Mark Lane and Charles Brehm

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Brehm's wordages are worse than useless.
Lane should hav gotten a Nobel Prize for showing that shot echoes can be louder than shot sources.

[Royell Storing]

Brehm's wordages are worse than useless.
Lane should hav gotten a Nobel Prize for showing that shot echoes can be louder than shot sources.

    People lose sight of WW2 ending roughly 18 yrs before 11/22/63. Brehm was a WW2 Vet. He was wounded during the D. Day Invasion. And then he was under fire once again on 11/22/63. Cut this man some slack.

[John Corbett]

There's only one problem with the "back and to the left" argument. JFK did not go back and to the left when the bullet struck him in the back of the head. His head actually moved forward a few inches from frames 312-313. From there he went straight backward. He was already leaning hard to his left when the headshot struck. That gave the false impression that he had gone back and to the left. All one has to do is look forward a half second from frame 313.
At frame 322, JFK is still in the far right side of the limo's back seat. There was no leftward movement from his position at 312.



Another myth bites the dust.

[Jarrett Smith]

Well, he heard 3 shots and missed the early shot Connally heard so that's 4 total. The 3rd and 4th shots were so close he probably thought it was one.

[Royell Storing]

Another myth bites the dust.

JFK was actually lifted Up and driven Back into the backrest. The force was so great that he then bounced off of the backrest and tilted to his (L) against Jackie. Once she moved, he was like a tree falling. The 1 still frame above does Not tell the story. And, there are more detailed Zapruder film images too.

[John Corbett]

Well, he heard 3 shots and missed the early shot Connally heard so that's 4 total. The 3rd and 4th shots were so close he probably thought it was one.

There was no fourth shot and zero forensic evidence of one. The only "evidence" of a shot from the GK is some people thought that's where it sounded like the shots came from. There was a clear consensus among the witnesses that there were three shots. With few exceptions, those who expressed an opinion said all the shots seemed to come from one direction. Either they all came from the GK or they all came from the direction of the TSBD. Obviously, one of those two groups has to be wrong unless one wants to make the ridiculous argument that the GK earwitnesses didn't hear the TSBD shots and the TSBD earwitnesses didn't hear the GK shots. Otherwise, it is clear that one of those two groups got it wrong. So how do we decide which group got it right. Very simple. Look at which group is corroborated by the other evidence. There is ample forensic evidence and an eyewitness to support shots from the TSBD. There is zero corroborating evidence for the witnesses who thought the shots came from the GK.