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

[Michael Capasse]

Nutter's know how to weigh evidence and determine what is probative and what is not. Eye and earwitness testimony that conflicts with what we see in the Z-film is not at all probative.

Actually, Nutters know how to cherry-pick witness statements and ignore other corroborating accounts.
  it is necessary to get to their phony preset conclusion. 

[John Corbett]

Actually, Nutters know how to cherry-pick witness statements and ignore other corroborating accounts.
  it is necessary to get to their phony preset conclusion. 

For the most part,  Nutters don't rely on fallible human witnesses and instead look at the hard evidence which clearly points to Oswald as the lone gunman. There is no hard evidence of any other shooter from any other location.  Witnesses have some value but only to the extent their accounts can be corroborated by the hard evidence. If one were to rely on witnesses to tell them what happened, it would be easy to construct a dozen or more scenarios depending on which witnesses one chooses to believe. The assassination only happened one way and the hard evidence tells us what that one way was. 

[Michael Capasse]

For the most part,  Nutters don't rely on fallible human witnesses and instead look at the hard evidence which clearly points to Oswald as the lone gunman. There is no hard evidence of any other shooter from any other location.  Witnesses have some value but only to the extent their accounts can be corroborated by the hard evidence. If one were to rely on witnesses to tell them what happened, it would be easy to construct a dozen or more scenarios depending on which witnesses one chooses to believe. The assassination only happened one way and the hard evidence tells us what that one way was.

IOW; we pick and choose the statement that serves us best

[John Corbett]

IOW; we pick and choose the statement that serves us best

The case against Oswald can be made on the forensic evidence alone without a single eyewitness.

If I were to use an eyewitness, only one is needed, Zapruder's camera. It has perfect recall.

[Michael Capasse]

The case against Oswald can be made on the forensic evidence alone without a single eyewitness.

Your opinion. Good to know

[Andrew Mason]

The case against Oswald can be made on the forensic evidence alone without a single eyewitness.

If I were to use an eyewitness, only one is needed, Zapruder's camera. It has perfect recall.

I agree that one doesn't need Zapruder's camera to make the case against Oswald. 

But Zapruder's camera was silent and it did not have great resolution.  If Zapruder's camera had sound, better resolution and a steady tripod, the zfilm might have perfect recall.  In any event, you are relying on witnesses to support an early missed shot.  The zfilm does not show that without an interpretation based on preferred witness evidence.

[John Corbett]

I agree that one doesn't need Zapruder's camera to make the case against Oswald. 

But Zapruder's camera was silent and it did not have great resolution.  If Zapruder's camera had sound, better resolution and a steady tripod, the zfilm might have perfect recall.  In any event, you are relying on witnesses to support an early missed shot.  The zfilm does not show that without an interpretation based on preferred witness evidence.

The Z-film alone gives us clues as to when the first shot was fired without using any witnesses. We see JBC turn to look over his right shoulder at Z164. Here's where a CORROBORARED witness can come into play. He said he turned in response to hearing the first shot which he recognized as the sound of a high powered rifle. The film and JBC's statement jibe. Without JBC's statement it would be hard to determine that his turn to look over his right shoulder was a reaction to the first shot. The fact the film and his statement jibe strengthens the probative value of both. In addition we have Rosemary Willis running alongside the limo. She begins to slowdown during the Z160s and when she comes to a stop, she turns and looks back to the TSBD. She later said she did that upon hearing a gunshot. She didn't testify before the WC but was called by the HSCA. None of this is proof positive as to when the first shot was fired but taken as a whole, it is probative of a shot prior to Z164. If we add to that the blurring and frame jump in Z155, it is a strong indication of a shot around Z147-148.

If we don't read the reactions of JBC and Willis as evidence of a gunshot, there is nothing in the Z-film that would tell us when Oswald's missed shot was fired.  That is why the WC never determined which shot missed. They allowed that it could be the first, second, or third shot.