Well, he put all 3 shots 10 to 12 seconds apart and estimated the time between the first two at 2 seconds and enough time for him to recognize it as a rifle shot, form the conclusion that an assassination was occurring and decide to turn around to check on the President.
My point is that it is not necessary to have Connally tell us how long it was between shots #1 and#2. We have many others who recalled a longer pause between the first two with the third coming in rapid succession after the second. Connally is only one witness and his recollection conflicts with those of dozens of others.
Yet you want to ignore his later statement that it was not less than a second and closer to two.
My point is that it is not necessary to have Connally tell us how long it was between shots #1 and#2.Mason Untruth #1This was not your point at all. The false point you were making was that Connally put the two events over four seconds apart. You were saying that he wasn't the only witness who spaced the shots that far apart. You were not telling the truth.
Yet you want to ignore his later statement that it was not less than a second and closer to two.Mason Untruth #2I have posted in detail about Connally's recollections of the shooting. I have not left out a single thing he has said. The arguments I have presented explain all his statements in the context of someone recalling a traumatic, life-threatening event. I have ignored nothing.
You, on the other hand, ignore nearly every statement he made except the couple that suit the needs of your demented theory.
You ignore the evidence presented for the "temporal distortions" that accompany the recollection of traumatic events.
As usual, in your extremely untruthful way, you ignore everything except the cherry-picked scraps you pin on to the shambles you call a theory.
Your disdain for the evidence is striking.