Gov. John Connally Grips His White Stetson Hat at Z-272

[Andrew Mason]

I mean my observation that JBC's jacket suddenly bulged out at Z224 and two frames later both JFK and JBC both suddenly flipped their arms upward in perfect unison. After which JFK is seen leaning forward and to his left with his hands up around his throat and JBC doubles over and dips to his right, gyrates in his seat for a few more seconds before collapsing into Nellie's lap. Yeah, that interpretation. So what's your interpretation of that sequence?

The film doesn’t tell you what is happening, other than JFK is reacting to his neck wound.  I can’t tell what JBC is reacting to without referring to other evidence. Nellie, and 20 others said that JFK reacted like that to the first shot and the evidence is pretty consistent that JBC was hit in the back on the second shot. JBC said he turned around after the first shot to look at JFK. Nellie said she did not look in the back seat after the second shot.  She is looking at JFK up to z265. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was taken after the first and before any other shots. Hickey said he was looking at JFK when the second and third shots occurred.  He is facing rearward at z255.

An the shot pattern explicitly recalled by over 40 people says there was only one shot to that point.

So I suggest that JBC is reacting the way he said he reacted after hearing the first shot.

It was a closer to 8.

So you are in a better position than Itek to opine on this?

David Powers was filming from the QM directly behind the JFK limo. We can see the left side of JBC's torso.  The jump seat was 6 inches inboard from the side of the car and JBC would likely have been centered in that seat, not on the right side of it.

The scale drawing of the car shows the seat to be 2.5 inches inboard:


But even 6 inches is not enough. JFK’s spine had to have been 8 inches from the inside if he had his ribs pressed against the side, which he didn’t (his right arm its extended out from his shoulder).   That would put JBC’s back wound about an inch right of JFK’s midline. It needs to be at least 6 inches farther left because of the right to left path.

You're forgetting that JBC had rotated his shoulders to the right which changes the geometry and moves the entry point on his back a few inches to the left. Again, you fail to factor in JBC's torso rotation.

He doesn’t look rotated at z224. Maybe 30 degrees at most. That moves it left by 8(1-cos30)=8(.134)=1.1 inches.

Faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions. I find Dale Myers virtual 3D rendition far more impressive than your chicken scratches. His simulation shows the wounds line up perfectly for a shot from the sniper's nest.

Myers refuses to disclose his data, such as the angle from the SN that he uses, or the distance of JFK’s exit wound from the back wound of JBC.  So it is not possible to really say if it is accurate. Good graphics are only worth that data they are based on.

[John Corbett]

The film doesn’t tell you what is happening, other than JFK is reacting to his neck wound.

No, it doesn't tell YOU what is happening. I guess that's the reason you developed a theory that is incompatible with the film

I can’t tell what JBC is reacting to without referring to other evidence.

I'm all for that. JBC's sworn testimony is evidence. I don't put complete faith in eye and earwitnesses unless they can be corroborated. JBC said he turned and looked over his right shoulder in reaction to a shot that sounded to him came from the right rear and from an elevated position. We see JBC start to turn to look over his right shoulder beginning at Z164. That's corroboration. That tells us the shot came before Z164.

Nellie, and 20 others said that JFK reacted like that to the first shot and the evidence is pretty consistent that JBC was hit in the back on the second shot. JBC said he turned around after the first shot to look at JFK. Nellie said she did not look in the back seat after the second shot.  She is looking at JFK up to z265. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was taken after the first and before any other shots. Hickey said he was looking at JFK when the second and third shots occurred.  He is facing rearward at z255.

You continue to rely on uncorroborated witnesses. Nothing corroborates Altgens recollection. Altgens was focused on his job which was getting photos of the motorcade as it started down Elm St. His famous photos is #6. That means he took 5 more before that. Do you really expect him to remember after which of those photos he heard the first shot, assuming he even heard the first shot and recognized it for what it was. Many people in DP did not. Nellie might be one of the worst witnesses available. Not only is she not corroborated by the Z-film. Almost everything she said is refuted by it.

An the shot pattern explicitly recalled by over 40 people says there was only one shot to that point.

40 people? Out of how many that were in Dealey Plaza that day.

So I suggest that JBC is reacting the way he said he reacted after hearing the first shot.

He started his reaction at Z164. The first shot came before that unless you want to argue he was anticipating the first shot.

So you are in a better position than Itek to opine on this? The scale drawing of the car shows the seat to be 2.5 inches inboard:

If that is Itek's diagram you posted, they show JBC directly in front of JFK. No wonder their analysis if FUBAR. I will neither agree nor disagree as to whether the seat was 2.5 inches inboard but you have to do more than that to figure out how far inboard JBC was. He would likely have been seated in the center of the seat so you have to add half the width of the seat to the 2.5 inches to determine how far inboard his spine would have been. They show the seat to be 20.5 inches wide so the center of that seat would be (20.5/2) +2.5 = 13 which puts JBC's spine 13 inches inboard from the side of the car.

What I do know is that David Powers was filming from directly behind JFK and JBC and throughout the motorcade, the left half of JBC's head and torso are visible in front of JFK. That tells me he was about a half a body width inside JFK. At the time of the SBT, his shoulders were rotated to his right which would bring the point of entry under his right armpit even further to the left.

Here is a still from David Powers film taken from the QM. As you can see, most of JBC's head is visible. It looks clear to me that JBC's right armpit would be to the left of JFK's centerline and he isn't even rotated to the right as he was when the single bullet struck.
https://s.hdnux.com/photos/12/23/10/2699800/7/1200x0.jpg

 

But even 6 inches is not enough. JFK’s spine had to have been 8 inches from the inside if he had his ribs pressed against the side, which he didn’t (his right arm its extended out from his shoulder).

WRONG. His upper arm is almost vertical and his elbow rests on the side of the car. JFK was as far right as he could go. This footage of the limo as it is starting out at Love Field shows the tip of JFK's elbow is actually outside the car at the 24:22 mark of the video.
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=video+jfk%27s+limo+leaving+love+field&&mid=9645ED65333C0BECEC009645ED65333C0BECEC00&churl=https%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fchannel%2fUCDBAOsRNqsx5kz-w4Im7M5A&FORM=VAMGZC

That would put JBC’s back wound about an inch right of JFK’s midline. It needs to be at least 6 inches farther left because of the right to left path. He doesn’t look rotated at z224. Maybe 30 degrees at most. That moves it left by 8(1-cos30)=8(.134)=1.1 inches.
Myers refuses to disclose his data, such as the angle from the SN that he uses, or the distance of JFK’s exit wound from the back wound of JBC.  So it is not possible to really say if it is accurate. Good graphics are only worth that data they are based on.

Well once again you have proven that if you start with faulty premises, you will reach faulty conclusions.

[Andrew Mason]

No, it doesn't tell YOU what is happening. I guess that's the reason you developed a theory that is incompatible with the filmI'm all for that.

The point is that the film is equivocal in showing what JBC is reacting to. The evidence is that there was one shot at that point. That is corroborated by many independent bodies of independent evidence:
1. that the time of the first shot being after z186.
2. that JFK reacted to the first shot in ways not seen until after z193.
3. that the second and third shots were in raoid succession with the second after the midpoint between 1 and 3
4. the shots occurred over a short period of time that few witnesses estimated to be as much as 10 seconds.
5. that JBC recoiled visibly from the second shot and immediately lay back onto his wife (Nellie, Greer, Powers, Gayle Newman). The only motion seen that fits this observation occurs from z271-290.
6. that JFK’s hair flew up on the second shot (Hickey and possibly Kinney). This occurs at only one place: z273-276.
7. That Greer turned around at the time of the second shot (Greer, also noted by John Chism).
8. That there was an impact in the car sensed by Greer at the time of the second shot. This is consistent with the evidence of Tague that he was struck by a fragment on the second shot and the damage seen on the windshield frame, indicating that fragments from the second shot went up to at least the top of the windshield.

In my experience evidence does not fit together like that without a reason.

JBC's sworn testimony is evidence. I don't put complete faith in eye and earwitnesses unless they can be corroborated.

I don’t either.  You don’t seem to acknowledge that other witnesses can independently corroborate a witness.

JBC said he turned and looked over his right shoulder in reaction to a shot that sounded to him came from the right rear and from an elevated position. We see JBC start to turn to look over his right shoulder beginning at Z164.

And not only does JBC make no effort to see JFK, his rightward 2-3 o’clock right turn is exactly what JFK and Jackie do which Mary Woodward said was in response to her calls to the President to look in their direction.  And she said this was before the first shot.  So you have evidence that directly contradicts what your spidey sense suggests.

That's corroboration.

No it isn’t. At best it is evidence that could be corroborative if there was evidence of only one place where JBC turns to the right.  But it isn’t.  There is also z230-270.  Besides, z164ff is not a turn to look at JFK and your interpretation is directly refuted by Mary Woodward and many others.

That tells us the shot came before Z164. You continue to rely on uncorroborated witnesses. Nothing corroborates Altgens recollection. Altgens was focused on his job which was getting photos of the motorcade as it started down Elm St. His famous photos is #6. That means he took 5 more before that. Do you really expect him to remember after which of those photos he heard the first shot, assuming he even heard the first shot and recognized it for what it was.

Altgens is corroborated by Hickey, Greer, John Chism, 40+ witnesses to the shot pattern, 20+ witnesses as to JFK’s reaction to the first shot and all the witnesses who put the first shot after z186 ( Betzner, motorcade witnesses, Elm St. witnesses etc.).

Many people in DP did not. Nellie might be one of the worst witnesses available. Not only is she not corroborated by the Z-film. Almost everything she said is refuted by it.

Well, everything she says is inconsistent with your interpretation of when you think you see JBC reacting to being hit in the back. But her evidence is corroborated by others, such as Greer, Powers, Chism, Gayle Newman, Hickey.

If that is Itek's diagram you posted, they show JBC directly in front of JFK. No wonder their analysis if FUBAR.

It isn’t Itek.  That is the Hess & Eisenhart drawing of the limo at 6 HSCA 50.

I will neither agree nor disagree as to whether the seat was 2.5 inches inboard but you have to do more than that to figure out how far inboard JBC was. He would likely have been seated in the center of the seat so you have to add half the width of the seat to the 2.5 inches to determine how far inboard his spine would have been. They show the seat to be 20.5 inches wide so the center of that seat would be (20.5/2) +2.5 = 13 which puts JBC's spine 13 inches inboard from the side of the car.

Ok. That puts the right armpit wound, which was 7.87 inches right of his spine, 5.1 inches from the inside of the car. For the SBT to work JFK’s midline would have to be at the inside wall of the car, which is impossible.

What I do know is that David Powers was filming from directly behind JFK and JBC and throughout the motorcade, the left half of JBC's head and torso are visible in front of JFK. That tells me he was about a half a body width inside JFK. At the time of the SBT, his shoulders were rotated to his right which would bring the point of entry under his right armpit even further to the left.

The question is how far and how much does that change the position of the right armpit entrance wound. I say 30 degrees max, which means 1.1 inch.

 

Here is a still from David Powers film taken from the QM. As you can see, most of JBC's head is visible. It looks clear to me that JBC's right armpit would be to the left of JFK's centerline and he isn't even rotated to the right as he was when the single bullet struck.Well once again you have proven that if you start with faulty premises, you will reach faulty conclusions.

I was referring to the position of JFK before he disappears behind the Stemmons sign:
His upper arm extends out from his shoulder forward and to the right.  By z224 he is farther to the left.

[John Corbett]

The point is that the film is equivocal in showing what JBC is reacting to. The evidence is that there was one shot at that point. That is corroborated by many independent bodies of independent evidence:
1. that the time of the first shot being after z186.
2. that JFK reacted to the first shot in ways not seen until after z193.
3. that the second and third shots were in raoid succession with the second after the midpoint between 1 and 3
4. the shots occurred over a short period of time that few witnesses estimated to be as much as 10 seconds.
5. that JBC recoiled visibly from the second shot and immediately lay back onto his wife (Nellie, Greer, Powers, Gayle Newman). The only motion seen that fits this observation occurs from z271-290.
6. that JFK’s hair flew up on the second shot (Hickey and possibly Kinney). This occurs at only one place: z273-276.
7. That Greer turned around at the time of the second shot (Greer, also noted by John Chism).
8. That there was an impact in the car sensed by Greer at the time of the second shot. This is consistent with the evidence of Tague that he was struck by a fragment on the second shot and the damage seen on the windshield frame, indicating that fragments from the second shot went up to at least the top of the windshield.

In my experience evidence does not fit together like that without a reason.

There is absolutely nothing in those 8 items that even remotely fits the film evidence. Are you looking at the film through a kaleidoscope?

I don’t either.  You don’t seem to acknowledge that other witnesses can independently corroborate a witness.

Eye and earwitness accounts are the weakest form of evidence and also the weakest form of corroboration. We have a sizeable group of witnesses who say all three shots came from the GK and another sizeable group of witnesses who said all the shots came from the direction of the TSBD. Obviously a sizeable group of witnesses can be wrong.

And not only does JBC make no effort to see JFK, his rightward 2-3 o’clock right turn is exactly what JFK and Jackie do which Mary Woodward said was in response to her calls to the President to look in their direction.  And she said this was before the first shot.  So you have evidence that directly contradicts what your spidey sense suggests.

Oh, goody. You present us with still another witness. You can come up with just about any scenario you want depending on which witnesses you choose to cherry pick. It's harder to cherry pick forensic evidence.

No it isn’t. At best it is evidence that could be corroborative if there was evidence of only one place where JBC turns to the right.  But it isn’t.  There is also z230-270.  Besides, z164ff is not a turn to look at JFK and your interpretation is directly refuted by Mary Woodward and many others.Altgens is corroborated by Hickey, Greer, John Chism, 40+ witnesses to the shot pattern, 20+ witnesses as to JFK’s reaction to the first shot and all the witnesses who put the first shot after z186 ( Betzner, motorcade witnesses, Elm St. witnesses etc.).

Keep relying on what witnesses recall and you will continue to be confused about what actually happened.

Well, everything she says is inconsistent with your interpretation of when you think you see JBC reacting to being hit in the back. But her evidence is corroborated by others, such as Greer, Powers, Chism, Gayle Newman, Hickey.

I suppose we are supposed to believe that it is just coincidence that JBC's arm flipped up 2 frames after his jacket bulged out and also coincidentally, the same frame JFK's arm flipped upward.

It isn’t Itek.  That is the Hess & Eisenhart drawing of the limo at 6 HSCA 50.

It doesn't matter whose diagram it is. It is FUBAR and you presented it anyway.

Ok. That puts the right armpit wound, which was 7.87 inches right of his spine, 5.1 inches from the inside of the car. For the SBT to work JFK’s midline would have to be at the inside wall of the car, which is impossible.
The question is how far and how much does that change the position of the right armpit entrance wound. I say 30 degrees max, which means 1.1 inch.

I really don't care what you say. If we go by your calculations, the bullet should have hit JBC in the middle of his back. Obviously your calculations are off. Why don't you calculate where the shot would have to have been fired from in order to exit JFK's midline and miss JBC to his left with JBC sitting a half a body width to the left of JFK.

 I was referring to the position of JFK before he disappears behind the Stemmons sign:
His upper arm extends out from his shoulder forward and to the right.  By z224 he is farther to the left.

Seriously? You think JFK slid to the left?

[Andrew Mason]

There is absolutely nothing in those 8 items that even remotely fits the film evidence. Are you looking at the film through a kaleidoscope?

Not everything is capable of being proven by the zfilm. It was a silent film. It can’t reveal the shot pattern. But the zfilm has to be consistent with the facts and it is consistent with those 8 bodies of evidence.  That evidence just conflicts with your interpretation of the reasons that you think things happen in the zfilm.

For example, a shot at z190 is quite consistent with the actions of JFK that begin at z193.  The HSCA photographic panel concluded that JFK shows signs of reaction to an external stimulus before disappearing behind the Stemmons sign.  But it is not definitive. And you disagree with their interpretation of the reasons for the movement of JFK. 

Another example of the zfilm being consistent with a shot around z190-193: Jack Ready said he turned to his right rear immediately upon hearing the first shot.  He begins that turn by z199 when he removes his right hand from the right hand-hold.

Another example is Rosemary stopping at z198-99 and turning her head sharply right at z202-206.

All are consistent with the zfilm and a shot at z190-193.  But the film by itself is equivocal as to when the first shot occurred.

Eye and earwitness accounts are the weakest form of evidence and also the weakest form of corroboration. We have a sizeable group of witnesses who say all three shots came from the GK and another sizeable group of witnesses who said all the shots came from the direction of the TSBD. Obviously a sizeable group of witnesses can be wrong.

Yes they can. Witnesses can be confused. They may estimate distances and time inaccurately.  It depends on the ability of a human to make the observation. 

Direction of a sound source involves the human brain discerning a time difference between the arrivals of the sound wavefront at each ear.  Since there were many reflective surfaces in Dealey Plaza, the witnesses’ ability to accurately determine the source depended on where they were.  In fact, the witnesses close to the SN were not confused.  Witnesses along Elm St toward the triple underpass would have heard reflections from the north pergola and underpass and many of them thought the shots came from there.

But:
1. a simple shot rhythm,
2. the number of shots,
3. the relative position of JFK when the first shot sounded,
4. where one’s car was when the first shot sounded
5. what JFK after the first shot, or
6. whether one pressed the shutter before or after the first shot
are all simple observations for a human to make.

I suppose we are supposed to believe that it is just coincidence that JBC's arm flipped up 2 frames after his jacket bulged out and also coincidentally, the same frame JFK's arm flipped upward.It doesn't matter whose diagram it is. It is FUBAR and you presented it anyway.

The zfilm shows a reduction in the area of while shirt visible between z223 and z224. It does not show whether there is outward movement of the jacket. There is also an increase in area of white shirt between z222 and z223.  Both changes can be the result of just movement of the jacket due to body or arm motion.

I really don't care what you say. If we go by your calculations, the bullet should have hit JBC in the middle of his back. Obviously your calculations are off.

?? I say it went a few inches to the left of JBC’s midline.

Why don't you calculate where the shot would have to have been fired from in order to exit JFK's midline and miss JBC to his left with JBC sitting a half a body width to the left of JFK.
Seriously? You think JFK slid to the left?

I put JBC 6 inches left of JFK.  I also explained that the bullet at z193 went to the left of JBC’s midline.  I didn’t suggest it missed striking him.

[John Corbett]

Not everything is capable of being proven by the zfilm. It was a silent film. It can’t reveal the shot pattern. But the zfilm has to be consistent with the facts and it is consistent with those 8 bodies of evidence.  That evidence just conflicts with your interpretation of the reasons that you think things happen in the zfilm.

Not a single one of the 8 items you listed are evidence. They are your arguments. I'm not surprised you don't know the difference.

For example, a shot at z190 is quite consistent with the actions of JFK that begin at z193.  The HSCA photographic panel concluded that JFK shows signs of reaction to an external stimulus before disappearing behind the Stemmons sign.  But it is not definitive. And you disagree with their interpretation of the reasons for the movement of JFK. 

Are you arguing for a first shot at Z190? How do you explain why JFK didn't raise his hands to in front of his throat until almost two second later? Instead we see him calmly waving to the few remaining spectators on Elm St. until just before he goes behind the sign. He had just started to lower his right hand  and was still lowering it at Z225. It was the next frame that JFK is seen reacting to the bullet that had passed through him and Connally a few frames earlier. That's the very same frame Connally reacted by flipping his injured right arm upward.

Another example of the zfilm being consistent with a shot around z190-193: Jack Ready said he turned to his right rear immediately upon hearing the first shot.  He begins that turn by z199 when he removes his right hand from the right hand-hold.

If you asked 50 witnesses in DP what happened, you'd probably get 50 different versions. There is only one witness in DP that I trust implicitly and that is Zapruder's camera. That witness gave us an accurate description of what happened right from the start and its account hasn't changed one bit since.

Another example is Rosemary stopping at z198-99 and turning her head sharply right at z202-206.

Rosemary Willis began to stop in the early 170s, She couldn't be expected to stop on a dime after running along side the limo.

All are consistent with the zfilm and a shot at z190-193.  But the film by itself is equivocal as to when the first shot occurred.
Yes they can. Witnesses can be confused. They may estimate distances and time inaccurately.  It depends on the ability of a human to make the observation. 

I'm still waiting for you to explain why JFK continued to wave to the crowd if he had been hit no later than Z193.

Direction of a sound source involves the human brain discerning a time difference between the arrivals of the sound wavefront at each ear.  Since there were many reflective surfaces in Dealey Plaza, the witnesses’ ability to accurately determine the source depended on where they were.  In fact, the witnesses close to the SN were not confused.  Witnesses along Elm St toward the triple underpass would have heard reflections from the north pergola and underpass and many of them thought the shots came from there.

It is very difficult to determine the source of gunfire by sound alone. That's why we have two sizeable groups with mutually exclusive versions of where the shots came from.

But:
1. a simple shot rhythm,
2. the number of shots,
3. the relative position of JFK when the first shot sounded,
4. where one’s car was when the first shot sounded
5. what JFK after the first shot, or
6. whether one pressed the shutter before or after the first shot
are all simple observations for a human to make.

Simple and very easy to get wrong. That's why we have so many varying descriptions of what happened. The only version I care about is the Z-film.

The zfilm shows a reduction in the area of while shirt visible between z223 and z224. It does not show whether there is outward movement of the jacket. There is also an increase in area of white shirt between z222 and z223.  Both changes can be the result of just movement of the jacket due to body or arm motion.

<chuckle>

?? I say it went a few inches to the left of JBC’s midline.
I put JBC 6 inches left of JFK.  I also explained that the bullet at z193 went to the left of JBC’s midline.  I didn’t suggest it missed striking him.

If it went a few inches to the left of JBC's midline, why isn't there a wound on the left side of JBC's back?

[Robin Unger]