Mary Woodward said there were 3 shots and the 1st shot missed everything

[Tom Graves]

You seem to be of the opinion there are multiple truths and it is a multiple-choice exercise. There is only one truth of the JFKA and all other theories are simply false. Oswald was the assassin and he carried out the assassination in only one way. Once that way is determined, it is pointless to consider there are alternatives. Your scenario is simply bonkers and undeserving of serious consideration.

He seems intent on proving the JFK assassination was a conspiracy.

[Andrew Mason]

When do you believe JFK was hit?

When do you believe JBC was hit?

Since eyewitness/earwitness testimony is notoriously unreliable (especially in a virtual echo chamber like Dealey Plaza), how does the Zapruder film, and only the Zapruder film, support your beliefs as to when JFK was hit and when JBC was hit?

I don’t know where the idea that multiple independent witnesses are inherently unreliable comes from.  Studies have shown that over 95% of witnesses are accurate in recalling salient details-which are details that more than 50% of the witnesses noticed.  Witness reliability is always something that has to be addressed when there is no independent corroboration. But when you have 25 independent witnesses all saying the same thing, that is more than sufficient corroboration.  We know that those witnesses ARE reliable.

[Andrew Mason]

Because that's what automatically happened when he was hit.

Do you think it was a delayed automatic reaction?

You don’t seem to recognize circular reasoning.

[Andrew Mason]

When do you believe JFK was hit?

When do you believe JBC was hit?

The last two shots were close together. The evidence of the people on the 5th floor TSBD is that all three shots came from the SN. Greer said he turned around for the first time immediately after the second shot. Altgens said his z255 photo was after the first and before any other shot. Hickey said he was turned forward watching JFK for the last two shots.  The shooter needed about 2.3 seconds to make the last two shots.  Work it out and you tell me where that puts the second shot. That’s where the evidence says it  occurred.   

Since eyewitness/earwitness testimony is notoriously unreliable (especially in a virtual echo chamber like Dealey Plaza), how does the Zapruder film, and only the Zapruder film, support your beliefs as to when JFK was hit and when JBC was hit?

You are fooling yourself if you don’t try to interpret the equivocal parts of the zfilm using the witness evidence.  The easiest person to fool is always oneself.

[Tom Graves]

You don’t seem to recognize circular reasoning.

Do you think JFK's neuromuscular reaction was a delayed one?

[John Corbett]

I don’t know where the idea that multiple independent witnesses are inherently unreliable comes from.  Studies have shown that over 95% of witnesses are accurate in recalling salient details-which are details that more than 50% of the witnesses noticed.  Witness reliability is always something that has to be addressed when there is no independent corroboration. But when you have 25 independent witnesses all saying the same thing, that is more than sufficient corroboration.  We know that those witnesses ARE reliable.

A double sound produced by the last shot could easily fool a large number of witnesses. Some of those witnesses said that there was almost no time between the two shots. That could not have been two shots from Oswald's Carcano. The possibilities are two sounds from Oswald's last shot or two gunmen. There is no other evidence of a second gunman so that kind of narrows it down.

[Andrew Mason]

You seem to be of the opinion there are multiple truths and it is a multiple-choice exercise. There is only one truth of the JFKA and all other theories are simply false. Oswald was the assassin and he carried out the assassination in only one way. Once that way is determined, it is pointless to consider there are alternatives. Your scenario is simply bonkers and undeserving of serious consideration.

Tom Graves and I are in agreement that there was an early missed shot but we have a sharp disagreement as to how early that shot occurred. Since there are only clues and not definitive proof of when the first shot occurred, I can recognize that there is a possibility that he could be right and I could be wrong. I can't give your scenario that same consideration. There is no possible way you could be right

Both you and Tom think the other is wrong. I am just saying you are both right - on the other being wrong.