JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Gov. John Connally Grips His White Stetson Hat at Z-272
John Corbett:
--- Quote from: Andrew Mason on April 21, 2026, 02:15:13 PM ---To my knowledge no expert has even considered a scenario in which the bullet through JFK then struck just the thigh.
--- End quote ---
That alone should tell you something
--- Quote ---
The trajectory was along the femur so it struck at a shallow angle to the femur bone. The femur is the strongest bone in the body so I don’t know on what basis one could say that a partially spent bullet, tumbling end over end then striking the thigh butt first on a shallow angle striking the femur and making a dent in the base on one side would result in a shattering of the femur.
The better question might be: how does a bullet strike the back of the radius with enough force to break pieces of the radius (but not put a hole through the radius) and not deflect away from the point of contact?
--- End quote ---
CE399 showed how that happened.
--- Quote ---
The evidence is that Greer sensed an impact in the car on the second shot and Tague was struck on the second shot.
My only contention is that the large bodies of mutually consistent witness evidence all fits together and cannot be rejected. I wouldn’t call that a theory. It is what the witnesses independently recalled happened: JFK was struck by the first shot; the first shot was after z186: the last two shots were closer together and in fairly rapid succession. There is no conflict between that evidence and one person firing all shots with Oswald’s rifle. There is no conflict between that evidence and the zfilm. There is no conflict between that evidence and the physical evidence
--- End quote ---
Your fixation on eyewitnesses while ignoring the hard evidence continues to prevent you from knowing the truth of the assassination. There is nothing about your theory that is the least bit compatible with the Z-film. Robin Unger's enhanced Z193 frame shows just how ridiculous your drawing is of how JBC would have to be turned for your scenario to hold water. I would estimate there is at lease a 60 degree difference in the turn of JBC's shoulder between the Z-frame and your drawing. It is preposterous.
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: John Corbett on April 21, 2026, 03:48:20 PM ---That alone should tell you somethingCE399 showed how that happened.
--- End quote ---
Yes. It tells me that everyone assumed that JBC was hit by only one bullet.
--- Quote ---Your fixation on eyewitnesses while ignoring the hard evidence continues to prevent you from knowing the truth of the assassination.
--- End quote ---
Statistical corroboration of witnesses is used by the CIA, Mossad, MI5 and every other successful intelligence agency all the time. They gather information from various sources and determine facts. Although each piece is individually is not reliable, when the pieces all fit together they are extremely reliable. That is all I am doing.
If the 9 pages of witness recollections I provided, which fit with the 20+ witness recollections that JFK reacted to the first shot in ways not seen until after z193, which fit together with the motorcade witnesses, Betzner, Phil Willis, Linda Willis, Altgens, Hickey, Greer, and the witnesses along Elm who stated where JFK was in relation to where they were standing at the time of the first shot, were independent, the only rational conclusion is that the last two shots were close together, JFK reacted to the first shot and the first shot was after z186. In fact the way the three bodies fit together with the zfilm (there is a five second time difference between JFK showing signs of being hit so that must be the first shot according to the shot spacing witnesses. And that fits all the 20+ who said that JFK reacted that way to the first shot. And that fits with where the witnesses in the motorcade, Elm St. witnesses, photographers etc put the first shot: i.e. after z186) tells you that the witnesses are independent.
--- Quote ---There is nothing about your theory that is the least bit compatible with the Z-film. Robin Unger's enhanced Z193 frame shows just how ridiculous your drawing is of how JBC would have to be turned for your scenario to hold water.
I would estimate there is at least a 60 degree difference in the turn of JBC's shoulder between the Z-frame and your drawing. It is preposterous.
--- End quote ---
? At z193, JBC's shoulders are turned right so that his chest is facing left the sightline from Zapruder, which is 30 degrees. For that to be 60 degrees too far right, you must think JBC is facing to the left of forward in z193.
Robin Unger:
Robin Unger:
Robin Unger:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version