These witness statements don't require explanations to understand them. They speak for themselves. If you feel the need to explain them then you are misinterpreting what they said. The eyewitnesses changed their stories over time, the later statements incorporate things they were told not that they saw.

You have to read their statements before you can analyse them.  What does "I heard what appeared to be two shots and it seemed that the right side of his head was hit and his hair flew forward." tell you about what happened on the first of those two shots?

You have no way of knowing that three bullets caused all the wounds since no proper autopsy was ever performed.

?? There were three shots heard. There were 3 shells on the floor. According to Harold Norman, the bolt action was heard three times. Witnesses close to the effects of the shots (eg. the Connallys, Greer, Secret Service) testified as to the effects of each of the three shots. There is nothing in the autopsy findings that precludes those wounds having been made by three bullets.  That may not convince you that the wounds were caused by three shots, but it is a sufficient evidentiary basis for reaching such a conclusion.

A single shooter could NOT have fired three times in the allotted time accurately. A single shooter with a bolt-action rifle also doesn't match what was heard regarding the sequence of the shots.

And your evidence is??  The FBI fired three aimed shots well within 6.4 seconds, which is, according to the evidence, about the time span of the three shots. There is abundant evidence that the second shot was after the midpoint. According to the FBI it was possible to fire 3 accurate aimed shots with Oswald's MC in 4.6 seconds, so it woud have been possible for Oswald to have fired the second shot 2.3 seconds before the final shot.

Your opinion is based on something other than the actual evidence.

I have just given you the evidence. Are you saying that is not actual evidence? Why?

 Was it ruled out that a bullet that entered from the front through the throat could have ended up in his lung? One of Parkland doctors, I believe Perry stated there was blood coming up from one of the lungs

Was it ruled out that a bullet that entered from the front through the throat could have ended up in his lung? One of Parkland doctors, I believe Perry stated there was blood coming up from one of the lungs

Yes, it was ruled out by the Warren Report.
What would we expect?

You have to read their statements before you can analyse them.  What does "I heard what appeared to be two shots and it seemed that the right side of his head was hit and his hair flew forward." tell you about what happened on the first of those two shots?

 Exactly, read the statement as it is stated not read into the statement what you want it to say. He said exactly what happened, the bullet impacted JFK's head and his hair flew forward. Sounds a whole lot like Z313. He also said the last two were like they were one shot.

George Hickey 11/30--- second statement

 "I heard two reports which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound than the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them."
How can that ever be misconstrued as being a shot at Z270 making his hair somehow move followed by a pause and then a shot at Z313 that really does make his hair and much more fly forward. There is no possible way to even explain the rational that is behind thinking of this nature.


Is this the same type of analysis you are applying to other eyewitness statements? It would have to be to come up with an imaginary shot at Z270.

?? There were three shots heard.   it is a sufficient evidentiary basis for reaching such a conclusion.
  The FBI fired three aimed shots well within 6.4 seconds According to the FBI it was possible to fire 3 accurate aimed shots with Oswald's MC in 4.6 seconds, so it woud have been possible for Oswald to have fired the second shot 2.3 seconds before the final shot.
I have just given you the evidence. 

Any qualified links on those statements?

HSCA Report, Volume XI
Current Section: Wesley Liebeler
OSWALD"S RIFLE CAPABILITY
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=39836

Was it ruled out that a bullet that entered from the front through the throat could have ended up in his lung? One of Parkland doctors, I believe Perry stated there was blood coming up from one of the lungs

If the autopsy photos and x-rays are considered gospel to the LNers, then we know exactly how/what the MB did thru JFK's back->throat.



With a downward trajectory angle of 17 deg, the FMJ bullet entered JFK's back at T1, smashed thru C7 then exited thru a small hole at C6. If that's not magic, then I've got some beans you might be interested in.