, not really, but it would have been very small---very small.
 
There is no z210. It was destroyed by Life Magazine. Besides, we can't see JFK's hand after z206.  In z206 his hand is aligned with the forearm and it is in front of him. When he was waving (e.g. prior to z193) his hand was up, perpendicular to this forearm.


I never asked myself if it made sense because it never occurred to me that he was hit by two bullets in the thigh.  There was only one thigh wound.

Exactly, I wish you would, that is the problem.
 

The SBT says that all wounds other than the JFK head wound were caused by one bullet. So by definition, there cannot be two SBT shots.

No. Not in your theory. Anything and everything are possible, unexplainable but possible, and that is the problem. Your theory has two bullets striking JBC’s thigh. SBT has one bullet doing all the wounding. You have two with no clear explanation of where the bullets ended up.  Now fragments are flying everywhere. 

 

An oddball "theory" observed by 132 witnesses?

Yes, to oddball, no to 132 witnesses
 
 
 One more time just for you.
Nellie's testimony at 4 H 147:

Nellie:  As the first shot was hit, and I turned to look at the same time, I recall John saying, "Oh, no, no, no.

Gov Connally: I immediately, when I was hit, I said, "Oh, no, no, no." And then I said, "My God, they are going to kill us all."   


No impact to the head was observed by Hickey on the second shot 18 H 762:

Yes, there was you have to cite a later statement to erase what he originally stated.

In his original after incident 11/22 statement. The 11/22/63 statement you ignore. You know before the “medias influence.” referenced by WC and HSCA panels.

(11-22-63 report, 18H765) “As 100-X made the turn and proceeded a short distance, I heard what seemed to me that a firecracker exploded to the right and rear. I stood partially up and turned to the rear to see if I could observe anything. Nothing was observed and I turned around and looked at the President’s car. The President was slumped to the left in the car. 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.”
  [/i][/u]
In your 1 week later “media influenced” version, the second shot was the shot that made JFK’s air fly forward.

It is obvious why you are afraid of the 11/22 first report. His head was hit by a shot and then his hair flew forward. A completely different meaning than what you posted. You like and rely on the time altered HSCA version. In your version the second shot is the shot that makes his hair fly forward.

11/30/63 Hickey

“It looked to me as if the president was struck in the right upper rear of the head. 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”

 A Mason:This is consistent with Oswald trying to get the second and third shots off as quickly as possible without having to re-aim because the car was getting away. The first shot occurred as soon as JFK emerged from under the oak tree. This was just after JFK passed the lamp post before the Thornton sign.  The second shot occurred as JFK was moving slightly left to right, almost directly away from Oswald. It just missed JFK on the right side and struck JBC in the right armpit and wrist.  The third shot fired on the exact same trajectory as the second without having to re-aim, 2.3 seconds later struck him in the head as his head moved to the right.  Believe it or not, there is actually uncontradicted evidence that this is what occurred. 

For all the reasons stated previous, this is just wrong for so many reasons.

[Andrew Mason]

I notice that you are no longer insisting we can see JFK's arm in Willis' photo.  Progress. 

We? I see it, you never will because you cannot admit it.

I would admit it if there was anything in the photo that could be his arm.  There isn't. Here: you mark where you think JFK's waving right arm/hand is:


or just describe how many pixels you think his hand is from some identifiable point.

This whole story has run its course. Seriously, you thought just adding a bullet to the shot sequence would not require an explanation for what happened to the extra bullet?

It would be more accurate to say that you subtracted a shot from the evidence of three shots.

The bullet breaking into fragments is obviously not any kind of answer. Then to add insult to injury you are denying the Z313 shot fragmented?

The bullet breaking into fragments and leaving the car is an answer. And there is evidence that this occurred on the second shot.

I never suggested that the shot at z312-313 did not fragment. The two fragments found in the car (CE567 and CE569) are likely from that head shot. No one in the car said that they sensed an impact within the car (as Greer did on the second shot) and no one outside the car sensed an impact from that shot (as Tague did, on the second shot).

AMason three shot theory:
No broken or damaged femur from the first shot.

There was lead embedded in the femur as seen on two different xrays of the left thigh.  The impact was oblique and dented the base of CE399.  There is no reason to believe that it would break the femur after passing through JFK and thigh muscle at an oblique angle.  You would need a pristine bullet hitting square-on to stand a chance of breaking the femur, one of the strongest bones in the body.

No second bullet anywhere.

There may have been some flecks of lead in the windshield frame and glass and in JBC, possibly on the floor.  Most of it appears to have gone over the windshield.  I know you find that convenient but that is the evidence.  Do you think Tague happened to be hit by the ONLY fragment that left the car?
 

The SBT says that all wounds other than the JFK head wound were caused by one bullet. So by definition, there cannot be two SBT shots.

No. Not in your theory. Anything and everything are possible, unexplainable but possible, and that is the problem. Your theory has two bullets striking JBC’s thigh. SBT has one bullet doing all the wounding. You have two with no clear explanation of where the bullets ended up.  Now fragments are flying everywhere. 

In the scenario provided by the evidence: 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter, there is no SBT.  I have no idea why you think I am suggesting 2 bullets striking JBC's thigh.

No impact to the head was observed by Hickey on the second shot 18 H 762:

Yes, there was you have to cite a later statement to erase what he originally stated.

In his original after incident 11/22 statement. The 11/22/63 statement you ignore. You know before the “medias influence.” referenced by WC and HSCA panels.

(11-22-63 report, 18H765) “As 100-X made the turn and proceeded a short distance, I heard what seemed to me that a firecracker exploded to the right and rear. I stood partially up and turned to the rear to see if I could observe anything. Nothing was observed and I turned around and looked at the President’s car. The President was slumped to the left in the car. 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.”
  [/i][/u]
In your 1 week later “media influenced” version, the second shot was the shot that made JFK’s air fly forward.

In his first statement he referred to two shots and two observations on those shots.  In his later statement he clarified what he saw on each shot.  On shot 2 he saw JFK's hair fly forward. On shot 3, he saw the right side of his head was hit.  I don't know of any report that talked about what happened to JFK on the second shot that suggested that just his hair flew forward.  We can see his hair flying forward, by the way.  It starts at z273.

[Jack Nessan]

I would admit it if there was anything in the photo that could be his arm.  There isn't. Here: you mark where you think JFK's waving right arm/hand is:


or just describe how many pixels you think his hand is from some identifiable point.It would be more accurate to say that you subtracted a shot from the evidence of three shots.
The bullet breaking into fragments and leaving the car is an answer. And there is evidence that this occurred on the second shot.

I never suggested that the shot at z312-313 did not fragment. The two fragments found in the car (CE567 and CE569) are likely from that head shot. No one in the car said that they sensed an impact within the car (as Greer did on the second shot) and no one outside the car sensed an impact from that shot (as Tague did, on the second shot).
There was lead embedded in the femur as seen on two different xrays of the left thigh.  The impact was oblique and dented the base of CE399.  There is no reason to believe that it would break the femur after passing through JFK and thigh muscle at an oblique angle.  You would need a pristine bullet hitting square-on to stand a chance of breaking the femur, one of the strongest bones in the body.There may have been some flecks of lead in the windshield frame and glass and in JBC, possibly on the floor.  Most of it appears to have gone over the windshield.  I know you find that convenient but that is the evidence.  Do you think Tague happened to be hit by the ONLY fragment that left the car?
 In the scenario provided by the evidence: 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter, there is no SBT.  I have no idea why you think I am suggesting 2 bullets striking JBC's thigh.
In his first statement he referred to two shots and two observations on those shots.  In his later statement he clarified what he saw on each shot.  On shot 2 he saw JFK's hair fly forward. On shot 3, he saw the right side of his head was hit.  I don't know of any report that talked about what happened to JFK on the second shot that suggested that just his hair flew forward.  We can see his hair flying forward, by the way.  It starts at z273.

------------------

Same nonsense on a different day. Maybe it is time to go back to fantasy land to create a new theory. This time leave Nelly and JBC, Jackie, and SA Hickey out of it.

You now have stated the second shot fragmented and hit the window molding and the curb by Tague. The attending surgeon, Dr Gregory, completely dismisses the whole theory you just presented. The bullet did not fragment. There was no fragmented bullet associated with the wrist, and a bullet did exit the wrist but backwards and in a whole state. The exiting bullet then struck JBC’s thigh backwards and deposited a small amount of lead on the femur. You're always claiming that you follow the evidence. That is what the evidence shows that occurred. 

You failed to explain this. Where is the whole bullet that damaged the wrist if it isn’t the one that damaged the thigh? Where is the proof there even being a third shot? You have never presented anything.