The First Shot

[John Corbett]

No offence John, but you are completely ignorant regarding the amount of evidence demonstrating a first shot at z222/z223.
Have a read through this thread to get yourself up to speed with the subject.

I've read through the arguments for a first shot strike and I don't find them the least bit compelling. You can make an argument for just about any scenario you want depending on the witnesses you choose to believe. I choose to believe the witnesses who are corroborated by the best witness available, Zapruder's camera.

For instance, you hold up Connally and Bennett as "ample" proof that there was a missed first shot. At his website, Pat Speer compiled a list of 44 witnesses who report JFK reacting to the first shot as we see in the Z-film - hands flying up towards his throat, slumping to his left etc
Are you familiar with the concept of 'weight of evidence'?

44 witnesses? Out of how many? There are many different versions of the shooting but there is only one correct one. I've weighed the evidence which convinces me there was a missed first shot. I find it far more likely that 44 people didn't recognize the first shot for what it was than that JBC and Bennett imagined hearing a shot that never happened, especially when we can see JBC doing exactly what he said he did in reaction to the first shot and that was several seconds before JFK and JBC were hit.

And just to clear up the worst of your cowardly misrepresentations - I have never claimed that my suspicions or assumptions are evidence of anything. If I am stating an assumption I will say so. Unlike you, I understand the difference between a fact and an assumption.
And no-one has said anything about a "positively" missed third shot.
Your deviousness reveals a lack of character.

Your assumption and suspicion were the only arguments you gave for a missed 3rd shot. Where is your evidence of that?

How can you be so sure the back shot wasn't his aiming point and the headshot struck high?

 
Do me a favour and don't ever respond to any of my posts. You're the worst kind of idiot and I really don't want to have to deal with you. 

If you don't want me to respond to your half-assed posts, don't make any.

[Tom Graves]

If you don't want me to respond to your half-assed posts, don't make any.

I told you he was a jerk.

[Andrew Mason]

My bad. I meant to say exited from below his right nipple. I've fixed it if you want to respond.

Sorry, John. I should have asked you first if that was a mistake.  In reading it over I can see that the rest fits with you intending to say “exited”. 

The key to understanding the second bullet is to understand why JBC felt such a forceful impact where the bullet entered. That impact requires the bullet to undergo a significant change in momentum at the point of impact.  The bullet didn’t stop there and it did not penetrate the fifth rib at the point of impact. That occurred farther along the rib. Since the bullet little damage at the point of initial impact, it did not lose much energy, hence speed, there. The bullet had lots of energy after that initial impact because it took out the last 10 cm of the rib driving bone shards into the lower right lung and then had enough energy to fracture the radius in several pieces.

So the momentum imparted by the bullet to the fifth rib did not result from a significant and sudden loss of its speed at the point of impact.  Rather the momentum transferred to the body at the point of impact was due to a sudden change in direction of the bullet at the point of impact. This means the bullet struck the fifth rib at much more than a shallow glance. It struck the fifth rib solidly at an angle much closer to the normal or perpendicular to the surface of the rib. The fact that the rib fractured farther up the rib close to the spine supports this forceful, more normal impact angle. Since it did not penetrate the rib at that point, it changed direction to follow along the rib.  Since force is equal the time rate of change of momentum (Force=change in momentum/time period) the sudden change in direction requires a large force applied by the body to the bullet at that point with an equal and opposite force of the bullet to the body at the point of impact.

[Dan O'meara]

I told you he was a jerk.

Nobody is interested in your pillow talk Comrade Jerkov

[Dan O'meara]

I've read through the arguments for a first shot strike and I don't find them the least bit compelling. You can make an argument for just about any scenario you want depending on the witnesses you choose to believe. I choose to believe the witnesses who are corroborated by the best witness available, Zapruder's camera.
44 witnesses? Out of how many? There are many different versions of the shooting but there is only one correct one. I've weighed the evidence which convinces me there was a missed first shot. I find it far more likely that 44 people didn't recognize the first shot for what it was than that JBC and Bennett imagined hearing a shot that never happened, especially when we can see JBC doing exactly what he said he did in reaction to the first shot and that was several seconds before JFK and JBC were hit.
Your assumption and suspicion were the only arguments you gave for a missed 3rd shot. Where is your evidence of that?
If you don't want me to respond to your half-assed posts, don't make any.

I've read through the arguments for a first shot strike

Outline a single one of these arguments.
It's not that I totally don't believe you when you say you've read through the arguments...

I find it far more likely that 44 people didn't recognize the first shot for what it was than that JBC and Bennett imagined hearing a shot that never happened

It seems that every time you post something there is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation that needs to be cleared up.
It's not that I'm saying you're totally doing it on purpose...
Just to clarify - the 44 witnesses Pat Speer compiled were not referencing whether or not they recognised the first shot for what it was. They were describing JFK's reaction. I made this clear when I posted "Pat Speer compiled a list of 44 witnesses who report JFK reacting to the first shot as we see in the Z-film - hands flying up towards his throat, slumping to his left etc.

You make the point that you "choose to believe the witnesses who are corroborated by the best witness available, Zapruder's camera."
The reactions these witnesses describe are corroborated by the Z-film!

Unbelievably you say you find it far more likely these witnesses were mistaken "than that JBC and Bennett imagined hearing a shot that never happened".
According to JBC he never even heard the shot that hit him!
Are you not aware of this?
JBC reports that there was a "split second" between him hearing the first shot and feeling that he had been hit. He is reporting that there was a split second between the first two shots - do you accept this? Of course you do.
Do you believe the traumatised memory of a man who suffered a life-threatening injury and whose body went instantly into shock, is more reliable than 44 witnesses whose observations are corroborated by the Z-film? Of course you do.
 

[John Corbett]

I've read through the arguments for a first shot strike

Outline a single one of these arguments.
It's not that I totally don't believe you when you say you've read through the arguments...

The one Andrew Mason is constantly relying on is that there are witnesses who say JFK reacted to being hit by the first shot.

I find it far more likely that 44 people didn't recognize the first shot for what it was than that JBC and Bennett imagined hearing a shot that never happened

It seems that every time you post something there is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation that needs to be cleared up.
It's not that I'm saying you're totally doing it on purpose...
Just to clarify - the 44 witnesses Pat Speer compiled were not referencing whether or not they recognised the first shot for what it was. They were describing JFK's reaction. I made this clear when I posted "Pat Speer compiled a list of 44 witnesses who report JFK reacting to the first shot as we see in the Z-film - hands flying up towards his throat, slumping to his left etc.

It makes all the difference in the world whether JFK reacted to the first or second shot and that depends on whether the witnesses you are referring two could tell whether that was the first or second shot JFK reacted to. If they didn't recognize the first missed shot for what it was, then it would have seemed to them that JFK was hit by the first shot.

You make the point that you "choose to believe the witnesses who are corroborated by the best witness available, Zapruder's camera."
The reactions these witnesses describe are corroborated by the Z-film!

Unbelievably you say you find it far more likely these witnesses were mistaken "than that JBC and Bennett imagined hearing a shot that never happened".
According to JBC he never even heard the shot that hit him!

That's right he didn't. It's called information overload. The brain can only process so much input at a time. JBC was overwhelmed by the sensation of the bullet passing through his chest. It's an established phenomenon that a shooting victim won't always hear the shot that hits them.
https://biologyinsights.com/what-does-it-feel-like-to-get-shot-a-scientific-look/

"While the sound of the gunshot itself is loud, the individual may experience auditory exclusion, where hearing becomes muffled or temporarily lost due to the body’s heightened state of awareness."

Are you not aware of this?

Of course I am. I've heard JBC tell this story countless times.

JBC reports that there was a "split second" between him hearing the first shot and feeling that he had been hit. He is reporting that there was a split second between the first two shots - do you accept this? Of course you do.

Now you are just plain lying. Why do you have to lie to make your points? This is what JBC actually said"
Mr. SPECTER. As the automobile turned left onto Elm from Houston, what did occur there, Governor?
Governor CONNALLY. We had--we had gone, I guess, 150 feet, maybe 200 feet, I don't recall how far it was, heading down to get on the freeway, the Stemmons Freeway, to go out to the hall where we were going to have lunch and, as I say, the crowds had begun to thin, and we could--I was anticipating that we were going to be at the hall in approximately 5 minutes from the time we turned on Elm Street.
We had just made the turn, well, when I heard what I thought was a shot. I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot. I instinctively turned to my right because the sound appeared to come from over my right

132

shoulder, so I turned to look back over my right shoulder, and I saw nothing unusual except just people in the crowd, but I did not catch the President in the corner of my eye, and I was interested, because once I heard the shot in my own mind I identified it as a rifle shot, and I immediately--the only thought that crossed my mind was that this is an assassination attempt.
So I looked, failing to see him, I was turning to look back over my left shoulder into the back seat, but I never got that far in my turn. I got about in the position I am in now facing you, looking a little bit to the left of center, and then I felt like someone had hit me in the back.
Mr. SPECTER. What is the best estimate that you have as to the time span between the sound of the first shot and the feeling of someone hitting you in the back which you just described?
Governor CONNALLY. A very, very brief span of time.

A very, very brief time span does not equate to a split second. Do you really think JBC did all the things he described after hearing the first shot in a split second. The Z-film indicates there were about 58 frames, about 3 seconds, between JBC's visible reaction and the second shot striking both men. That seems to be a reasonable time frame that fits both the reaction he described and his estimate that there was a very brief time span between shots.

Do you believe the traumatised memory of a man who suffered a life-threatening injury and whose body went instantly into shock, is more reliable than 44 witnesses whose observations are corroborated by the Z-film? Of course you do.

There is nothing in the Z-film that corroborates those 44 witnesses. It refutes them and corroborates JBC.

Glenn Bennett wasn't shot so what is your excuse for believing he imagined a missed first shot?