JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Tom Graves on January 08, 2026, 04:10:49 PM
-
Were all three shots fired in 5.6 seconds?
LOL!
-
Were all three shots fired in 5.6 seconds? LOL!
"LOL!" indeed. If one assumes that Oswald was the gunman and that the head shot was the final shot, then the last two shots, both of which were hits, were fired in 5.6 seconds. Yet, not one of the three Master-rated riflemen in the WC's rifle test was able to go two for two with his final two shots.
On their second and third shots, nearly all their shots landed far from the head and neck area and far from the center of mass. Only one of the 14 shots fired at the second and third target boards landed in the head and neck area, and another one of the 14 shots landed about 3 inches below the center of mass. Moreover, the one shot that hit in the head and neck area was on the second target board/second shot. Not one of the shots at the third target board/third shot landed in the head and neck area or in the center of mass.
So the three Master-rated riflemen went one for 14 on their second and third shots, i.e., the one shot that landed in the head and neck area on the second target board/second shot, and two of them took longer than 5.6 seconds for their final two shots. Yet, your alleged lone gunman, who barely qualified in the second of three qualification categories on his best day at the range in the Marine Corps while using a semi-automatic rifle and firing from a level position, supposedly went two for two on his second and third shots in 5.6 seconds.
BTW, Miller's third shot with the iron sights missed the target board completely. That means it missed the target silhouette on the target board and also missed the target board itself. But you guys want us to believe that Oswald went two for two on his final two shots, hitting JFK's head with his alleged third shot while supposedly using the iron sights (because his scope would have been worthless due to misalignment). Yet, a Master-rated rifleman wildly missed the head on the target silhouette with his third shot using the iron sights, even though he was firing from only 30 feet up, not 60 feet up, and was not firing through a half-open window in cramped quarters.
-
Regardless of the exact timing, I cannot avoid being troubled by how many witnesses emphasized the proximity of the second and third shots. To notice this so definitively, in the space of 5.6 seconds or even 10.2 seconds, is somewhat ... troubling. It's not so much the number of seconds but the number of witnesses who described the shots as being almost simultaneous. The lethal precision of the third shot, in comparison to the other two (or one, if you're a two-shot fan) is likewise somewhat ... troubling. The explosive fragmentation of the head shot bullet vis-a-vis the supposed SBT bullet is likewise somewhat ... troubling. The appearance of the throat wound at Parkland, the alignment of the back and throat wounds ... yep, troubling. It's almost uncanny how literally NOTHING in the JFKA is as neat and tidy as we would like it to be. It's downright ... troubling. Yes, I know all the LN explanations for the mysteries, but in their totality they remain ... troubling.
My UFO buddy Peter Gersten, who believes we live in a simulated reality (not as far-fetched as you might think), has a theory that certain events - including the JFKA - have some sort of larger significance that transcends their historical significance. I'm not a True Believer, but sometimes the JFKA does seem almost as though it had been DESIGNED to be and remain eternally puzzling.
-
Remember that the WC created the SBT precisely because it became clear that O could not have re-chambered and fired 2 shots in as short a space as the Z film indicated that K and C reacted to being hit. However, they attached no importance to the many witnesses who said the 2nd and 3rd shots were almost simultaneous.
-
Were all three shots fired in 5.6 seconds?
LOL!
No. A little over 9 seconds.
-
No. A little over 9 seconds.
There is simply no way the POTUS should be under fire for 9-10-11+ consecutive seconds and the JFK SS literally NOT physically react proactively. 6+ seconds is difficult to believe, but now Max Holland is attempting to almost double that total elapsed time? And somehow he manages to get the cooperation of Nat Geo and the Sixth Floor Museum to push that? Buying into the 9-10-11+ seconds of bullets reigning down, and there being no direct response from the JFK SS Detail, would require the cooperation of key men in the JFK SS Detail. This includes ASAIC Kellerman and Limo Driver Greer. (rolling stop or stop?). There was an SS Agent that jumped off of the (R) running board of the Queen Mary and he was immediately ordered to get his tail back onto the running board. Buying into the 9-10-11+ seconds scenario implicates members of the JFK SS Detail.
-
No. A little over 9 seconds.
Thumb1:
-
Sometimes the JFKA does seem almost as though it had been DESIGNED to be and remain eternally puzzling.
Dear FPR,
It's no mystery that our "innocuous" KGB* has been encouraging the nation-rending bepuzzlement for sixty-six years, now.
*Today's SVR and FSB
-- Tom
-
LP-
Verily.
My take is Gov. JBC struck ~Z-295 and JFK Z-313.
Indicates a second gunsel.
Then, you have the GK smoke-and-bang show.
-
LP-
Verily.
My take is Gov. JBC struck ~Z-295 and JFK Z-313.
Indicates a second gunsel.
Then, you have the GK smoke-and-bang show.
If you're going to keep repeating that mantra ad infinium, the least you could do is change up the vocabulary a bit from time to time.
-
TG-
Wut is a vokabalary?
-
TG-
Wut is a vokabalary?
A strong, potato-based form of alcohol after about 30 minutes.
-
Bring back Ripple, or Thunderbird, the real stuff.
-
If you're going to keep repeating that mantra ad infinium, the least you could do is change up the vocabulary a bit from time to time.
I looked up "pot calling kettle black" in my authoritative Dictionary of Useful Idioms for Useful Idiots. It gave only one example, but it was apt: "For example, for Thomas Graves to accuse anyone else on earth of using repetitive vocabulary and repeating the same points to the extent of near-maddening tediousness would constititute a paradigmatic example of the idom 'pot calling kettle black.' This example is so extreme that it is unilikely ever to occur in the real world, but it does serve to illustrate the idiom in its most extreme form."
-
Bring back Ripple, or Thunderbird, the real stuff.
In college, we got a guy so drunk on Bali Hai that he agreed to eat an unlit cigar. He threw up on the floor about 3/4 of the way through. Well, it seemed funny at the time. Maybe you had to be there.
-
A strong, potato-based form of alcohol after about 30 minutes.
Known as "Bathtub Gin" during Prohibition.
-
Bring back Ripple, or Thunderbird, the real stuff.
The preferred beverages of Fred Sanford.
-
I'm beginning to think the endless speculation as to how long Oswald had to fire the shots is pretty much a red herring. Ben Cole posted somewhere - perhaps here - several YouTube videos of guys firing a Carcano with absolutely jaw-dropping rapidity.
What is NOT a red herring, it seems to me, is the number of really solid witnesses who described the second and third shots as nearly simultaneous. There is an old (2010) thread at the Ed Forum on this subject, https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/16384-shot-sequence-descriptions/, where Pat Speer summarizes his meticulous research thusly (and I believe accurately):
Chapters 5 through 9 at patspeer.com are devoted to the eyewitness evidence, and show how the eyewitness statements, when taken as a whole, are quite clear on several points. One is that the first of the three shots heard by most witnesses hit Kennedy. Two is that the last two shots were fired quite close together. Although slightly less clear, a third point was nevertheless surprising – I certainly didn't expect it. The head shot was the FIRST of the last two shots fired closely together, and the second of the three shots heard by most witnesses.
When you examine what those witnesses said, "quite close together" is more like REALLY close together - i.e., "on top of each other," "bang bang," "bunched together," etc. It isn't anything like "three or four seconds." It certainly isn't the 4.8 to 5.6 seconds estimated by the WC. Regardless of whether the total sequence was as "long" as ten seconds or as short as six, numerous witnesses pereived the last two shots being noticeably closer together within that sequence.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t see that the WC or HSCA (firearms and acoustics panels) really focused on this issue. The focus seems to have been more on the perceived location and overall timing of the shots but not much on the fact that so many perceived the second and third shots as essentially simultaneous. (I was surprised to be reminded that the WC was actually quite open-minded, conceding the possibility of only two shots and that the three-shot witnesses may have been influenced by media coverage.)
Here’s the famous Lee Bowers interview where he describes the shot sequence beginning at about 5:35, with the second and third being “almost on top of each other.” He’s a good witness because he was physically removed from the immediate reverberations and echoes and whatnot. If he were alone in his description, that would be one thing – but he’s not. As I say … troubling.
The CT community would do itself a big favor if it would focus on these aspects that are genuinely troubling and less on ideologically-driven silliness and supposed plots and cover-ups that are closer to science fiction.
-
The extended firing time for 3 shots from sniper's nest is important for several reasons. For starters, the 11+ seconds elapsed firing time claims that Oswald fired shot #1: (1) STANDING UP, (2) fired almost STRAIGHT DOWN, (3) through a 1/2 open window. This is ridiculous, but it does get bullhorn'd via National Geographic and the Sixth Floor Museum. The extension of the elapsed firing time is being ballyhoo'd in order to get around Oswald's carcano being a WW2 Bolt Action Rifle. There is Zero Evidence to support this extended firing time.
-
The extended firing time for 3 shots from sniper's nest is important for several reasons. For starters, the 11+ seconds elapsed firing time claims that Oswald fired shot #1: (1) STANDING UP, (2) fired almost STRAIGHT DOWN, (3) through a 1/2 open window. This is ridiculous, but it does get bullhorn'd via National Geographic and the Sixth Floor Museum. The extension of the elapsed firing time is being ballyhoo'd in order to get around Oswald's carcano being a WW2 Bolt Action Rifle. There is Zero Evidence to support this extended firing time.
So who cares? As I noted, even the WC conceded the possibility of only two shots, the first being the shot in the back (as Pat Speer believes it was, and I tend to agree). The whole "early missed shot" thing is mostly just a red herring. CT wackos are desperate for three shots in an "impossibly short" time because then IT COULDN'T HAVE BEEN OSWALD!!! YEE-HA!!! LNers are desperate to expand the time for obvious reasons. But the arguments as to when the mysterious missed first shot was taken just go round and round to nowhere. It is a FACT that a number of credible witnesses heard two shots that were virtually simultaneous - this is far more compelling evidence that Oswald perhaps could not have fired them, because what these witnesses describe is indeed "impossibly short." As Pat Speer notes, typically the head shot is the SECOND shot in this sequence, meaning that if there actually was a missed shot it would have been the THIRD shot, virtually simultaneous with the head shot. This is a far more compelling CT argument than arguing about an early missed shot and whether Oswald could have fired three shots in six seconds (as the videos posted by Ben Cole show that he clearly could have). Add the fact that the head shot was uncannily precise and fragmentary and, voila, you have a Mafia pro in the Dal Tex building or something like that. :D
Here's one video that Ben previously posted:
-
Anytime people resort to Revisionist History, THAT is a big deal. And base it on a Lost Bullet? Seriously?
-
Anytime people resort to Revisionist History, THAT is a big deal. And base it on a Lost Bullet? Seriously?
You certainly have a rather Curious propensity for Capitalizing words in the Middle of sentences without apparent rhyme or Reason. Is this some sort of nervous typing tic?
Does not every early-missed-shot scenario have a missing bullet? Do you have one that doesn't? What I suggested is no more "based on" a missing bullet than any theory except the reasonably plausible one that Oswald fired only two shots, which does not require a missing bullet.
What you call Revisionist History is simply Pat Speer's reasonable, evidence-based assessment of what occurred, with the missed shot coming at the end rather than the beginning: Oswald's first shot being the back wound and his second being the one that missed immediately after the head shot, with the head shot presumably being fired by Someone Else if it and Oswald's second shot were almost simultaneous as witnesses described. In this scenario, Oswald simply fired two shots, which even the WC recognized was a possibility, which Jack Nessan has written a well-reasoned book about, and which eliminates any timing problems. I don't say it's what happened, but it is more plausible and evidence-based than the assorted missed-early-shot scenarios.
"Revisionist History," indeed. CT speculation is virtually nothing but revisionist history. Getaway cars in front of the TSBD, anyone? :D :D :D (As I recall, when I joined here a year ago you were promising to embarrass old-fart researchers with some stunning bombshell that would pretty much wrap up the case. Was the mysterious - indeed, revisionist - getaway car said bombshell, or are we still awaiting it?)
-
Were all three shots fired in 5.6 seconds?
LOL!
Given the fact that former Marine sharpshooter Oswald fired all three shots in 10.2 seconds (with his first shot missing everything at "Z-124") in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza, deliberating whether or not he could have done it in 5.6 seconds is like arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a needle to "Enter Sandman" and/or "Hell's Bells."
Ergo the "LOL!" in my OP.
LOL!
-
LP--
Nice post.
That has always troubled me also, the "bang....bang-bang" cadence.
-
LP--
Nice post.
That has always troubled me also, the "bang....bang-bang" cadence.
Ever heard of echoes?