JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
John Mytton:
After reading some posts by CTs, like this example "Not merely a "large number."..... The vast majority of the witnesses reported that the last two shots were nearly simultaneous...... That's impossible with a bolt action rifle...." so I did a quick collation of a number of witnesses who said the shots were roughly about evenly spaced or the spaces between were longer than virtually instantaneous. Btw some witnesses guessed that the length of time was greater between shots 2 and 3 than 1 and 2 but a lot of these witnesses didn't specify a specific length so cannot be counted by either side.
Mr. BELIN - Do you have any time estimate as to the spacing of any of these shots?
Mr. BAKER - It seemed to me like they just went bang, bang, bang; they were pretty well even to me.
BREHM said that a third shot followed and that all three shots were relatively close together. BREHM stated that he was in military service and he has had experience with bolt-action rifles, and he expressed the opinion that the three shots were fired just about as quickly as an individual can maneuver a bolt-action rifle, take aim, and fire three shots.
Mr. CABELL - Well, I would put it this way. That approximately 10 seconds elapsed between the first and second shots, with not more than 5 seconds having elapsed until the third one.
Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate on the time that passed from the first to the last shot?
Mrs. CONNALLY. Very short. It seemed to me that there was less time between the first and the second than between the second and the third.
Mr. BELIN - And what's your best recollection now as to the amount of time between shots?
Mr. COUCH - Well, I would say the longest time would be 5 seconds, but it could be from 3 to 5.
Mr. BELIN - And would this be true between the first and the second shots as well as between the second and the third - or would there have been a difference?
Mr. COUCH - As I recall, the time sequence between the three were relatively the same.
Mr. BELIN - The shots seemed to be how far apart?
Mr. FISCHER - That's hard to say. I've been thinking about that. And--uh--I'd guess--3 to 4 seconds.
Mr. BELIN - Was that between the first and the second or between the second and the third?
Mr. FISCHER - Between both. As far as I can remember, the shots were evenly paced.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did the shots seem evenly spaced or were some of them closer together?
Mr. HUDSON - They seemed pretty well evenly spaced.
Mr. BELIN. How close did the shots sound like they came together?
Mr. ROMACK. Oh, they happened pretty fast. I would say maybe 3 or 4 seconds apart.
Mr. BELIN. Were they equally spaced, or did one sound like it was closer than another one in time?
Mr. ROMACK. It sounded like to me that they were evenly spaced. They rang out pretty fast.
Mr. SPECTER - Do you recall whether or not the statement is accurate in that you told the police officials at that time that there was a time span of 8 seconds between the first and second shots and a time span of 3 seconds between the second and third shots?
Mr. ROWLAND - I think I did tell them that, yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. I see. Did you tell them that you heard the bolt action of the rifle?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And that you heard the expended cartridges fall to the floor?
Mr. NORMAN. Yes; I heard them making a sound.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/wit.htm
JERRY HAYNES from WFAATV who was there with JAY. @17:37
....we heard one shot then a second or two later we heard another shot and then another second or two later the third shot.
JAY WATSON from WFAATV who ran straight back to the studio gave this account @27:28
I can best explain it in my own words, we were a hundred yards....yada yada yada
Jerry Haynes and I were standing there and we heard one shot and immediately thereafter heard another shot and then a third little bit later.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_0cyKe4RTU
JohnM
John Mytton:
--- Quote from: Bob Prudhomme on January 09, 2018, 07:34:40 PM ---"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the coverup."
Are YOU part of the coverup?
--- End quote ---
I don't know about that Bob, there appears to be a lot of witnesses who specifically didn't hear the last two shots one on top of the other? Why are your CT mates afraid of confronting any evidence that contradicts their fragile infrastructure?
JohnM
Joe Elliott:
--- Quote from: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 07:17:06 AM ---
I don't know about that Bob, there appears to be a lot of witnesses who specifically didn't hear the last two shots one on top of the other? Why are your CT mates afraid of confronting any evidence that contradicts their fragile infrastructure?
JohnM
--- End quote ---
John
It is not surprising that a lot of witnesses didn?t hear the last two shots right on top of each other.
For those close to the line of fire, they will hear two sounds from one shot. A ?Crack?, the sound of the supersonic bullet itself, shortly followed by a ?Thump?, the sound from the muzzle blast. Being closer to the bullet (at it?s closest approach), the ?Crack? occurs before the ?Thump?.
The greater the distance from the shooter, the greater the time difference comes between the ?Crack? and the ?Thump?. For the last shot, at the longest range, 88 yards, the two sounds would be the most distinct.
Some witnesses may have been far enough away from the path of the bullet not to hear the ?Crack?. Or the ?Crack? and the ?Thump? were still close together for them to perceive it as two separate sounds. Or knew, from previous experience, that a ?Crack-Thump? means one shot, not two. And so did not report two shots coming right on top of each other.
Joe
Dillon Rankine:
According to Josiah Thompson in Six Seconds in Dallas, (1976, p. 29) that out of 65 witnesses reporting:
40 said the second and third shots were bunched (closer together)
13 said three shots were evenly spaced
7 said first two shots were bunched
5 said four shots with first two bunched, a pause, then final two bunched
Various studies have been conducted since and despite some differences in interpretation of qualitative witness data, these findings remain basically identical. Then again, witnesses can be mistaken and there?s just too many psychophysical variables in play to conceivably account for, so this data can be used with extreme caution.
Joe Elliott:
--- Quote from: Dillon Rankine on January 11, 2018, 12:39:28 AM ---
According to Josiah Thompson in Six Seconds in Dallas, (1976, p. 29) that out of 65 witnesses reporting:
40 said the second and third shots were bunched (closer together)
13 said three shots were evenly spaced
7 said first two shots were bunched
5 said four shots with first two bunched, a pause, then final two bunched
Various studies have been conducted since and despite some differences in interpretation of qualitative witness data, these findings remain basically identical. Then again, witnesses can be mistaken and there?s just too many psychophysical variables in play to conceivably account for, so this data can be used with extreme caution.
--- End quote ---
The bulk of the earwitnesses support the theory that the last two shots were closer together.
And the bulk of the eyewitnesses support the theory that the Presidential limousine stopped or almost stopped. Indeed, there is even stronger support from the witnesses for the limousine stopping then there is for the last two shots being bunched together.
And yet, we know from the Zapruder film that the limousine did not stop. It slowed from 13 mph to 8 mph. It always went faster than jogging speed. Just ask Clint Hill.
Had the Zapruder film recorded sound, we would likely know the bulk of the witnesses were wrong on the shot sequence as well.
What are the odds of 61.5 % or 79.4 % of the witnesses being wrong by sheer luck? Astronomical. Assuming witness errors are independent events. But if witness errors are systematic, it?s no wild fluke at all.
Which teaches us that treating this as a statistical problem or a problem in probability is a mistaken. Statistics and Probability can only be used for independent events.
What could cause systematic errors in the ?Limousine Speed? witnesses? Look at Don Roberdeau?s map of Dealey Plaza. A great number of the witnesses were close to the cars three or more cars behind the limousine. They had a good look at those cars but not the limousine at the time of the shots.
When the limousine slowed from 13 to 8 mph, each succeeding car had to slow more abruptly then the car in front of it (common in heavy traffic). So, the cars further back had to stop.
Rather than admit that they were not close enough to see history, it appears many witnesses guessed. The cars they could see easily had stopped. That means the limousine must have stopped as well.
What could cause systematic errors in the ?Shot Spacing? witnesses? The fact that a single shot can generate multiple noises, like ?Crack ? Thump?. Why would this be more common for the last shot? I don?t know. Maybe because that was the furthest shot and the sounds would be more noticeably separate. Maybe because it was only with the third fatal head shot that witnesses realized the President was shot and they remembered the details of that shot better than the others.
In any case, we should not trust witnesses. Not as individuals. Not as a group based on the idea ?Well, they couldn?t have all made the same mistake?.
Addendum:
Of the 59 ?Speed of Limousine? witnesses:
52.9 % said the limousine stopped
2.9 % said the limousine stopped or almost stopped
23.5 % said the limousine almost stopped
14.7 % said the limousine slowed
5.9 % said the limousine maintained its speed
In other words:
79.4 % said the limousine stopped or almost stopped
Of the 65 ?Shot Sequence? witnesses (Josiah Thompson):
61.5 % said the second and third shots were bunched together
20.0 % said the shots were evenly spaced
10.8 % said the first and second shots were bunched together
7.7 % said there were two pairs of bunched shots
If 79.4 % of the witnesses can be wrong about the speed of the limousine, why can?t 61.5% of the witnesses by wrong about the spacing of the shots?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version