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

[Andrew Mason]

If the "second had not completely died out before the third shot sounded" that could not possibly be two shots from Oswald's rifle. You keep arguing for things that are impossible.

If you know how long a rifle shot in Dealey Plaza would have persisted, then you should provide it along with the source.

There was a large post office building a bit more than 600 feet (188 m measured on Google maps, which is 616 feet) directly south of the TSBD. There were also buildings on the east side over that distance, pavement and concrete structures in Dealey Plaza. There was also the triple underpass about 500-550 feet south west of the SN as well as a railway embankment all along the west side. There were also reflective surfaces in between the TSBD and the underpass. So it was a real reverberation chamber:
. 

Sound from the 6th floor TSBD would have reflected off all those surfaces and then back to the people standing on the north side of Elm St. where Mary Woodward was.  The sound wave front would have taken a tad more than half a second: .55 seconds (speed of sound at 68F is 1127 fps) to directly reach the Post Office building and a bit more for sound waves reflected from the street, buildings along Houston and other concrete structures.  The sound then would have bounced back off the Post Office building as well as back off the triple underpass and arrived at the ears of Mary Woodward.  So she would definitely have heard the first round of continuous echos (reverberation) for at least 1.2 seconds after the blast.

But the reverberation doesn't just end on that first reflection.  It would have gone back and forth a bit. The reverberations from the first reflection back off the TSBD would have traveled south toward the Post Office building and bounced again of that large surface, arriving at Mary Woodward over the next 1.2 seconds. Same with the sound reflecting from the triple underpass back off the building along Houston and structures in between, although with a bit less travel time.

So unless the sound reflected only one time before ending completely, the reverberations could easily have continued for about 2.4 seconds.

Mary Woodward said that there was a third shot within the period of reverberation of the second shot.  She recalled three distinct shots.  She said she would go to her grave swearing that there were three shots. See this Youtube clip. Her statement begins about 2:50.

[John Corbett]

If you know how long a rifle shot in Dealey Plaza would have persisted, then you should provide it along with the source.

If you are going to postulate that the sound of a single shot could reverberate for 2 seconds or more, the burden is on you to prove that.

There was a large post office building a bit more than 600 feet (188 m measured on Google maps, which is 616 feet) directly south of the TSBD. There were also buildings on the east side over that distance, pavement and concrete structures in Dealey Plaza. There was also the triple underpass about 500-550 feet south west of the SN as well as a railway embankment all along the west side. There were also reflective surfaces in between the TSBD and the underpass. So it was a real reverberation chamber:
. 

Sound from the 6th floor TSBD would have reflected off all those surfaces and then back to the people standing on the north side of Elm St. where Mary Woodward was.  The sound wave front would have taken a tad more than half a second: .55 seconds (speed of sound at 68F is 1127 fps) to directly reach the Post Office building and a bit more for sound waves reflected from the street, buildings along Houston and other concrete structures.  The sound then would have bounced back off the Post Office building as well as back off the triple underpass and arrived at the ears of Mary Woodward.  So she would definitely have heard the first round of continuous echos (reverberation) for at least 1.2 seconds after the blast.

But the reverberation doesn't just end on that first reflection.  It would have gone back and forth a bit. The reverberations from the first reflection back off the TSBD would have traveled south toward the Post Office building and bounced again of that large surface, arriving at Mary Woodward over the next 1.2 seconds. Same with the sound reflecting from the triple underpass back off the building along Houston and structures in between, although with a bit less travel time.

So unless the sound reflected only one time before ending completely, the reverberations could easily have continued for about 2.4 seconds.

Mary Woodward said that there was a third shot within the period of reverberation of the second shot.  She recalled three distinct shots.  She said she would go to her grave swearing that there were three shots. See this Youtube clip. Her statement begins about 2:50.

Wouldn't it be easier just to scrap your silly theory and start over than to keep coming up with ever more ridiculous explanations. I'm still waiting for you to explain how Oswald shot JBC in the back at a time JBC had spun around and was facing him.

[Andrew Mason]

If you are going to postulate that the sound of a single shot could reverberate for 2 seconds or more, the burden is on you to prove that.

I have.  I cited evidence from Mary Woodward. You just said she must be wrong-that she did not hear what she swore she heard. I provided other evidence that the shots were in that kind of rapid succession. 

You have provided nothing except your interpretation of equivocal head turns in the zfilm and you suggest that all that evidence must be wrong.

I'm still waiting for you to explain how Oswald shot JBC in the back at a time JBC had spun around and was facing him.

The shot occurred with JBC in that position. Nellie told Dr. Shires that he was turned around to the right when he was hit in the back. Shires commented that this would explain why the back of his forearm was turned toward his chest.  JBC thought he had started to turn back around when he was hit but could not say for sure how far he had gotten.

Gayle Newman said the second shot sounded after the car had been 10 feet from her. She saw that JBC grabbed his chest and lay back:


In her first interview by Jay Watson of WFAA TV within an hour or so of the assassination (before it had been announced that the President was dead) Gayle Newman said that Connally was turned to his side and he grabbed his stomach.

How the bullet passed through his body requires an anatomical understanding of the human torso when it is turned like that.  The shoulders can turn without changing the position of the shoulder blade.  JBC was hit in the armpit which fits with having the armpit turned to face the rifle.

So the evidence is consistent and overwhelming that the second shot occurred close to the third shot which necessarily means JBC was turned sideways right as that is his position at z250-270 … just as Gayle Newman reported seeing less than an hour after seeing Connally hit by second shot.

[Zeon Mason]

Here is Andrew Mason's drawing showing how he thinks the bullet exiting JFK's throat could have struck JBC in the thigh without first passing through his torso:


Here are some photos which he says simulate JBC's position at Z193:

Even the photo looks to me that JBC is turned farther to the right than we see in Z193 but let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say the photo acurately depicts JBC's position. The drawing shows an exaggerated turn to the right and even then shows there was barely enough room for the bullet to miss JBC's torso and still find his thigh. Note how dissimilar these two representations are. The drawing shows an extreme turn to the right. Note how much further forward JBC's left shoulder is in the drawing than in the photo. Note how much more it is turned to the right in the drawing than in the photo.

So even using his photo of JBC's simulated position, JBC's left shoulder is not turned anywhere near far enough to create an open path from JFK's throat to JBC's thigh. He has to exaggerate JBC's position at Z193 to even show a theoretical possibility of his SBT 2.0 scenario. This is why I said earlier it is impossible.

EDIT: I should have included the actual Z193 frame when I first posted this so I am adding it now:


Compare JBC's shoulder turn in the actual frame to Andrew's photos and drawing.

Andrew’s  Z193 drawing matches more closely with the way JC had turned himself almost 180 degrees at Z270 than it does with how JC appears at Z193.

Not sure that a VIP Statesman like JC would sit in a limo jump seat with his legs spread wide apart as that might invite some photograph depicting such posture which might be used to suggest the VIP was undignified.

So that’s why I think that JohnMs diagram of how JC had rotated both legs towards the right would facilitate a more comfortable as well as a more appropriate posture for a VIP. Plus it aligns the right wrist with hat upside down with a bullet path thru JCs upper body with a  trajectory line from TSBD at Z224.

[John Corbett]

I have.  I cited evidence from Mary Woodward. You just said she must be wrong-that she did not hear what she swore she heard. I provided other evidence that the shots were in that kind of rapid succession. 

Too rapid to have both been fired by Oswald. Either those witnesses were wrong or there were two gunmen. I know which one I am betting on.

You have provided nothing except your interpretation of equivocal head turns in the zfilm and you suggest that all that evidence must be wrong.

I don't recall ever having used the head turns of the limo occupants as evidence of anything. You must be thinking of Graves. I have not suggested that all that evidence must be wrong. I have stated that your cherry-picked witnesses who put the last two shots close together are wrong. Every one of them.

The shot occurred with JBC in that position. Nellie told Dr. Shires that he was turned around to the right when he was hit in the back. Shires commented that this would explain why the back of his forearm was turned toward his chest.  JBC thought he had started to turn back around when he was hit but could not say for sure how far he had gotten.

This is your turn to dismiss what a witness said. JBC said he was facing almost forward when he felt the bullet hit him in the back. That pretty much blows your theory out of the water. We know he wasn't shot in the back at Z271 because that would have been impossible with JBC facing Oswald at that frame.
You never have explained how that could have happened.

Gayle Newman said the second shot sounded after the car had been 10 feet from her. She saw that JBC grabbed his chest and lay back:

Here we go again with a cherry-picket uncorroborated witness. You have built a house of cards with these flawed accounts of what happened.

In her first interview by Jay Watson of WFAA TV within an hour or so of the assassination (before it had been announced that the President was dead) Gayle Newman said that Connally was turned to his side and he grabbed his stomach.

Kind of like this at Z245:
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z245.jpg

How the bullet passed through his body requires an anatomical understanding of the human torso when it is turned like that.  The shoulders can turn without changing the position of the shoulder blade.  JBC was hit in the armpit which fits with having the armpit turned to face the rifle.

JBC's back at his armpit wasn't facing Oswald. It was turned away from Oswald making an entry wound there impossible. How you could look at Z271 and think it was even remotely possible for Oswald to shoot JBC in the back at that frame is truly mind boggling.

So the evidence is consistent and overwhelming that the second shot occurred close to the third shot which necessarily means JBC was turned sideways right as that is his position at z250-270 … just as Gayle Newman reported seeing less than an hour after seeing Connally hit by second shot.

The Z-film alone thoroughly demolishes that scenario.

[Andrew Mason]

Too rapid to have both been fired by Oswald. Either those witnesses were wrong or there were two gunmen. I know which one I am betting on.

That is an interesting comment.  We know from other evidence that Oswald was deeply involved and we know that there is very little likelihood of, and no evidence of, anyone else being involved. We also know from the three men just below the SN on the sixth floor that all shots came from the same location.  So we know that the was only one person shooting and that person was Oswald and no other.  We both agree on that.

But the SBT scenario has many problems that feed conspiracy theories, so CTs persist.  And they convince many using just this argument: there is too much evidence that conflicts with the SBT and the only alternative is multiple shooters.   

And it is not just the shot pattern or the fact that JFK was reported by everyone watching him to have reacted to the first shot, or the many reports that do not fit a first shot before z186. It is also a problem with the condition of CE399 after allegedly pulverizing JBC's fifth rib and doing this to the forearm:

while still looking like this:


And there's more.  The trajectory at z222 doesn't begin to work because even with JFK as far right as possible, the bullet exits 8 inches left of the wall of the car on JFK's right side and travels another 5 inches farther left before passing the plane of the jump seat.  So JBC's right armpit has to be 13 inches inside that wall.  The most extreme position proposed for JBC is 8 inches or 20 cm.  Not nearly enough. 

And then you have the problem of z230-270 being the only time JBC makes any attempt to see JFK. Before then, he never turns his head to look at JFK. 

And then there is a the problem of a phantom missed first shot for which there is absolutely no physical evidence. There is also no clear witness evidence that it missed - and a lot of witness evidence that it did not miss.

And there's even more.  There is the problem with the evidence that Tague was struck by a fragment from the second shot (not the first, not the third) which is corroborated by Greer sensing an impact inside the car on the second shot and no other.

So for you to maintain that all of these independent bodies of evidence must be completely wrong and does not at least provide a consistent rational alternative to the SBT (although one with which you still can disagree) is difficult to understand.  Is it not time to admit that there are at least two possible ways that Oswald could have fired all three shots? 

I don't recall ever having used the head turns of the limo occupants as evidence of anything.

I guess it was the other John Corbett who said (April 19/post #30 in this thread):

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

I have not suggested that all that evidence must be wrong. I have stated that your cherry-picked witnesses who put the last two shots close together are wrong.

Again, this is not cherry picking. It is rational reasoning.  It is you who is cherry picking.  There are three possibilities of shot pattern. This is the witness distribution of those three possibilities:
,
So choosing the one with the least (6) witnesses is NOT cherry picking but choosing the one with by far the most (47) is? Explain that reasoning!

This is your turn to dismiss what a witness said. JBC said he was facing almost forward when he felt the bullet hit him in the back. That pretty much blows your theory out of the water. We know he wasn't shot in the back at Z271 because that would have been impossible with JBC facing Oswald at that frame.

Yes, but he wasn't sure how he was facing. That is understandable.   So one looks to other evidence to see if JBC's vague recollection of where he thought he was facing was correct.  Not a single witness supports him facing forward at the time of the second shot.

Nellie said he was turned round to the right when hit by the second shot. Gayle Newman said JBC was turned sideways when the shot occurred.

And that, of course, fits with the recollection of 21+ witnesses who said that the first shot caused JFK to react.  Another 15 or 16 said that the first shot occurred at a time that is inconsistent with any time before z186, which means that JFK was hit by the first shot.  And the vast majority said that the last two shots were closer together and many said in rapid succession. Altgens said that his z255 photo was after the first and before any other shots. Hickey said he was turned forward looking at JFK for the last two shots, yet he is still facing rearward in Altgens z255 photo. etc.   So not only do no witnesses corroborate JBC's vague recollection of where he was facing when he felt the second shot, the witnesses say he was turned around sideways.  And those witnesses are supported by the shot timing evidence that put the second shot at a time when he WAS turned sideways.

Here we go again with a cherry-picket uncorroborated witness. You have built a house of cards with these flawed accounts of what happened.

Again, in what universe is choosing 6 out of 63 not cherry picking but choosing 47 out of 63 is? 

Kind of like this at Z245:
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z245.jpg

Yes. But also z270. Definitely NOT z222-230.

[John Corbett]

That is an interesting comment.  We know from other evidence that Oswald was deeply involved and we know that there is very little likelihood of, and no evidence of, anyone else being involved. We also know from the three men just below the SN on the sixth floor that all shots came from the same location.  So we know that the was only one person shooting and that person was Oswald and no other.  We both agree on that.

Yes, we agree Oswald was the lone shooter which leaves us with the conclusion that the witnesses who said they heard two shots at the end that were almost right on top of each other with almost no time between them were wrong. They didn't hear two shots together at the end, They might have heard two sounds from the same shot, but they didn't hear two shots.

But the SBT scenario has many problems that feed conspiracy theories, so CTs persist.  And they convince many using just this argument: there is too much evidence that conflicts with the SBT and the only alternative is multiple shooters.   

It doesn't take much too feed conspiracy theories and there are no real problems with the SBT, only imagined ones.

And it is not just the shot pattern or the fact that JFK was reported by everyone watching him to have reacted to the first shot,

Not a true statement

or the many reports that do not fit a first shot before z186.

Reports are often wrong. The ones that don't fit a first shot before Z186 are definitely wrong.

It is also a problem with the condition of CE399 after allegedly pulverizing JBC's fifth rib and doing this to the forearm:

while still looking like this:

You actually believe that nonsense? The explanation for the condition of CE399 has been known for years. The nose of the bullet was not smashed because it never hit hard bone. The bullet had tumbled which is why the flattening is at the base, not the nose. It also explains the lead fragments found in JBC's wrist since the lead core was only exposed at the base.

And there's more.  The trajectory at z222 doesn't begin to work because even with JFK as far right as possible, the bullet exits 8 inches left of the wall of the car on JFK's right side and travels another 5 inches farther left before passing the plane of the jump seat.  So JBC's right armpit has to be 13 inches inside that wall.  The most extreme position proposed for JBC is 8 inches or 20 cm.  Not nearly enough. 

I don't know where you get those figures. With JBC sitting half a body width left of JFK and his shoulders rotated to the right, the entry wound on his back was in a direct line through JFK's exit and entry would back to Oswald's rifle. The bullet couldn't have missed JBC and it didn't. It struck him just below his right armpit, your silly manufactured drawings not withstanding.

And then you have the problem of z230-270 being the only time JBC makes any attempt to see JFK. Before then, he never turns his head to look at JFK.

He tried to look at JFK beginning at Z164 but didn't turn around far enough to see him. That doesn't mean he didn't try.

 

And then there is a the problem of a phantom missed first shot for which there is absolutely no physical evidence. There is also no clear witness evidence that it missed - and a lot of witness evidence that it did not miss.

Yes, there is no physical evidence of where the missed shot hit nor should we expect there to be. No one was looking for evidence of a missed shot because the initial belief was that JFK and JBC were hit by 3 separate shots with no misses. The SBT wasn't developed until months later.

And there's even more.  There is the problem with the evidence that Tague was struck by a fragment from the second shot (not the first, not the third) which is corroborated by Greer sensing an impact inside the car on the second shot and no other.

It has never been established which shot cause Tague's wound. It's an open question.

So for you to maintain that all of these independent bodies of evidence must be completely wrong and does not at least provide a consistent rational alternative to the SBT (although one with which you still can disagree) is difficult to understand. 

The evidence isn't wrong. It's the myths that have grown out of people's misunderstanding of the evidence that are wrong.

Is it not time to admit that there are at least two possible ways that Oswald could have fired all three shots? 

The time for that expired many years ago. We have solid evidence as to what happened and it only happened one way. This isn't a multiple choice exercise.

I guess it was the other John Corbett who said (April 19/post #30 in this thread):

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

I just reread what i wrote and I stand by every word of it.

[/list]Again, this is not cherry picking. It is rational reasoning.  It is you who is cherry picking.  There are three possibilities of shot pattern. This is the witness distribution of those three possibilities:
,
So choosing the one with the least (6) witnesses is NOT cherry picking but choosing the one with by far the most (47) is? Explain that reasoning!
Yes, but he wasn't sure how he was facing. That is understandable.   So one looks to other evidence to see if JBC's vague recollection of where he thought he was facing was correct.  Not a single witness supports him facing forward at the time of the second shot.

Nellie said he was turned round to the right when hit by the second shot. Gayle Newman said JBC was turned sideways when the shot occurred.

And that, of course, fits with the recollection of 21+ witnesses who said that the first shot caused JFK to react.  Another 15 or 16 said that the first shot occurred at a time that is inconsistent with any time before z186, which means that JFK was hit by the first shot.  And the vast majority said that the last two shots were closer together and many said in rapid succession. Altgens said that his z255 photo was after the first and before any other shots. Hickey said he was turned forward looking at JFK for the last two shots, yet he is still facing rearward in Altgens z255 photo. etc.   So not only do no witnesses corroborate JBC's vague recollection of where he was facing when he felt the second shot, the witnesses say he was turned around sideways.  And those witnesses are supported by the shot timing evidence that put the second shot at a time when he WAS turned sideways.
Again, in what universe is choosing 6 out of 63 not cherry picking but choosing 47 out of 63 is? 
Yes. But also z270. Definitely NOT z222-230.

You continue to put your blind faith in the ability of witnesses to accurately recall with great detail an event that happened out of nowhere, lasted less than 10 seconds, and was completely horrifying. There's only one witness I trust to have been able to do that, Zapruder's camera. That witnesses was not surprised by the event, watched it dispassionately, and recorded it accurately. You couldn't say the same thing about any human witness in Dealey Plaza.
There were other cameras recording but none of them had the vantage point of Zapruder's camera. That's what makes that witness the best source to tell us what happened that day.