What is your standard of objectivity?
You let the evidence drive your beliefs. You don't try to bend the evidence to fit your beliefs.
You seem to ignore the problems with: the hand of JFK covering the exit path from the neck;
Just how did you come to that conclusion?
that there is no evidence of impact or damage or blood; that there is nothing occluding the exit wound in the chest to prevent a collapsed lung which JBC did not experience until he reached Parkland;
Do you think two seconds would make much difference to whether his lung didn't collapse until he got to Parkland?
that there is no right to left path from the SN through JFK that goes to JBC's right side;
You can determine that from the two dimensional Z-film?
that there is no path though JBC's torso that would explain the wrist wound; and that the shot pattern recalled by the vast majority of witnesses means there was only one shot before the midpoint and that midpoint is well after z225.
Oh, goody. We have someone else who puts absolute faith in witness recollections.
In any event, my point was that the SBT conflicts with large bodies of mutually consistent evidence.
Not really.
That is not even debatable
Would you care to debate that?
it is a matter of record.
What record would that be?
You just happen to think that all the witnesses who put the first shot well after z186 (Betzner, Croft, occupants of VP car, VP security car, persons along Elm St. where JFK's car was passing or had just passed when the first shot was heard), that JFK reacted visibly to it (20+ witnesses), and that the last two shots were closer together (40+ witnesses), were all wrong. Is that being objective?
Yes, because another group of witnesses remember it differently. and the Z-film supports them. JBC said he turned to look over his right shoulder when he heard the first shot. He did that at Z164. Then there was Rosemary Willis who quit running after the limo and stopped running and turned back to look in the direction of the TSBD. She began that in the early Z170s. I don't put my faith in witnesses based on whether or not they tell a story I choose to believe. I believe the witnesses that can be corroborated. For example, SS Agent Bennett said he was scanning the crowd to the right when he heard the first shot. He then turned to look at JFK and SAW the second shot strike him below his right shoulder. Bennett wrote that in his notes on the flight back to Washington. That is significant because JFK was on his back the whole time he was at Parkland and the only way Bennett could have known about the back wound was if he saw it strike JFK.
No. I suggest that he moved his arm because he was preparing to do the turn to the rear that he then performs. He said he turned to the rear to see JFK after hearing the first shot but before being hit in the back. He wasn't going to turn rearward with his arm down on his lap. He makes no attempt to see JFK prior to that turn which begins at about z228.
Go back and look at the Z=film. Tell me what JBC does starting at Z164.
So why does Rosemary turn suddenly back toward the TSBD at z202-206:

Rosemary Willis did not suddenly turn back toward the TSBD in the 200s. She was running with the limo when she heard the first shot. She couldn't be expected to stop on a dime. She first slowed to a stop and then looked back. She started slowing in the Z170s.
Why would Betzner say his z186 photo was just before the first shot?
{/quote]
You'd have to ask Betzner.
Why would the occupants of the VP car say the first shot was just after they completed the turn and were going down Elm St.
WOW! There's a precise description.
(it is almost finished the turn when last seen at z180). Why would occupants of the VP security car say that the first shot was as they were almost finished the turn and were parallel to the TSBD? Why would Mrs. Cabell say the first shot occurred when their car had entered the intersection?
You keep cherry picking the witnesses who support what you choose to believe. I choose to believe the witnesses who can be corroborated by the Z-film.
You say there is only one explanation for the behaviour we see after z151.
I don't remember saying that. I said it is my belief that the jiggle at Z158 was likely caused by a shot at Z151. I have acknowledged that the jiggle is not proof positive. Coupled with JBC's turn which began at Z164, it seems probable to me that is when the first shot was fired. Some have argued for a much earlier shot but that requires a very slow reaction by JBC. You would have us believe the shot came after JBC started to turn to look over his right shoulder.
Why would Mary Woodward say that JFK's turn and wave to her group after they shouted to them (that being the last such acknowledgement that he made) was before the first horrible ear-shattering noise? She heard three distinct shots, with the last two close together.
What evidence do you have to corroborate Mary Woodward?
The weakest form of evidence I have seen in the 35 years I have debated this subject online are statements that begin "So-and-so said...". Just because a witness says something doesn't establish it as fact. Witnesses often get things wrong. Often they get very important things wrong.
It is not a coincidence. They are both reacting to the same thing: the first shot. JFK has already begun reacting behind the Stemmons sign as we see from his position in z224 and 225 so his movements at z226 are not his first. JBC began to react at about z226-228.
JFK's hand was still moving down at Z225. His arms didn't start up until Z226, the same frame JBC flipped his injured right arm upward.