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

[John Corbett]

I find it quite a bit more compelling than a missed first shot for which there are not only zero witnesses

Simply not true.

but over 80 witnesses who say it didn't happen.

Do you think by exaggerating the split of witnesses you make your argument more compelling. It's not working.

You will never find a real case where this has occurred.

I've already pointed out to you the large number of witnesses who said the shots came from the GK and were dead wrong.

(And I am not even talking about the improbability of someone deciding to shoot when the target is moving across the field of view after piling boxes for a shot down the street and then missing not only the target but the entire 7 by 21 foot car at 160 feet;  and I will overlook the complete absence of a mark in whatever it was supposed to have hit.)

Why would anyone have looked for a mark in the street when for months after the shooting it was believed all three shots struck inside the limo. If you want to talk about missing evidence, explain why only two bullets were recovered if three struck inside the limo.

. On the off-chance you  might want to view the discussion of the second shot, it begins at around the 33 minute mark:

You're citing a witness who only heard 2 of the 3 shots to make your point. You are getting desperate. To make matters worse, Gary Mack mistakenly states the WC concluded the first shot hit both JFK and JBC and the second shot missed. Why do you rely on clueless people to make your points?

The bullet entered at the edge of the right scapula which is the rear border of the armpit and passed throught the fifth rib at the middle of the armpit.  Explain how that happened if he wasn't turned sharply right as Nellie, Gayle Newman and 47 earwitnesses said he was.

JBC was turned to he right. That's never been in dispute.

And still you offer no illustration that shows how it was even possible for JBC to be shot in the back by Oswald at Z271. The impossibility of that alone destroys your entire premise. Unless and until you can do that, you are just blowing smoke.

[John Corbett]

Even more evidence.

Here's a recreation of Z222 with the Queen Mary(which was a mistake) and at first I thought this makes the SBF kind of impossible because Connally is obviously too high but thankfully they took two photos and the other was from Zapruder's position and when you compare Zapruder's view with the recreation view it's clear that in the actual Limo, the jump seat is much lower which makes the SBF a no brainer!

Here is a sideview taken earlier in the motorcade which clearly shows how much higher the rear seat was.
https://a57.foxnews.com/a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/11/640/320/1862/1048/JFK112219.jpg?ve=1&tl=1?ve=1&tl=1

[Andrew Mason]

Simply not true.

Oh, there is a witness who said JFK did not react to the first shot and continued to smile and wave after? Was this important witness called to testify to the WC?

Do you think by exaggerating the split of witnesses you make your argument more compelling. It's not working.

That you would suggest that it is an exaggeration shows you haven't been checking the lists of witnesses I provided. I gave you all their names. You have not provided the names or cites to anyone who said that 1. JFK did not react to the first shot 2. said the first shot occurred when the motorcade was in a position at a point before z186 3. the last two shots were not closer together whom I did not name and reference.

I've already pointed out to you the large number of witnesses who said the shots came from the GK and were dead wrong.

Sigh. How many times do I have to respond to this? I am getting the impression that you don't want to engage in a serious discussion because you don't seem to read what I have written and you keep repeating this.  Witness perception of sound source location is determined by the direction of the sound.so with reflective surfaces at different distances from observers in DP there will be different directions of sound arriving at different intervals. The ear witnesses were just relating where the sound appeared to the to be coming from. That differed depending on where they were located in Dealey Plaza and how they were facing. This did not affect ability to count the shots or observe the pattern of shots.

Why would anyone have looked for a mark in the street when for months after the shooting it was believed all three shots struck inside the limo.

They did though. Do you think bullet marks just disappear?

JBC was turned to he right. That's never been in dispute.

Not at z222-225 when you say the second shot occurred.

[John Corbett]

Oh, there is a witness who said JFK did not react to the first shot and continued to smile and wave after? Was this important witness called to testify to the WC?

Yes, there is. Zapruder's camera.

That you would suggest that it is an exaggeration shows you haven't been checking the lists of witnesses I provided. I gave you all their names. You have not provided the names or cites to anyone who said that 1. JFK did not react to the first shot 2. said the first shot occurred when the motorcade was in a position at a point before z186 3. the last two shots were not closer together whom I did not name and reference.Sigh. How many times do I have to respond to this? I am getting the impression that you don't want to engage in a serious discussion because you don't seem to read what I have written and you keep repeating this.  Witness perception of sound source location is determined by the direction of the sound.so with reflective surfaces at different distances from observers in DP there will be different directions of sound arriving at different intervals. The ear witnesses were just relating where the sound appeared to the to be coming from. That differed depending on where they were located in Dealey Plaza and how they were facing. This did not affect ability to count the shots or observe the pattern of shots.
They did though. Do you think bullet marks just disappear?

Yes. With months of traffic passing over it, asphalt surfaces will smooth out.

Not at z222-225 when you say the second shot occurred.

Once again you display your poor powers of perception. JBC shoulders are most definitely turned to the right during that time frame.

And still you offer no illustration that shows how it was even possible for JBC to be shot in the back by Oswald at Z271. The impossibility of that alone destroys your entire premise. Unless and until you can do that, you are just blowing smoke.