Part of the Texas Lore of the JFKA is that Gov. John Connally kept his grip on his white Stetson cowboy hat, even after being shot through the wrist, by the same bullet that first passed through President JFK's neck, then through JBC's chest, and only then through JBC's wrist. The same whole slug burrowed into JBC's thigh (and somehow mysteriously ended up on a hospital gurney, or below the gurney, several floors below JBC's operating room, by the WC version). That is C-399. Quite the adventurous bullet!
Nellie Connally said her husband held on onto his Stetson cowboy hat all the way to the Parkland hospital, although Nellie Connally also said the assassin's first shot struck JFK, the second hit JBC, and the third hit JFK. Such are the perils of citing JFKA witnesses, for SBT'ers and LN'ers alike.
On a more authoritative note, Cyril Wecht, (now deceased) a renowned forensic pathologist and longtime critic of the Warren Commission (WC), maintained that it was physically and neurologically impossible for Connally to have maintained a grip on his hat if the "Magic Bullet" (Commission Exhibit 399) had actually shattered his radius bone, as the WC claimed.
The WC was, or course, was required to accept the Texas Lore, given that it had committed to the SBT, which meant that JBC was shot ~Z-223.
The WC version is, well, dubious:
"The SBT bullet entered the dorsal (back) side of his right wrist (thumb side), shattered the distal radius bone, and exited on the palm side. This path damaged nearby structures, including a partial transection of a dorsal branch of the radial nerve and a tendon leading to the thumb.
Dr. Charles F. Gregory (the orthopedic surgeon who operated on the wrist) noted this during the procedure. The Warren Commission Report explicitly references the "partial cutting of a radial nerve and tendon" as evidence that the bullet was already tumbling/yawed (not pristine), as it caught and tore these structures rather than pushing them aside."
OK, to reprise, the WC maintains JBC was shot through the right wrist ~Z-223, but was still holding onto his Stetson hat at Z-272.
Layman's view: I have never had a wrist shattered by a bullet. I was struck on the wrist hard enough (in an industrial mishap) once to leave bone bruises, or contusions, on my wrist. Yes bones can bruise and swell. The blow struck the dorsal side on the wrist. I could not have held onto my baseball cap through that experience, had I been holding one. I never had a Stetson.
Yet here is Gov. JBC at Z-272 still holding onto the Stetson, after having been shot through the wrst (and the chest).:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZqXH27m0/Screen-Shot-2569-04-14-at-07-12-47.png)
Note that JBC has made a near 180-degree in his seat, despite having been shot through the chest (by the SBT version). JBC is checking up on JFK, after hearing the first shot, JBC said. Those darn witnesses!
Side note: The telltale smell of gunsmoke hung in the air in the GK area in the immediate aftermath of the JFKA.
This gunsmoke could not have been from LHO's M-C, as the breeze was blowing from the GK towards to the TSBD---that is proven beyond dispute by women's skirts and coats fluttering in the wind.
Conclusion: The SBT strikes me as dubious.
The WC was driven towards the LN explanation by LBJ's fear that LHO-KGB-G2 connections could trigger a nuclear war. LBJ said so himself. For you younger folks, in the 1960s talk of nuclear war was nearly a daily event, especially during the CMC-1962. The possibility of a nuclear war seemed real, nearly tangible. Students practiced nuclear war drills once a week (that includes me!). Sears Roebuck started building bomb shelters under new stores in the early 1960s. Nelson Rockefeller floated a plan to finance every homeowner in America building bomb shelters under their houses.
WC members Russell, Boggs, Cooper all later said they disagreed with the WC conclusions.
The Texas Lore that JBC held onto his Texas Stetson Hat ...well, not sure about that. I lived in Texas in the late 1970s. Texas Lore and state pride are big things, and so are Stetson cowboy hats.
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
Part of the Texas Lore of the JFKA is that Gov. John Connally kept his grip on his white Stetson cowboy hat, even after being shot through the wrist, by the same bullet that first passed through President JFK's neck, then through JBC's chest, and only then through JBC's wrist. The same whole slug burrowed into JBC's thigh (and somehow mysteriously ended up on a hospital gurney, or below the gurney, several floors below JBC's operating room, by the WC version). That is C-399. Quite the adventurous bullet!The radial nerve covers the extensor muscles of the hand. Holding the hat requires the flexors, not the extensors. The radial nerve transection, then, wouldn't be expected to prevent Connally from continuing to hold the hat.
Nellie Connally said her husband held on onto his Stetson cowboy hat all the way to the Parkland hospital, although Nellie Connally also said the assassin's first shot struck JFK, the second hit JBC, and the third hit JFK. Such are the perils of citing JFKA witnesses, for SBT'ers and LN'ers alike.
On a more authoritative note, Cyril Wecht, (now deceased) a renowned forensic pathologist and longtime critic of the Warren Commission (WC), maintained that it was physically and neurologically impossible for Connally to have maintained a grip on his hat if the "Magic Bullet" (Commission Exhibit 399) had actually shattered his radius bone, as the WC claimed.
The WC was, or course, was required to accept the Texas Lore, given that it had committed to the SBT, which meant that JBC was shot ~Z-223.
The WC version is, well, dubious:
"The SBT bullet entered the dorsal (back) side of his right wrist (thumb side), shattered the distal radius bone, and exited on the palm side. This path damaged nearby structures, including a partial transection of a dorsal branch of the radial nerve and a tendon leading to the thumb.
Dr. Charles F. Gregory (the orthopedic surgeon who operated on the wrist) noted this during the procedure. The Warren Commission Report explicitly references the "partial cutting of a radial nerve and tendon" as evidence that the bullet was already tumbling/yawed (not pristine), as it caught and tore these structures rather than pushing them aside."
OK, to reprise, the WC maintains JBC was shot through the right wrist ~Z-223, but was still holding onto his Stetson hat at Z-272.
Layman's view: I have never had a wrist shattered by a bullet. I was struck on the wrist hard enough (in an industrial mishap) once to leave bone bruises, or contusions, on my wrist. Yes bones can bruise and swell. The blow struck the dorsal side on the wrist. I could not have held onto my baseball cap through that experience, had I been holding one. I never had a Stetson.
Yet here is Gov. JBC at Z-272 still holding onto the Stetson, after having been shot through the wrst (and the chest).:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZqXH27m0/Screen-Shot-2569-04-14-at-07-12-47.png)
Note that JBC has made a near 180-degree in his seat, despite having been shot through the chest (by the SBT version). JBC is checking up on JFK, after hearing the first shot, JBC said. Those darn witnesses!
Side note: The telltale smell of gunsmoke hung in the air in the GK area in the immediate aftermath of the JFKA.
This gunsmoke could not have been from LHO's M-C, as the breeze was blowing from the GK towards to the TSBD---that is proven beyond dispute by women's skirts and coats fluttering in the wind.
Conclusion: The SBT strikes me as dubious.
The WC was driven towards the LN explanation by LBJ's fear that LHO-KGB-G2 connections could trigger a nuclear war. LBJ said so himself. For you younger folks, in the 1960s talk of nuclear war was nearly a daily event, especially during the CMC-1962. The possibility of a nuclear war seemed real, nearly tangible. Students practiced nuclear war drills once a week (that includes me!). Sears Roebuck started building bomb shelters under new stores in the early 1960s. Nelson Rockefeller floated a plan to finance every homeowner in America building bomb shelters under their houses.
WC members Russell, Boggs, Cooper all later said they disagreed with the WC conclusions.
The Texas Lore that JBC held onto his Texas Stetson Hat ...well, not sure about that. I lived in Texas in the late 1970s. Texas Lore and state pride are big things, and so are Stetson cowboy hats.
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
I rather suspect it was Texas Lore that "The Gov. was still holding onto to his Stetson hat." A sign of defiance and strength, in the face of dire adversity.
(https://i.postimg.cc/YCYxGKzn/Screen-Shot-2569-04-14-at-15-12-13.png)
Part of the Texas Lore of the JFKA is that Gov. John Connally kept his grip on his white Stetson cowboy hat, even after being shot through the wrist, by the same bullet that first passed through President JFK's neck, then through JBC's chest, and only then through JBC's wrist. The same whole slug burrowed into JBC's thigh (and somehow mysteriously ended up on a hospital gurney, or below the gurney, several floors below JBC's operating room, by the WC version). That is C-399. Quite the adventurous bullet!We know that JBC continued to press his right forearm against his chest all the way to Parkland because he said he felt no pain until he got to Parkland. [We know that the pleural cavity was punctured so if he had not occluded the wound in his chest his lung would have collapsed. A collapsed lung is excruciatingly painful. That is exactly what he felt when he got out of the car at Parkland - excruciating pain]. JBC said he did not know that his forearm was struck until waking up in hospital after his wounds were treated. So the forearm wound was not painful.
Nellie Connally said her husband held on onto his Stetson cowboy hat all the way to the Parkland hospital, although Nellie Connally also said the assassin's first shot struck JFK, the second hit JBC, and the third hit JFK. Such are the perils of citing JFKA witnesses, for SBT'ers and LN'ers alike.
Note that JBC has made a near 180-degree in his seat, despite having been shot through the chest (by the SBT version). JBC is checking up on JFK, after hearing the first shot, JBC said. Those darn witnesses!The SBT is in conflict with several bodies of mutually consistent evidence. If one follows the evidence: 1. JFK was struck by the first bullet; 2. JBC was struck in the back by the second, which occurred closer in time to the third than the first; and 3. the third and last bullet struck JFK in the head.
...
Conclusion: The SBT strikes me as dubious.
MT Thanks for your comment.
"The radial nerve covers the extensor muscles of the hand. Holding the hat requires the flexors, not the extensors. The radial nerve transection, then, wouldn't be expected to prevent Connally from continuing to hold the hat."--MT
The WC said something along those lines too. Maybe so.
Cyril Wecht had the opposite opinion, as I cited above.
My layman's view is the impact and injury to the wrist would have dislodged Gov. JBC's grip from the hat, and likely did.
I rather suspect it was Texas Lore, that "and the Gov. was still holding onto to his Stetson hat." A sign of defiance and strength, in the face of dire adversity.
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
We know that JBC continued to press his right forearm against his chest all the way to Parkland because he said he felt no pain until he got to Parkland. [We know that the pleural cavity was punctured so if he had not occluded the wound in his chest his lung would have collapsed. A collapsed lung is excruciatingly painful. That is exactly what he felt when he got out of the car at Parkland - excruciating pain]. JBC said he did not know that his forearm was struck until waking up in hospital after his wounds were treated. So the forearm wound was not painful.
So, based on the evidence, there is no reason to believe that he could not have held onto his stetson all the way to Parkland Hospital.
The SBT is in conflict with several bodies of mutually consistent evidence. If one follows the evidence: 1. JFK was struck by the first bullet; 2. JBC was struck in the back by the second, which occurred closer in time to the third than the first; and 3. the third and last bullet struck JFK in the head.
Greer said he turned around on the second shot - almost simultaneously with it - to see JBC falling back onto Nellie. He is finishing that turn at z281:
(https://i.postimg.cc/vBz6C6pD/zf124.jpg)
Hickey said he was looking at JFK for both the second and third shots, which were close together. We can see from Altgens #6 at z255 that he is still turned facing rearward (ie. at z255 he has yet to turn forward and hear the second shot).
In that sequence of events, JBC was hit by the second shot some time after z255 and before z281. That seems to fit all the evidence, including the abundant evidence that JFK reacted visibly to the first shot, that JBC turned around to check on JFK (the turn to the rear from z230-270) and then he was struck by the second bullet in the back. At that point he was turned with his right arm raised exposing his armpit to the SN, so that the bullet actually hit the right armpit. His right wrist was covering the exit location in his chest so the bullet struck the right radius.
If the WC had followed the evidence, they would have realized that the shot sequence also fits with the evidence that all shots were fired from the 6th floor sniper's nest by a single shooter.
Your theory has not improved with age. It makes no more sense now than when you were peddling it on John McAdams' forum almost 20 years ago. Anyone who thinks JBC was not hit until after Z225 can't be looking at frames Z220-255 objectively.What is your standard of objectivity? You seem to ignore the problems with: the hand of JFK covering the exit path from the neck; that there is no evidence of impact or damage or blood; that there is nothing occluding the exit wound in the chest to prevent a collapsed lung which JBC did not experience until he reached Parkland; that there is no right to left path from the SN through JFK that goes to JBC's right side; that there is no path though JBC's torso that would explain the wrist wound; and that the shot pattern recalled by the vast majority of witnesses means there was only one shot before the midpoint and that midpoint is well after z225.
JBC's first reaction came when he suddenly flipped his right arm up and down beginning at Z226 and lasting about a half second. Do you think he flipped his arm up and down in anticipation of being shot a few seconds later? Following his arm flip, he immediately turns and dips to his right before twisting further to his right until he was facing JFK.No. I suggest that he moved his arm because he was preparing to do the turn to the rear that he then performs. He said he turned to the rear to see JFK after hearing the first shot but before being hit in the back. He wasn't going to turn rearward with his arm down on his lap. He makes no attempt to see JFK prior to that turn which begins at about z228.
There's only one explanation that fits the Z-film throughout the shooting sequence. There was an early missed shot. My analysis tells me that shot was fired at or about Z151, although I will concede the evidence for that is not absolute proof. That is followed by Connally beginning to turn toward his right in reaction to a shot he judged to be behind him and to his right. Some have theorized the missed shot occurred before Zapruder resumed filming but that requires a very slow reaction not only from JBC but Rosemary Willis as well.So why does Rosemary turn suddenly back toward the TSBD at z202-206:
There's no way I will ever believe it is a coincidence that both men moved their arms upward at exactly the same frame if they were not reacting to the same stimulus. For those who don't believe JBC was hit until several seconds later, what do they think could have caused JBC's rapid up and down arm movement at Z226?It is not a coincidence. They are both reacting to the same thing: the first shot. JFK has already begun reacting behind the Stemmons sign as we see from his position in z224 and 225 so his movements at z226 are not his first. JBC began to react at about z226-228.
MT Thanks for your comment.
"The radial nerve covers the extensor muscles of the hand. Holding the hat requires the flexors, not the extensors. The radial nerve transection, then, wouldn't be expected to prevent Connally from continuing to hold the hat."--MT
The WC said something along those lines too. Maybe so.
Cyril Wecht had the opposite opinion, as I cited above.
My layman's view is the impact and injury to the wrist would have dislodged Gov. JBC's grip from the hat, and likely did.
I rather suspect it was Texas Lore, that "and the Gov. was still holding onto to his Stetson hat." A sign of defiance and strength, in the face of dire adversity.
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
What is your standard of objectivity?You let the evidence drive your beliefs. You don't try to bend the evidence to fit your beliefs.
You seem to ignore the problems with: the hand of JFK covering the exit path from the neck;Just how did you come to that conclusion?
that there is no evidence of impact or damage or blood; that there is nothing occluding the exit wound in the chest to prevent a collapsed lung which JBC did not experience until he reached Parkland;Do you think two seconds would make much difference to whether his lung didn't collapse until he got to Parkland?
that there is no right to left path from the SN through JFK that goes to JBC's right side;You can determine that from the two dimensional Z-film?
that there is no path though JBC's torso that would explain the wrist wound; and that the shot pattern recalled by the vast majority of witnesses means there was only one shot before the midpoint and that midpoint is well after z225.Oh, goody. We have someone else who puts absolute faith in witness recollections.
Not really.
In any event, my point was that the SBT conflicts with large bodies of mutually consistent evidence.
That is not even debatableWould you care to debate that?
it is a matter of record.What record would that be?
Yes, because another group of witnesses remember it differently. and the Z-film supports them. JBC said he turned to look over his right shoulder when he heard the first shot. He did that at Z164. Then there was Rosemary Willis who quit running after the limo and stopped running and turned back to look in the direction of the TSBD. She began that in the early Z170s. I don't put my faith in witnesses based on whether or not they tell a story I choose to believe. I believe the witnesses that can be corroborated. For example, SS Agent Bennett said he was scanning the crowd to the right when he heard the first shot. He then turned to look at JFK and SAW the second shot strike him below his right shoulder. Bennett wrote that in his notes on the flight back to Washington. That is significant because JFK was on his back the whole time he was at Parkland and the only way Bennett could have known about the back wound was if he saw it strike JFK.
You just happen to think that all the witnesses who put the first shot well after z186 (Betzner, Croft, occupants of VP car, VP security car, persons along Elm St. where JFK's car was passing or had just passed when the first shot was heard), that JFK reacted visibly to it (20+ witnesses), and that the last two shots were closer together (40+ witnesses), were all wrong. Is that being objective?
Go back and look at the Z=film. Tell me what JBC does starting at Z164.
No. I suggest that he moved his arm because he was preparing to do the turn to the rear that he then performs. He said he turned to the rear to see JFK after hearing the first shot but before being hit in the back. He wasn't going to turn rearward with his arm down on his lap. He makes no attempt to see JFK prior to that turn which begins at about z228.
So why does Rosemary turn suddenly back toward the TSBD at z202-206:Rosemary Willis did not suddenly turn back toward the TSBD in the 200s. She was running with the limo when she heard the first shot. She couldn't be expected to stop on a dime. She first slowed to a stop and then looked back. She started slowing in the Z170s.
(https://i.postimg.cc/rsYTCDbp/RWillis-202-206.gif)
WOW! There's a precise description.
Why would the occupants of the VP car say the first shot was just after they completed the turn and were going down Elm St.
You keep cherry picking the witnesses who support what you choose to believe. I choose to believe the witnesses who can be corroborated by the Z-film.
(it is almost finished the turn when last seen at z180). Why would occupants of the VP security car say that the first shot was as they were almost finished the turn and were parallel to the TSBD? Why would Mrs. Cabell say the first shot occurred when their car had entered the intersection?
You say there is only one explanation for the behaviour we see after z151.
Why would Mary Woodward say that JFK's turn and wave to her group after they shouted to them (that being the last such acknowledgement that he made) was before the first horrible ear-shattering noise? She heard three distinct shots, with the last two close together.What evidence do you have to corroborate Mary Woodward?
It is not a coincidence. They are both reacting to the same thing: the first shot. JFK has already begun reacting behind the Stemmons sign as we see from his position in z224 and 225 so his movements at z226 are not his first. JBC began to react at about z226-228.JFK's hand was still moving down at Z225. His arms didn't start up until Z226, the same frame JBC flipped his injured right arm upward.
You let the evidence drive your beliefs. You don't try to bend the evidence to fit your beliefs.I would suggest that objectivity requires not having any belief, especially pre-conceived beliefs.
Just how did you come to that conclusion?There were two holes, one in the back and the other in the front. Air entering through either would result in a collapsed lung. There was nothing occluding the back hole until he fell back onto his wife at about z280. The right arm was moving until about z250 when it appears to have covered the location of the front wound.
Do you think two seconds would make much difference to whether his lung didn't collapse until he got to Parkland?
You can determine that from the two dimensional Z-film?Oh, goody. We have someone else who puts absolute faith in witness recollectionsThere are 20+ witnesses who said that JFK reacted to the first wound in ways not seen in the zfilm until after z193. They are: T.E. Moore; Nellie Connally; David Powers; Gayle Newman; William Newman; John Chism; Faye Chism; James Altgens; Abraham Zapruder; Clint Hill; Linda Willis; George Hickey; Sam Kinney; Paul Landis; Cecil Ault; Harold Norman; Malcolm Summers; Mary Moorman; Jean Newman; Charles Brehm; znc Pierce Allman. Not a single witness said he smiled and waved after the first shot, let alone for 3 seconds.
Not really.Would you care to debate that?What record would that be?
Yes, because another group of witnesses remember it differently. and the Z-film supports them. JBC said he turned to look over his right shoulder when he heard the first shot. He did that at Z164.Do you really think Governor Connally is trying desperately to see JFK at z164 or even 193-198?:
| (https://i.postimg.cc/j26zPN9g/zf029.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/CKXzj8xj/JFK-193-to-198.gif) |
Then there was Rosemary Willis who quit running after the limo and stopped running and turned back to look in the direction of the TSBD. She began that in the early Z170s. I don't put my faith in witnesses based on whether or not they tell a story I choose to believe. I believe the witnesses that can be corroborated.Rosemary's sister, Linda, said that the first shot occurred when JFK was between her and the Stemmons sign, in her line of sight.
Glen Bennett gave a statement that is materially different than his earlier notes and was never called and never cross-examined on the differences. In the first, he recalled two shots (CE 2112 (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0280a.htm)):
For example, SS Agent Bennett said he was scanning the crowd to the right when he heard the first shot. He then turned to look at JFK and SAW the second shot strike him below his right shoulder. Bennett wrote that in his notes on the flight back to Washington. That is significant because JFK was on his back the whole time he was at Parkland and the only way Bennett could have known about the back wound was if he saw it strike JFK.
I would suggest that objectivity requires not having any belief, especially pre-conceived beliefs.
There were two holes, one in the back and the other in the front. Air entering through either would result in a collapsed lung. There was nothing occluding the back hole until he fell back onto his wife at about z280. The right arm was moving until about z250 when it appears to have covered the location of the front wound.
There were 40+ witnesses who said that the last two shots were close together, which means the first shot must have hit JFK because he is reacting 5 seconds before the last shot. Here they are:
(https://i.postimg.cc/QdG3HDbY/Page-WC-cite-Page-1.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/Bn90X3gw/Page-WC-cite-Page-2.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/kg3mBCcp/Page-WC-cite-Page-3.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/SxFhJ4r3/Page-WC-cite-Page-4.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/8zQSjGHx/Page-WC-cite-Page-5.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/g2FWnpDf/Page-WC-cite-Page-6.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/wj8p7zVC/Page-WC-cite-Page-7.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/wj8p7zVC/Page-WC-cite-Page-7.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/W1LvhVnW/Page-WC-cite-Page-9.jpg)
Even JBC did not suggest that he turned to look at JFK there.
He thought he must have turned when he was behind the Stemmons sign. At this point JFK is as far right as he could be. Earlier in the motorcade JBC had turned to chat with JFK and had no difficulty seeing him.
Then there was Rosemary Willis who quit running after the limo and stopped running and turned back to look in the direction of the TSBD. She began that in the early Z170s. I don't put my faith in witnesses based on whether or not they tell a story I choose to believe. I believe the witnesses that can be corroborated.
Lots of corroboration for the 1.......2...3 shot pattern, first shot after z186, first shot causes visible reaction to JFK, JFK reacting before second shot, last two shots in quick succession but still distinct shots.Glen Bennett gave a statement that is materially different than his earlier notes and was never called and never cross-examined on the differences. In the first, he recalled two shots (CE 2112 (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0280a.htm)):
In his statement written the next day, possibly after hearing others talk about three shots, he said there were three shots and the second shot struck the President. He is the only witness who said this and his evidence is not only uncorroborated, it is different than his first statement. There are 20+ others who disagree with Bennett's last statement (see above list).
In Andrew’s Z190 1st shot theory, which shot is CE 399?
And what’s the likely path of z190 shot after it exited JFKs throat?
My best guess would be that since the Z190 bullet trajectory is more acute than a Z223 shot trajectory that the bullet after exiting JFK throat would have gone thru the front seat just to the left of Kellerman and buried into the front dash board.
Not saying I’m agreeing with this Z190 1st shot idea but at least it’s consistent with 3 shots fired in about 6.6 secs which is close together as most witness heard and a fair match to Harold Norman’s spacing in his boom click click sequence.
And if I’m remembering right, Andrew has the 2nd shot at about Z285? And that shot then must be the one That went thru JCs wrist bone and then into his left thigh yes?
Yet it looks like to me that JC has already lifted up the hat suddenly by Z230 which is about 2.5 secs BEFORE Z285. If the hat is up in his right hand at Z285, not sure how the shot at Z285 which strikes him in the left thigh would have gone thru the wrist?
Which medical school did you attend?This is a physics issue. Lungs expand to draw air into the lungs because they are in a sealed low pressure pleural cavity. If the seal is breached and air is allowed to flow into the pleural cavity, the lung will collapse. If there is a hole from the back to the pleural cavity and a hole from the front, there are two pathways for the pleural cavity to draw air. There is nothing obstructing the back/right armpit prior to about z280.
I am not impressed by arguments that begin, "So-and-so said..." because I know there are other so-and-sos who have said something different. That's why I put my faith in forensic evidence. It is a much more reliable way of determining the truth because it can often tell us which so-and-sos got it right and which so-and-sos got it wrong. I've seen the Z-film enough times to know JFK didn't seem to react until he was hit by the SECOND shot coming at or about Z222.That's not forensic science. That is you interpreting what you think has happened in equivocal parts of the zfilm. Not even the WC went as far as to say they could tell when the first two shots occurred. In fact, they had a whole section that explained all the various possibilities that they considered.
I do not know why JFK did not react to the sound of the first shot but he was hardly the only one. Clint Hill didn't react to that first shot and he only remembers hearing 2 shots, the second and the third. Charles Brehm can be seen in the background of the Z-film still clapping after JFK had been hit by the second shot.Maybe Charles Brehm and JFK did not react before z193 because there had not been a shot. That would fit with Betzner, Croft, Linda Willis, Phil Willis, Mary Woodward and another dozen or so witnesses along Elm St.
More So=and-so-said crap. I will never understand why people put so much faith in eyewitness accounts because eyewitnesses can be, and frequently are dead wrong about important details. I believe witnesses who can be corroborated. The others, not so much.Witnesses are most often corroborated by other independent witnesses. If 20 people independently recalled JFK reacting to the first shot, you might want to explain the probability that they independently recalled that and independently failed to see JFK continue to smile and wave for several seconds...
Well if you want to believe witnesses, JBC said he instantly recognized the first shot as the sound of a high powered rifle and that it was an assassination attempt. He said he turned to look over his right shoulder because that's where the sound seemed to come from. He can be seen turning to look over his right shoulder beginning at Z164, so he is corroborated.So why do you think JBC did not turn his head rearward if he was trying to look at JFK? He never turns to face the rear. I can't find anywhere before z230 where he attempts to look over his shoulder. That requires turning one's face relative to one's shoulders. I can turn my head more than 90 degrees. He didn't try to turn it at all relative to his shoulders.
....
So, yes, I believe JBC was trying to get a look at JFK but was unable to do so.
You have correctly identified one of the problems with Andrew's misguided beliefs in that JBC suddenly flipped his right arm upward at Z226 which is the same frame that JFK's arms started moving upward. Coincidence? NAH!!!
I don't know how you concluded 3 shots were fired in 6.6 seconds.
This is a physics issue. Lungs expand to draw air into the lungs because they are in a sealed low pressure pleural cavity. If the seal is breached and air is allowed to flow into the pleural cavity, the lung will collapse. If there is a hole from the back to the pleural cavity and a hole from the front, there are two pathways for the pleural cavity to draw air. There is nothing obstructing the back/right armpit prior to about z280. That's not forensic science. That is you interpreting what you think has happened in equivocal parts of the zfilm.
Studies have shown (Loftus, Eyewitness Testimony) that witnesses are quite accurate and complete in recalling details that more than 50% of the witnesses recalled. For details that were not as easily noticed, they are still likely to be more than 50% accurate and complete. In this case, many people recalled three shots, that JFK reacted to the first and that the last two were close together. Here is the chart from Loftus, Ch. 3 (p. 27):
(https://i.postimg.cc/cJ5Xv904/Loftus-table.jpg)
Maybe Charles Brehm and JFK did not react before z193 because there had not been a shot. That would fit with Betzner, Croft, Linda Willis, Phil Willis, Mary Woodward and another dozen or so witnesses along Elm St.
And maybe Clint Hill did react to the first shot. He said he did.
He said he stepped off the car after hearing the first shot and seeing the President react.
He said later during an interview at the Sixth Floor Museum that he was told by others in the car that the second shot happened after he leapt off the running board but he did not hear it, possibly because he was along side of the QM engine.
If 20 people independently recalled JFK reacting to the first shot, you might want to explain the probability that they independently recalled that and independently failed to see JFK continue to smile and wave for several seconds...
That 6.6 secs estimate is for the Z190-Z313 shots in the hypothetical 3 shot sequence that Andrew proposes. If the avg Z- film speed is 18.5 frames/sec and 313-190=123 frames then 123/18.5=6.649 secs.
There was ONE of the CBS time trial shooters ( an OLD guy like me ) who managed to score 3 hits on the easy to see red human shape on a large black square that was moving on a white track clearly visible and where no tree was an obstacle and where the shooter could set up with rifle pointing out the window before the target started moving. And he managed to score 3 hits in about 5.6 seconds on his first attempt.
So there’s that LOL.
In Andrew’s Z190 1st shot theory, which shot is CE 399?CE399 was the first bullet that struck JFK when he was between the lamp post and Thornton sign. I put it at or just before z193, after which JFK is seen to turn forward. This bullet passed through JFK’s neck without encountering anything capable of changing its direction. Where it went after that is a matter of placing both men in positions seen in the zfilm at z190-193 and seeing where a straight line points. It could not have passed to the far right side of Connnally at that point. So the only possibility would seem to be that it caused a wound to JBC on his left side.
And what’s the likely path of z190 shot after it exited JFKs throat?
My best guess would be that since the Z190 bullet trajectory is more acute than a Z223 shot trajectory that the bullet after exiting JFK throat would have gone thru the front seat just to the left of Kellerman and buried into the front dash board.It was on a downward slope at z190:
Not saying I’m agreeing with this Z190 1st shot idea but at least it’s consistent with 3 shots fired in about 6.6 secs which is close together as most witness heard and a fair match to Harold Norman’s spacing in his boom click click sequence.At z285 Connally is already falling back and Greer is turned around, which he said he did at the time of the second shot. I suggest the shot was at z271-272. His forward motion/recoil begins at z271-272. The hair on JFK’s right side flies up at z273-276 (Hickey observed this on the second shot).
And if I’m remembering right, Andrew has the 2nd shot at about Z285? And that shot then must be the one That went thru JCs wrist bone and then into his left thigh yes?
Yet it looks like to me that JC has already lifted up the hat suddenly by Z230 which is about 2.5 secs BEFORE Z285. If the hat is up in his right hand at Z285, not sure how the shot at Z285 which strikes him in the left thigh would have gone thru the wrist?The thigh wound did not occur on the second shot. JBC never felt the thigh wound.
CE399 was the first bullet that struck JFK when he was between the lamp post and Thornton sign. I put it at or just before z193, after which JFK is seen to turn forward.
This bullet passed through JFK’s neck without encountering anything capable of changing its direction. Where it went after that is a matter of placing both men in positions seen in the zfilm at z190-193 and seeing where a straight line points. It could not have passed to the far right side of Connnally at that point. So the only possibility would seem to be that it caused a wound to JBC on his left side.
It was on a downward slope at z190:
(https://i.postimg.cc/0y886f8m/croft-lined.jpg)
It doesn’t look like it would have struck the dashboard.
At z285 Connally is already falling back and Greer is turned around, which he said he did at the time of the second shot. I suggest the shot was at z271-272. His forward motion/recoil begins at z271-272. The hair on JFK’s right side flies up at z273-276 (Hickey observed this on the second shot).
The thigh wound did not occur on the second shot. JBC never felt the thigh wound.
MT:BC: It could be hubris, or more gently, an informed but incorrect opinion on Cyril Wecht's part. Wecht has credentials on this topic far exceeding mine, so I am loath to contradict Wecht. I lean to Wecht's explanation.
Thanks for your comments.
It could be hubris, or more gently, an informed but incorrect opinion on Cyril Wecht's part.
Wecht has credentials on this topic far exceeding mine, so I am loath to contradict Wecht. I lean to Wecht's explanation.
My layman's opinion is Gov JBC could not have held his right-hand grip on the Stetson after being shot through the dorsal side of the right wrist by the large and heavy slug, issued from an M-C.
The M-C, and related Western Cartridge ammo, is right on the borderline of what is considered a high-powered rifle (or carbine if you want to get technical).
The average muzzle velocity of the Western Cartridge Company (WCC) 6.5×52mm Carcano ammunition (CE-399) fired from the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was approximately 2,165 feet per second (fps).
The slug might have slowed down by the time it struck JBC's wrist, if we assume it passed through JBC's chest first.
Curiously, the WC held that the Western Cartridge slug "tumbled" inside of JBC's wrist, causing even more damage than if it had tunneled through. Ouch!
Like I said, I am just a layman, but...really? JBC held onto the Stetson even after CE-399 "tumbled" through his wrist?
Another side question: After the Western Cartridge slug passed through JBC's wrist, then it burrowed into JBC left thigh, by the WC account.
After that, the slug from the thigh should have been retrieved by a nurse or attendant, and put into an envelope. All hospitals, even then, saved bullets as standard procedure, and all gunshots had to be reported to local police, for good and obvious reasons.
I would expect that in such a high-profile murder and attempted murder case, the slug from JBC's thigh would, of course, be placed into an envelope and marked by a nurse or attendant as such. This is really basic. I cannot imagine these procedures were not followed.
Yet the WC holds that CE-399 was found several floors below the JBC operating room, either on the floor, or near or underneath a gurney, near an elevator, by Parkland employee Darryl Tomlinson.
Huh?
That has always struck me as curious. I will probably post on this soon.
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
BTW, there is one coincidence involving CE399 that I find provocative, and have never seen discussed. Many skeptics say that CE399 was found not on Connally's stretcher, but on a different stretcher that carried a young boy named Ronnie Fuller back to minor surgery to have a nasty cut sewn up. This stretcher was piloted through the Parkland ER suite by a nurse's aide named Rosa Majors. But that's not the only role she played that day. Before Fuller needed help, Majors was in Trauma Room 2 while the medical staff was assessing Connally's wounds. Her job there was to take possession of Connally's clothing, removing and collecting Connally's personal effects therefrom. That would have put her in prime contention of finding a bullet that had fallen from the wound in Connally's thigh. And if CE399 was indeed found on Fuller's stretcher, and was deliberately placed on it, then she becomes a prime suspect in placing there.
The Z-film puts it about 1.5 seconds later. I'm going with that.Do you mean your interpretation of the zfilm or what is unequivocally displayed in the zfilm?
JBC's right side was directly in line with the exit wound in JFK's throat. You make the same mistake the CTs do in assuming JBC was seated directly in front of JFK.No. I put JBC to the left of JFK by 10-20 cm or 4-8 inches which is what Itek Corp. determined:
It would require a magic bullet for the bullet exiting JFK's throat to hit JBC on his left side.At z193 the angle through JFK was about 16 degrees:
Do you mean your interpretation of the zfilm or what is unequivocally displayed in the zfilm?I mean my observation that JBC's jacket suddenly bulged out at Z224 and two frames later both JFK and JBC both suddenly flipped their arms upward in perfect unison. After which JFK is seen leaning forward and to his left with his hands up around his throat and JBC doubles over and dips to his right, gyrates in his seat for a few more seconds before collapsing into Nellie's lap. Yeah, that interpretation. So what's your interpretation of that sequence?
No. I put JBC to the left of JFK by 10-20 cm or 4-8 inches which is what Itek Corp. determined:It was a closer to 8. David Powers was filming from the QM directly behind the JFK limo. We can see the left side of JBC's torso. The jump seat was 6 inches inboard from the side of the car and JBC would likely have been centered in that seat, not on the right side of it. JFK was as far right as he could be. One of the films showing the limo starting up at Love Field shows JFK's arm was hanging down the side of the car.
The problem is that the wound in JBC’s back was 20 cm right of JBC’s midline putting the back wound directly in front of JFK’s midline but no farther left:
Again, you fail to factor in JBC's torso rotation.
(https://i.postimg.cc/LhF2gpVg/IMG-2672.jpg)
At z220 the angle from the SN to the car direction was at least 12 degrees. A bullet through JFK exiting a tad left of his midline (to the left side of the tie knot) on a right to left angle of 12 degrees would have traveled farther left before reaching JBC. With the plane of JBC’s back being at least 24 inches from JFK’s exit wound, this means the bullet had to have gone left another 24tan12=5.1 inches before striking JBC. That puts it 5.1 inches left of where the wound was. And that is assuming the maximum offset of the two men.
At z193 the angle through JFK was about 16 degrees:
(https://i.postimg.cc/pdDTKkH3/z193-positions.jpg)
Faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions. I find Dale Myers virtual 3D rendition far more impressive than your chicken scratches. His simulation shows the wounds line up perfectly for a shot from the sniper's nest.
So the bullet would have passed about 7 inches farther left, ie. 1 inch left of JBC’s spine. If JBC was a few inches farther ahead or less than 6 inches (4 is within the Itek margin) left of JFK, it could have passed 3-4 inches left of JBC’s spine. With JBC turned right as he was at z193 it would have missed the back entirely. One can easily see how the bullet through JFK goes to JBC’s left side in the Secret Service film recreation:
(https://i.postimg.cc/15XhwZxX/Clear-earlier-than-even-with-lane-line-ends-telescopic-sight.jpg). No magic required!
I mean my observation that JBC's jacket suddenly bulged out at Z224 and two frames later both JFK and JBC both suddenly flipped their arms upward in perfect unison. After which JFK is seen leaning forward and to his left with his hands up around his throat and JBC doubles over and dips to his right, gyrates in his seat for a few more seconds before collapsing into Nellie's lap. Yeah, that interpretation. So what's your interpretation of that sequence?The film doesn’t tell you what is happening, other than JFK is reacting to his neck wound. I can’t tell what JBC is reacting to without referring to other evidence. Nellie, and 20 others said that JFK reacted like that to the first shot and the evidence is pretty consistent that JBC was hit in the back on the second shot. JBC said he turned around after the first shot to look at JFK. Nellie said she did not look in the back seat after the second shot. She is looking at JFK up to z265. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was taken after the first and before any other shots. Hickey said he was looking at JFK when the second and third shots occurred. He is facing rearward at z255.
It was a closer to 8.So you are in a better position than Itek to opine on this?
David Powers was filming from the QM directly behind the JFK limo. We can see the left side of JBC's torso. The jump seat was 6 inches inboard from the side of the car and JBC would likely have been centered in that seat, not on the right side of it.The scale drawing of the car shows the seat to be 2.5 inches inboard:
You're forgetting that JBC had rotated his shoulders to the right which changes the geometry and moves the entry point on his back a few inches to the left. Again, you fail to factor in JBC's torso rotation.He doesn’t look rotated at z224. Maybe 30 degrees at most. That moves it left by 8(1-cos30)=8(.134)=1.1 inches.
Faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions. I find Dale Myers virtual 3D rendition far more impressive than your chicken scratches. His simulation shows the wounds line up perfectly for a shot from the sniper's nest.Myers refuses to disclose his data, such as the angle from the SN that he uses, or the distance of JFK’s exit wound from the back wound of JBC. So it is not possible to really say if it is accurate. Good graphics are only worth that data they are based on.
The film doesn’t tell you what is happening, other than JFK is reacting to his neck wound.No, it doesn't tell YOU what is happening. I guess that's the reason you developed a theory that is incompatible with the film
I can’t tell what JBC is reacting to without referring to other evidence.I'm all for that. JBC's sworn testimony is evidence. I don't put complete faith in eye and earwitnesses unless they can be corroborated. JBC said he turned and looked over his right shoulder in reaction to a shot that sounded to him came from the right rear and from an elevated position. We see JBC start to turn to look over his right shoulder beginning at Z164. That's corroboration. That tells us the shot came before Z164.
Nellie, and 20 others said that JFK reacted like that to the first shot and the evidence is pretty consistent that JBC was hit in the back on the second shot. JBC said he turned around after the first shot to look at JFK. Nellie said she did not look in the back seat after the second shot. She is looking at JFK up to z265. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was taken after the first and before any other shots. Hickey said he was looking at JFK when the second and third shots occurred. He is facing rearward at z255.You continue to rely on uncorroborated witnesses. Nothing corroborates Altgens recollection. Altgens was focused on his job which was getting photos of the motorcade as it started down Elm St. His famous photos is #6. That means he took 5 more before that. Do you really expect him to remember after which of those photos he heard the first shot, assuming he even heard the first shot and recognized it for what it was. Many people in DP did not. Nellie might be one of the worst witnesses available. Not only is she not corroborated by the Z-film. Almost everything she said is refuted by it.
An the shot pattern explicitly recalled by over 40 people says there was only one shot to that point.
He started his reaction at Z164. The first shot came before that unless you want to argue he was anticipating the first shot.
So I suggest that JBC is reacting the way he said he reacted after hearing the first shot.
So you are in a better position than Itek to opine on this? The scale drawing of the car shows the seat to be 2.5 inches inboard:
(https://i.postimg.cc/XNzJtHC1/IMG-2673.jpg) (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028b.htm)
WRONG. His upper arm is almost vertical and his elbow rests on the side of the car. JFK was as far right as he could go. This footage of the limo as it is starting out at Love Field shows the tip of JFK's elbow is actually outside the car at the 24:22 mark of the video.
But even 6 inches is not enough. JFK’s spine had to have been 8 inches from the inside if he had his ribs pressed against the side, which he didn’t (his right arm its extended out from his shoulder).
Well once again you have proven that if you start with faulty premises, you will reach faulty conclusions.
That would put JBC’s back wound about an inch right of JFK’s midline. It needs to be at least 6 inches farther left because of the right to left path. He doesn’t look rotated at z224. Maybe 30 degrees at most. That moves it left by 8(1-cos30)=8(.134)=1.1 inches.
Myers refuses to disclose his data, such as the angle from the SN that he uses, or the distance of JFK’s exit wound from the back wound of JBC. So it is not possible to really say if it is accurate. Good graphics are only worth that data they are based on.
No, it doesn't tell YOU what is happening. I guess that's the reason you developed a theory that is incompatible with the filmI'm all for that.The point is that the film is equivocal in showing what JBC is reacting to. The evidence is that there was one shot at that point. That is corroborated by many independent bodies of independent evidence:
JBC's sworn testimony is evidence. I don't put complete faith in eye and earwitnesses unless they can be corroborated.I don’t either. You don’t seem to acknowledge that other witnesses can independently corroborate a witness.
JBC said he turned and looked over his right shoulder in reaction to a shot that sounded to him came from the right rear and from an elevated position. We see JBC start to turn to look over his right shoulder beginning at Z164.And not only does JBC make no effort to see JFK, his rightward 2-3 o’clock right turn is exactly what JFK and Jackie do which Mary Woodward said was in response to her calls to the President to look in their direction. And she said this was before the first shot. So you have evidence that directly contradicts what your spidey sense suggests.
That's corroboration.No it isn’t. At best it is evidence that could be corroborative if there was evidence of only one place where JBC turns to the right. But it isn’t. There is also z230-270. Besides, z164ff is not a turn to look at JFK and your interpretation is directly refuted by Mary Woodward and many others.
That tells us the shot came before Z164. You continue to rely on uncorroborated witnesses. Nothing corroborates Altgens recollection. Altgens was focused on his job which was getting photos of the motorcade as it started down Elm St. His famous photos is #6. That means he took 5 more before that. Do you really expect him to remember after which of those photos he heard the first shot, assuming he even heard the first shot and recognized it for what it was.Altgens is corroborated by Hickey, Greer, John Chism, 40+ witnesses to the shot pattern, 20+ witnesses as to JFK’s reaction to the first shot and all the witnesses who put the first shot after z186 ( Betzner, motorcade witnesses, Elm St. witnesses etc.).
Many people in DP did not. Nellie might be one of the worst witnesses available. Not only is she not corroborated by the Z-film. Almost everything she said is refuted by it.Well, everything she says is inconsistent with your interpretation of when you think you see JBC reacting to being hit in the back. But her evidence is corroborated by others, such as Greer, Powers, Chism, Gayle Newman, Hickey.
If that is Itek's diagram you posted, they show JBC directly in front of JFK. No wonder their analysis if FUBAR.It isn’t Itek. That is the Hess & Eisenhart drawing of the limo at 6 HSCA 50 (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028b.htm).
I will neither agree nor disagree as to whether the seat was 2.5 inches inboard but you have to do more than that to figure out how far inboard JBC was. He would likely have been seated in the center of the seat so you have to add half the width of the seat to the 2.5 inches to determine how far inboard his spine would have been. They show the seat to be 20.5 inches wide so the center of that seat would be (20.5/2) +2.5 = 13 which puts JBC's spine 13 inches inboard from the side of the car.Ok. That puts the right armpit wound, which was 7.87 inches right of his spine, 5.1 inches from the inside of the car. For the SBT to work JFK’s midline would have to be at the inside wall of the car, which is impossible.
What I do know is that David Powers was filming from directly behind JFK and JBC and throughout the motorcade, the left half of JBC's head and torso are visible in front of JFK. That tells me he was about a half a body width inside JFK. At the time of the SBT, his shoulders were rotated to his right which would bring the point of entry under his right armpit even further to the left.The question is how far and how much does that change the position of the right armpit entrance wound. I say 30 degrees max, which means 1.1 inch.
Here is a still from David Powers film taken from the QM. As you can see, most of JBC's head is visible. It looks clear to me that JBC's right armpit would be to the left of JFK's centerline and he isn't even rotated to the right as he was when the single bullet struck.Well once again you have proven that if you start with faulty premises, you will reach faulty conclusions.I was referring to the position of JFK before he disappears behind the Stemmons sign:
The point is that the film is equivocal in showing what JBC is reacting to. The evidence is that there was one shot at that point. That is corroborated by many independent bodies of independent evidence:
1. that the time of the first shot being after z186.
2. that JFK reacted to the first shot in ways not seen until after z193.
3. that the second and third shots were in raoid succession with the second after the midpoint between 1 and 3
4. the shots occurred over a short period of time that few witnesses estimated to be as much as 10 seconds.
5. that JBC recoiled visibly from the second shot and immediately lay back onto his wife (Nellie, Greer, Powers, Gayle Newman). The only motion seen that fits this observation occurs from z271-290.
6. that JFK’s hair flew up on the second shot (Hickey and possibly Kinney). This occurs at only one place: z273-276.
7. That Greer turned around at the time of the second shot (Greer, also noted by John Chism).
8. That there was an impact in the car sensed by Greer at the time of the second shot. This is consistent with the evidence of Tague that he was struck by a fragment on the second shot and the damage seen on the windshield frame, indicating that fragments from the second shot went up to at least the top of the windshield.
In my experience evidence does not fit together like that without a reason.
Eye and earwitness accounts are the weakest form of evidence and also the weakest form of corroboration. We have a sizeable group of witnesses who say all three shots came from the GK and another sizeable group of witnesses who said all the shots came from the direction of the TSBD. Obviously a sizeable group of witnesses can be wrong.
I don’t either. You don’t seem to acknowledge that other witnesses can independently corroborate a witness.
And not only does JBC make no effort to see JFK, his rightward 2-3 o’clock right turn is exactly what JFK and Jackie do which Mary Woodward said was in response to her calls to the President to look in their direction. And she said this was before the first shot. So you have evidence that directly contradicts what your spidey sense suggests.
No it isn’t. At best it is evidence that could be corroborative if there was evidence of only one place where JBC turns to the right. But it isn’t. There is also z230-270. Besides, z164ff is not a turn to look at JFK and your interpretation is directly refuted by Mary Woodward and many others.Altgens is corroborated by Hickey, Greer, John Chism, 40+ witnesses to the shot pattern, 20+ witnesses as to JFK’s reaction to the first shot and all the witnesses who put the first shot after z186 ( Betzner, motorcade witnesses, Elm St. witnesses etc.).
Well, everything she says is inconsistent with your interpretation of when you think you see JBC reacting to being hit in the back. But her evidence is corroborated by others, such as Greer, Powers, Chism, Gayle Newman, Hickey.
It isn’t Itek. That is the Hess & Eisenhart drawing of the limo at 6 HSCA 50 (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028b.htm).It doesn't matter whose diagram it is. It is FUBAR and you presented it anyway.
Ok. That puts the right armpit wound, which was 7.87 inches right of his spine, 5.1 inches from the inside of the car. For the SBT to work JFK’s midline would have to be at the inside wall of the car, which is impossible.
The question is how far and how much does that change the position of the right armpit entrance wound. I say 30 degrees max, which means 1.1 inch.
I was referring to the position of JFK before he disappears behind the Stemmons sign:
(https://i.postimg.cc/jjSTwpM4/JFK-turn-183-203.gif)His upper arm extends out from his shoulder forward and to the right. By z224 he is farther to the left.
There is absolutely nothing in those 8 items that even remotely fits the film evidence. Are you looking at the film through a kaleidoscope?Not everything is capable of being proven by the zfilm. It was a silent film. It can’t reveal the shot pattern. But the zfilm has to be consistent with the facts and it is consistent with those 8 bodies of evidence. That evidence just conflicts with your interpretation of the reasons that you think things happen in the zfilm.
Eye and earwitness accounts are the weakest form of evidence and also the weakest form of corroboration. We have a sizeable group of witnesses who say all three shots came from the GK and another sizeable group of witnesses who said all the shots came from the direction of the TSBD. Obviously a sizeable group of witnesses can be wrong.Yes they can. Witnesses can be confused. They may estimate distances and time inaccurately. It depends on the ability of a human to make the observation.
I suppose we are supposed to believe that it is just coincidence that JBC's arm flipped up 2 frames after his jacket bulged out and also coincidentally, the same frame JFK's arm flipped upward.It doesn't matter whose diagram it is. It is FUBAR and you presented it anyway.The zfilm shows a reduction in the area of while shirt visible between z223 and z224. It does not show whether there is outward movement of the jacket. There is also an increase in area of white shirt between z222 and z223. Both changes can be the result of just movement of the jacket due to body or arm motion.
I really don't care what you say. If we go by your calculations, the bullet should have hit JBC in the middle of his back. Obviously your calculations are off.?? I say it went a few inches to the left of JBC’s midline.
Why don't you calculate where the shot would have to have been fired from in order to exit JFK's midline and miss JBC to his left with JBC sitting a half a body width to the left of JFK.I put JBC 6 inches left of JFK. I also explained that the bullet at z193 went to the left of JBC’s midline. I didn’t suggest it missed striking him.
Seriously? You think JFK slid to the left?
Not everything is capable of being proven by the zfilm. It was a silent film. It can’t reveal the shot pattern. But the zfilm has to be consistent with the facts and it is consistent with those 8 bodies of evidence. That evidence just conflicts with your interpretation of the reasons that you think things happen in the zfilm.
For example, a shot at z190 is quite consistent with the actions of JFK that begin at z193. The HSCA photographic panel concluded that JFK shows signs of reaction to an external stimulus before disappearing behind the Stemmons sign. But it is not definitive. And you disagree with their interpretation of the reasons for the movement of JFK.
Another example of the zfilm being consistent with a shot around z190-193: Jack Ready said he turned to his right rear immediately upon hearing the first shot. He begins that turn by z199 when he removes his right hand from the right hand-hold.
Rosemary Willis began to stop in the early 170s, She couldn't be expected to stop on a dime after running along side the limo.
Another example is Rosemary stopping at z198-99 and turning her head sharply right at z202-206.
I'm still waiting for you to explain why JFK continued to wave to the crowd if he had been hit no later than Z193.
All are consistent with the zfilm and a shot at z190-193. But the film by itself is equivocal as to when the first shot occurred.
Yes they can. Witnesses can be confused. They may estimate distances and time inaccurately. It depends on the ability of a human to make the observation.
Direction of a sound source involves the human brain discerning a time difference between the arrivals of the sound wavefront at each ear. Since there were many reflective surfaces in Dealey Plaza, the witnesses’ ability to accurately determine the source depended on where they were. In fact, the witnesses close to the SN were not confused. Witnesses along Elm St toward the triple underpass would have heard reflections from the north pergola and underpass and many of them thought the shots came from there.
Simple and very easy to get wrong. That's why we have so many varying descriptions of what happened. The only version I care about is the Z-film.
But:
1. a simple shot rhythm,
2. the number of shots,
3. the relative position of JFK when the first shot sounded,
4. where one’s car was when the first shot sounded
5. what JFK after the first shot, or
6. whether one pressed the shutter before or after the first shot
are all simple observations for a human to make.
The zfilm shows a reduction in the area of while shirt visible between z223 and z224. It does not show whether there is outward movement of the jacket. There is also an increase in area of white shirt between z222 and z223. Both changes can be the result of just movement of the jacket due to body or arm motion.<chuckle>
?? I say it went a few inches to the left of JBC’s midline.If it went a few inches to the left of JBC's midline, why isn't there a wound on the left side of JBC's back?
I put JBC 6 inches left of JFK. I also explained that the bullet at z193 went to the left of JBC’s midline. I didn’t suggest it missed striking him.
Are you arguing for a first shot at Z190? How do you explain why JFK didn't raise his hands to in front of his throat until almost two second later?
Not a single one of the 8 items you listed are evidence. They are your arguments. I'm not surprised you don't know the difference.Well, I gave you 9 pages of the evidence that the last two shots were closer together than the first two. I am not going to do that every time I mention it. I am just going to refer to the body of evidence bearing this out. Do you not agree that this large body of evidence set out in those 9 pages is evidence of the 1......2.
Are you arguing for a first shot at Z190? How do you explain why JFK didn't raise his hands to in front of his throat until almost two second later? taking two seconds before taking a breath.What is the normal reaction to being shot through the neck?
He is not waving after z193. The change begins after z193. He turns forward, brings his hand down and eventually his arm. By z222 both hands are up in front of him and are cupped or clenched. That is about 1.5 seconds and we really don't know when those hands took that position because he was behind the sign before then..
Instead we see him calmly waving to the few remaining spectators on Elm St. until just before he goes behind the sign.
He had just started to lower his right hand and was still lowering it at Z225. It was the next frame that JFK is seen reacting to the bullet that had passed through him and Connally a few frames earlier. That's the very same frame Connally reacted by flipping his injured right arm upward.So his previous actions could not be a reaction to the shot through his neck?
If you asked 50 witnesses in DP what happened, you'd probably get 50 different versions.They asked more than 50 witnesses what happened and the thrust of what they said happened is similar. But you do have to read what they said.
If it went a few inches to the left of JBC's midline, why isn't there a wound on the left side of JBC's back?Maybe because his back/shoulders were turned sharply right. Maybe he was not as far left as you suggest. Itek said 4-8 inches. If he was 4 inches inside and leaning forward a bit, it could have passed 4-5 inches or so from his spine.
Connally says he was hit in Frame: Z-234
Frame from JFK the movie:
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/Gallery/Zapruder%20Gallery/124_small.jpg)
Well, I gave you 9 pages of the evidence that the last two shots were closer together than the first two. I am not going to do that every time I mention it. I am just going to refer to the body of evidence bearing this out. Do you not agree that this large body of evidence set out in those 9 pages is evidence of the 1......2.You gave us 9 pages of witnesses recollections which is the most unreliable source of evidence we have and your arguments which are not evidence at all.
..3 shot pattern? Ditto for the 20+ witnesses that said JFN reacted to the first shot and the other 7 bodies of evidence.
What is the normal reaction to being shot through the neck?\
The change starts at z193-194. By z222 he has moved left and his hands are clenched in front of him.
It may be that he did not immediately know that he had been shot through the neck. It may be that he did not realize how serious things were until he tried to take a breath and realized he couldn't breathe. A person takes a breath about every 4 seconds so maybe his dramatic reaction at z226 is when he took that next breath. (He was also wearing a complete upper body corset so when he moves his entire torso moves).The more you try to save this turkey of a scenario you are presenting, the sillier you sound.
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z200.jpg
He is not waving after z193. The change begins after z193.
Pure BS. JFK is not even visible at Z222. His right hand becomes visible at Z224 and when we compare that to Z225 when his face reappears. his hand was still moving downward at Z225. it was at frame Z226 that his arms start to move dramatically upward.
He turns forward, brings his hand down and eventually his arm. By z222 both hands are up in front of him and are cupped or clenched. That is about 1.5 seconds and we really don't know when those hands took that position because he was behind the sign before then..
So his previous actions could not be a reaction to the shot through his neck?So says Dr. Andrew Mason.
They asked more than 50 witnessesOh, brother. More cherry picked witnesses. I'll gladly take the Z-film over all 50 of those witnesses. I would say the same if it was 500 or 5000.
No I don't because we have the Z-film and that tells me exactly what happened and it trumps the recollections of every witness in DP.
what happened and the thrust of what they said happened is similar. But you do have to read what they said.
Maybe because his back/shoulders were turned sharply right. Maybe he was not as far left as you suggest. Itek said 4-8 inches. If he was 4 inches inside and leaning forward a bit, it could have passed 4-5 inches or so from his spine.4-5 inches from his spine would still result in a wound to his back. The fact the entry wound was near his right armpit indicates the bullet passed farther to the right than your silly figuring tells you.
Thumb1:Are you suggesting the reaction beginning at z226 could not possibly be a reaction to being unable to breathe?
"Yes, in my opinion, the HSCA was most certainly incorrect in its assessment that JFK was showing signs of being struck by a bullet as early as Zapruder frame 190. And I think the proof that the HSCA was dead wrong about that timing issue can be found later in that same Zapruder Film, in frames 224 thru 226. Because if Kennedy was hit as early as Z190, then there's no way we'd be seeing JFK doing what he's doing with the hands as late as Z226. That jerking upward of his hands would certainly have occurred well prior to Z226 if he had been hit as early as Z190." -- DVP; May 5, 2024
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/30407-favorite-author-jim-dieugenio-favorite-researcher-pat-speer/page/3/#findComment-535251
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/Gallery/Zapruder%20Gallery/l2_small.jpg)
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/Gallery/Zapruder%20Gallery/l3_small.jpg)
You gave us 9 pages of witnesses recollections which is the most unreliable source of evidence we have and your arguments which are not evidence at all.I see you didn’t read those 9 pages. If you had you would realize how consistently similar the witnesses are and realize how improbable it is that you could get a distribution of witness evidence that like this;
Are we still talking about JFK? He is not even visible at Z222. On what basis do you say he has moved left? Your imagination?I should have said z224 when we first see his hands and left shoulder. We can see his hands and body in z225 and we can see that the hands remain in the same position when we see that he is no longer up against the right side of the car and is obviously showing signs of reacting to his neck wound. He remains in that position when he brings his hands to his face. Here is the whole sequence:
The more you try to save this turkey of a scenario you are presenting, the sillier you sound.https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z200.jpgOk. We know you disagree with the HSCA photographic panel that JFK was showing a reaction to a severe external stimulus by z207 from a shot at z190. I am simply pointing out that the change begins at z193. Here is the entire sequence:
Open your eyes!!! He most certainly is calmly waving to the spectators on Elm as we can see the white cuff of his right hand up in the air and his head is turned toward the spectators. I could have picked just above any from Z193-205 that shows the same thing.
4-5 inches from his spine would still result in a wound to his back. The fact the entry wound was near his right armpit indicates the bullet passed farther to the right than your silly figuring tells you.Not with JBC turned sharply right:
I see you didn’t read those 9 pages. If you had you would realize how consistently similar the witnesses are and realize how improbable it is that you could get a distribution of witness evidence that like this;
(https://i.postimg.cc/6qpJx35q/Statistical-corroboration-pattern-shots.jpg)
where the vast majority were all wrong, yet the same witnesses provided this distribution of the number of shots and were right:
(https://i.postimg.cc/d3psZ1yH/Statistical-corroboration-no-shots.jpg)I should have said z224 when we first see his hands and left shoulder. We can see his hands and body in z225 and we can see that the hands remain in the same position when we see that he is no longer up against the right side of the car and is obviously showing signs of reacting to his neck wound. He remains in that position when he brings his hands to his face. Here is the whole sequence:
(https://i.postimg.cc/MKjR4nSL/z222-to-z236-JBC.gif)
Ok. We know you disagree with the HSCA photographic panel that JFK was showing a reaction to a severe external stimulus by z207 from a shot at z190. I am simply pointing out that the change begins at z193. Here is the entire sequence:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z5NtDybb/JFK-Jackie-turns-z187-to-z207.gif) Not with JBC turned sharply right:
(https://i.postimg.cc/g0cYmfG8/AM-model3D-z195.jpg)
Finally, all I am saying is that one does not have to reject large bodies of witness evidence to reach the conclusion that all shots were fired from the SN. The SBT is not only inconsistent with large bodies of evidence, it is not required to support the conclusion that Oswald fired all three shots. The rest of the evidence shows that.
I see you didn’t read those 9 pages. If you had you would realize how consistently similar the witnesses are and realize how improbable it is that you could get a distribution of witness evidence that like this;
(https://i.postimg.cc/6qpJx35q/Statistical-corroboration-pattern-shots.jpg)
where the vast majority were all wrong, yet the same witnesses provided this distribution of the number of shots and were right:
(https://i.postimg.cc/d3psZ1yH/Statistical-corroboration-no-shots.jpg)I should have said z224 when we first see his hands and left shoulder. We can see his hands and body in z225 and we can see that the hands remain in the same position when we see that he is no longer up against the right side of the car and is obviously showing signs of reacting to his neck wound. He remains in that position when he brings his hands to his face. Here is the whole sequence:
(https://i.postimg.cc/MKjR4nSL/z222-to-z236-JBC.gif)
Ok. We know you disagree with the HSCA photographic panel that JFK was showing a reaction to a severe external stimulus by z207 from a shot at z190. I am simply pointing out that the change begins at z193. Here is the entire sequence:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z5NtDybb/JFK-Jackie-turns-z187-to-z207.gif) Not with JBC turned sharply right:
(https://i.postimg.cc/g0cYmfG8/AM-model3D-z195.jpg)
Finally, all I am saying is that one does not have to reject large bodies of witness evidence to reach the conclusion that all shots were fired from the SN. The SBT is not only inconsistent with large bodies of evidence, it is not required to support the conclusion that Oswald fired all three shots. The rest of the evidence shows that.
I don't care how consistent your chosen witnesses are with each other, they aren't consistent with what the Z-film shows which invalidates them. I will never understand your obsession with relying on witnesses when we have so much more reliable forms of evidence to tell us what happened.You are relying entirely on JBC saying he turned to his right after the first shot and you are relying entirely on you thinking that happened at z164-170. So you are relying on only one witness and you are also ignoring the possibility that his turn to look at JFK occurred after z230.
The sequence you posted shows that from Z189 until JFK goes behind the sign, the only thing he was doing was slowly and calmly lowering his right hand after waving to the few remaining spectators on that section of Elm St.That is all he does. You are right. He stops waving at z193. He then turns forward and lowers his hand. That is what witnesses said he did in response to the first shot. See Mary Woodward:
It think it is hilarious that after telling us JBC only rotate his shoulders at most 30 degrees to the right you show a drawing that shows his shoulders turned about 75-80 degrees in order to avoid being hit by the bullet exiting JFK's throat. You also show him leaning way over to the side of the car. When you have to resort to such extreme exaggerations to make your theory work, doesn't that cause you to question the validity of your theory?I said that at z224 JBC's shoulders were rotated only 30 degrees at most:
One should reject any large body of witnesses who give accounts that conflict with the Z-fillm.Maybe you should study their evidence first. It is much more likely that the large proportion of witnesses got it right if it was a simple observation of a detail reported by most witnesses.
I agree with the CTs on one point. Without the SBT, there had to be two shooters and a conspiracy. Fortunately we have the Z-film and other evidence that tells use positively the SBT is valid. I would go so far as to agree with Dale Myers when he said it isn't a single bullet theory, it is a single bullet fact.The real reason for the SBT is the assumption that all of JBC's wounds occurred on the same shot. If that was the case, then there was no where for the shot through JFK to go other than to strike JBC and if he was struck only once, the SBT would have to be correct. I am suggesting that the SBT is wrong because so much evidence conflicts with it. And I suggest the reason it is wrong is that the assumption that JBC was struck by only one bullet is wrong.
You are relying entirely on JBC saying he turned to his right after the first shot and you are relying entirely on you thinking that happened at z164-170. So you are relying on only one witness and you are also ignoring the possibility that his turn to look at JFK occurred after z230.Wrong. I am relying on two witnesses. JBC and the Z-film and the latter corroborates the former. We see JBC doing what he said he did upon hearing the first shot and he turns in the way we would expect him to turn after hearing a shot that came from above, behind, and to his right.
I am suggesting that one can rely on a large number of witnesses who said the same thing independently.
In fact, there are at least 22 witnesses who said JFK reacted to the first shot and not a single witness said he smiled and waved after the first shot.I don't give a rip that not a single witness said JFK smiled and waved to them. I can see JFK waving at them. We can't tell from the Z-film if he was smiling but it seems likely he would have.
That is 22:0.
Why would we assume something like that?
If they were assumed to be no more than 50% reliable, the probability that all 22 would get it wrong is 1/2^22= 1 in 4 million.
If they were 95% accurate as the studies on witness recollection show,Pure BS. What studies show that?
the probability that they would all be wrong is on the order of 1 in 1000 trillion.What is the probability that all the witnesses who said the shots came from the GK were wrong?
But you are entitled to stick to your interpretation of the zfilm. I am just astonished that it would persuade anyone to conclude that 80%-100% of the witnesses as to three different facts (shot pattern, JFK hit by first shot, Location of JFK at time of first shot) were all wrong in the same way.I'm astonished that you think that is a more reliable indicator than the Z-film. I will concede that the Z-film can't tell us for sure when the first shot was fired and it is theoretically possible the first shot was fired before Zapruder resumed filming which would make the second and third shots closer together, but I find more probably there was roughly 3.75 seconds between the first and second shots and just under 5 seconds between the 2nd and 3rd because I believe the first shot was fired at or about Z151.
That is all he does. You are right. He stops waving at z193. He then turns forward and lowers his hand. That is what witnesses said he did in response to the first shot.And you continue to put absolute faith in fallible witnesses. The one reliable witness doesn't show JFK reacting until after he reappeared from behind the sign. It's possible he began reacting a few frames earlier when we can't see him but that's not something I will assume.
See Mary Woodward:
(https://i.postimg.cc/fb0QLB3t/image.png)I said that at z224 JBC's shoulders were rotated only 30 degrees at most:
(https://i.postimg.cc/q7MFWQrt/zf085.jpg)
For a shot at z193 JBC was turned far to the right, close to 2:30/3 o'clock (75-90 degrees):
(https://i.postimg.cc/prNsG235/shoulder-separation-JFK-JBC-z193.jpg)
Maybe you should study their evidence first. It is much more likely that the large proportion of witnesses got it right if it was a simple observation of a detail reported by most witnesses.
And you think your little experiment is equivalent to seeing the POTUS shot dead in front of you.
I once did a presentation on fact finding (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZuZkwUBJQJjaCbsWMDAGqz7J9nQgrHeu/view?usp=drive_link) to a professional group using Powerpoint. Near the beginning of the presentation a playing card for exactly one second and made no comment. At the end of the presentation, I asked the audience if they noticed a playing card and, if so, to write down on a slip what the card was. About 70% said Four of Spades and 30% chose other cards. One person had not noticed the card because they were not looking at the screen for that one second. I asked him to decide what the card was from the evidence provided on the slips. He said "Four of spades" and he was absolutely right. Witnesses are reliable. Not all and not always. But large numbers of witnesses that agree are quite reliable.
The real reason for the SBT is the assumption that all of JBC's wounds occurred on the same shot.It is not an assumption. It is a logical conclusion based on reliable evidence. Something your beliefs are lacking.
If that was the case, then there was no where for the shot through JFK to go other than to strike JBC and if he was struck only once, the SBT would have to be correct. I am suggesting that the SBT is wrong because so much evidence conflicts with it. And I suggest the reason it is wrong is that the assumption that JBC was struck by only one bullet is wrong.
DVP has argued that at Z225 JFK and JBC both show other signs of being struck and he might be right about that. He bases that on JFK's facial expression at Z225. Given the low resolution of the Z-film and we can't compare JFK's facial expression to Z224, I don't think that is conclusive. There is no question that JBC's right shoulder dips dramatically at Z225 but I simply can't say whether that is a reflexive response or it is being moved by the force of the bullet. Either seems possible to me.
It's not just Connally's right shoulder that is moving around between Z224 and 225, it's both shoulders that are (IMO) unquestionably flinching. And this flinching is occurring in the exact same frame (Z225) in which Connally's facial expression changes and his mouth opens. Also take note of Connally's necktie curling up, which was being caused no doubt by the sudden flinching of the shoulders, forcing the tie to move. What we're seeing here are the immediate involuntary reflex actions being exhibited by Governor Connally after being struck by a bullet:The movement couldn’t possibly be preparing to turn around because:
The movement couldn’t possibly be preparing to turn around because:
1. JBC had just heard a rifle shot.
2. He feared an assassination of the President was underway.
3. He wanted to turn around to look behind him to see JFK.
You, therefore, think that Connally is exhibiting classic signs of sudden distress (flinching, suddenly opening his mouth, and jerking an arm up then down) merely because he was "preparing to turn around". Oh brother!
Looks like Andrew is in just about as much SBT Denial as Mr. James R. Gordon of The Education Forum. Mr. Gordon, btw, totally denied the Connally "hat flip" altogether. He thought it never occurred:
"These “jerky” and “startled” reactions that you talk about only occur between Z 226 and Z 228. And these are blurred frames. These reactions have nothing to do with John Connally, they are a consequence of Zapruder moving his camera." -- James Gordon; 2015
How's that for a severe case of Denial?
CE399 was the first bullet that struck JFK when he was between the lamp post and Thornton sign. I put it at or just before z193, after which JFK is seen to turn forward. This bullet passed through JFK’s neck without encountering anything capable of changing its direction. Where it went after that is a matter of placing both men in positions seen in the zfilm at z190-193 and seeing where a straight line points. It could not have passed to the far right side of Connnally at that point. So the only possibility would seem to be that it caused a wound to JBC on his left side.
It was on a downward slope at z190:
(https://i.postimg.cc/0y886f8m/croft-lined.jpg)
It doesn’t look like it would have struck the dashboard.
At z285 Connally is already falling back and Greer is turned around, which he said he did at the time of the second shot. I suggest the shot was at z271-272. His forward motion/recoil begins at z271-272. The hair on JFK’s right side flies up at z273-276 (Hickey observed this on the second shot).
The thigh wound did not occur on the second shot. JBC never felt the thigh wound.
Ok so you propose a Z190-193(approx ) shot hit JFK in the back and exited his throat and then bypassed JCs back entirely and the bullet came to rest in JCs left thigh yes?CE399 definitely caused the thigh wound but there is not enough evidence to determine where it ended up. While some of the medical evidence suggests it did not penetrate far, that was not what Dr. Shires said. He operated on the wound and removed damaged tissue down to the femur. He also said that the xrays of JBC’s left thigh showed a small lead fragment embedded in the femur. The fragment is visible in the xray front and side views.
A. How do you account for the thigh wound being shallow if the momentum of the CE 399 bullet passing thru JFKs back and throat was not reduced by very much, thus probably still traveling at 1500 ft/ sec when it would have entered the thigh of JC?I suggest that the bullet after exiting JFK’s neck, striking the tie, tumbling, striking the thigh butt-first and leaving lead from its base embedded in the femur and a wound that damaged tissue down to the femur did not make a shallow wound.
Your drawing to demonstrate how you think JCs body position was at Z190-193 looks like an extremely difficult twisted torso position that one has wonder if an older man like JC would even have been able to twist his upper body around that much while still leaving his left leg hanging to the left of his lower buttocks.Connally was a healthy 46 year old. I don’t know of any evidence to suggest that he couldn’t do what he is seen doing in the zfilm at z193. He is turned around much more than that by z255.
D.Can you prove from Z frames Z190-Z193 that JCs shoulder line is rotated to his right at greater than a 45% angle as your drawing appears to be showing?Connally is turned so his chest is facing to the left of Zapruder. Zapruder was 31 degrees to the car direction at z193. It looks to me like JBC’s shoulders are turned to about a 2 o’clock position relative to the car. What do you say?
E. Can you demonstrate how JFK and JCs bodys were positioned in Z frames Z270-75 so that the 2nd bullet passed by JFKs body completely yet hit JC as he leaned over and the bullet struck JCs wrist bone entering backwards and where that bullet went after exiting his wrist?JFK is leaning forward and to the left after the neck shot. Dave Powers sitting directly behind JFK said that JFK moved far left after first shot. He said that left JBC visible until the second shot when he disappeared. There is no question that a bullet passing just to the right of JFK could have struck JBC.
I looked at the shot jiggles at various point in the Zapruder Film and found that up to and including the headshot, Zapruder had 3 vertical jumps. And working backwards from the obvious headshot which confirmed the vertical jiggle a few frames later, next we have the SBF jiggle happening a few frames after Kennedy and Connally simultaneously react and then we come to the first jiggle which can be confirmed by Rosemary Willis hearing a gunshot and slowing down, and we also have the testimony from Connally that states he heard a gunshot and turned to look over his right shoulder. We can also see Kennedy's quick head snap to the right.
Zapruder also has some horizontal panning corrections which result in what appear to be horizontal jiggles but by studying the frames after the headshot and the SBF, we know how Zapruder reacted to the sounds of gunshots.
(https://i.postimg.cc/rmHVc31F/Zapuder-Shot-Reaction1.gif)
(https://www.washingtondecoded.com/.a/6a00d834523b6869e2019b02be18c8970b-800wi)
(https://i.postimg.cc/P5ZqB6hN/connallyturn.gif)
JohnM
CE399 definitely caused the thigh wound but there is not enough evidence to determine where it ended up. While some of the medical evidence suggests it did not penetrate far, that was not what Dr. Shires said. He operated on the wound and removed damaged tissue down to the femur. He also said that the xrays of JBC’s left thigh showed a small lead fragment embedded in the femur. The fragment is visible in the xray front and side views.
Dr. Gregory observed the thigh wound and said it was a punctate wound that looked like it was made by the butt end of an intact missile. That is quite different than the description he provided of the missile that struck the radius which Gregory described as an irregularly shaped missile.
So, it may be that CE399 stayed in the wound. Or, because it was a very oblique strike by a tumbling bullet, likely rapidly tumbling, it may have tumbled out of the wound and struck something at low speed and bounced back onto JBC. There is also the possibility that it bounced back onto the back seat. That is based the recent (but completely uncorroborated) statement by SA Landis that he picked up a whole bullet from the back seat and later placed it on JFK’s stretcher.
I suggest that the bullet after exiting JFK’s neck, striking the tie, tumbling, striking the thigh butt-first and leaving lead from its base embedded in the femur and a wound that damaged tissue down to the femur did not make a shallow wound.
Connally was a healthy 46 year old. I don’t know of any evidence to suggest that he couldn’t do what he is seen doing in the zfilm at z193. He is turned around much more than that by z255.
Connally is turned so his chest is facing to the left of Zapruder. Zapruder was 31 degrees to the car direction at z193. It looks to me like JBC’s shoulders are turned to about a 2 o’clock position relative to the car. What do you say?Robin Unger's enhanced Z193 frame shows JBC's shoulders weren't turned anywhere close to what they are in your silly drawing which further invalidates your magic bullet theory
JFK is leaning forward and to the left after the neck shot. Dave Powers sitting directly behind JFK said that JFK moved far left after first shot. He said that left JBC visible until the second shot when he disappeared. There is no question that a bullet passing just to the right of JFK could have struck JBC.
As far as the wrist wound is concerned, his right arm is pronated do that the back of his forearm is facing the chest right where the bullet exited. The damage done to the wrist indicates that the bullet deflected off the radius leaving a very long and irregular hole in the french cuff. There is also evidence it fragmented. Greer said he sensed a concussion on the second shot as if it hit something in the car. There was damage to the top of the windshield frame. Tague said he was hit on the second shot.
Pure nonsense. CE399 is that bullet that caused the thigh wound but only after passing through JFK's torso AND JBC's torso AND shattering his rib AND shattering his wrist. Had it gone directly from JFK's throat to JBC's thigh it would have done one of two things. If it hit his femur, it would have shattered it.To my knowledge no expert has even considered a scenario in which the bullet through JFK then struck just the thigh. The trajectory was along the femur so it struck at a shallow angle to the femur bone. The femur is the strongest bone in the body so I don’t know on what basis one could say that a partially spent bullet, tumbling end over end then striking the thigh butt first on a shallow angle striking the femur and making a dent in the base on one side would result in a shattering of the femur.
Gregory should have stayed in his lane. He was neither a ballistics expert nor a forensic medical examiner.I guess no one could look at this and say that the bullet that made it was irregularly shaped:
The second shot hit a lot of somethings in the car like JFK's back, his throat, his necktie, JBC's back, his rib, his wrist, and his thigh. The damage to the windshield was caused by a fragment from the head shot. How does a bullet go from JBCs wrist through the car seat in front of him, through Kellerman in order to hit the windshield.The better question might be: how does a bullet strike the back of the radius with enough force to break pieces of the radius (but not put a hole through the radius) and not deflect away from the point of contact?
The questions Zeon and I have presented you with are questions you should have been asking yourself about your silly theory which I think I first saw about 18 years ago on McAdams' forum. If you had, you would have realized it doesn't hold water and you would have abandoned it. Instead you try to bend and twist the evidence to make it work. By trying to drive this square peg into a round hole, you show you are not interested in knowing the truth. You are a person who wants your theory to be true.My only contention is that the large bodies of mutually consistent witness evidence all fits together and cannot be rejected. I wouldn’t call that a theory. It is what the witnesses independently recalled happened: JFK was struck by the first shot; the first shot was after z186: the last two shots were closer together and in fairly rapid succession. There is no conflict between that evidence and one person firing all shots with Oswald’s rifle. There is no conflict between that evidence and the zfilm. There is no conflict between that evidence and the physical evidence
To my knowledge no expert has even considered a scenario in which the bullet through JFK then struck just the thigh.
CE399 showed how that happened.
The trajectory was along the femur so it struck at a shallow angle to the femur bone. The femur is the strongest bone in the body so I don’t know on what basis one could say that a partially spent bullet, tumbling end over end then striking the thigh butt first on a shallow angle striking the femur and making a dent in the base on one side would result in a shattering of the femur.
The better question might be: how does a bullet strike the back of the radius with enough force to break pieces of the radius (but not put a hole through the radius) and not deflect away from the point of contact?
The evidence is that Greer sensed an impact in the car on the second shot and Tague was struck on the second shot.
My only contention is that the large bodies of mutually consistent witness evidence all fits together and cannot be rejected. I wouldn’t call that a theory. It is what the witnesses independently recalled happened: JFK was struck by the first shot; the first shot was after z186: the last two shots were closer together and in fairly rapid succession. There is no conflict between that evidence and one person firing all shots with Oswald’s rifle. There is no conflict between that evidence and the zfilm. There is no conflict between that evidence and the physical evidence
That alone should tell you somethingCE399 showed how that happened.Yes. It tells me that everyone assumed that JBC was hit by only one bullet.
Your fixation on eyewitnesses while ignoring the hard evidence continues to prevent you from knowing the truth of the assassination.Statistical corroboration of witnesses is used by the CIA, Mossad, MI5 and every other successful intelligence agency all the time. They gather information from various sources and determine facts. Although each piece is individually is not reliable, when the pieces all fit together they are extremely reliable. That is all I am doing.
There is nothing about your theory that is the least bit compatible with the Z-film. Robin Unger's enhanced Z193 frame shows just how ridiculous your drawing is of how JBC would have to be turned for your scenario to hold water.? At z193, JBC's shoulders are turned right so that his chest is facing left the sightline from Zapruder, which is 30 degrees. For that to be 60 degrees too far right, you must think JBC is facing to the left of forward in z193.
I would estimate there is at least a 60 degree difference in the turn of JBC's shoulder between the Z-frame and your drawing. It is preposterous.
Yes. It tells me that everyone assumed that JBC was hit by only one bullet.That's what the evidence indicated. You need imagination to conclude he got hit by second bullet. To believe your nonsense, we would have to believe that JBC got hit by the first shot and didn't even feel it. He had a clear memory of hearing that first shot and no memory of a wound to his thigh.
Statistical corroboration of witnesses is used by the CIA, Mossad, MI5 and every other successful intelligence agency all the time. They gather information from various sources and determine facts. Although each piece is individually is not reliable, when the pieces all fit together they are extremely reliable. That is all I am doing.
JBC isn't even close to being turned as far right as your drawing depicts and even then your drawing has his thigh flared in an unnatural position to the left while you have his body over rotated to the right. This is what I mean by a stretch. It's downright goofy.
If the 9 pages of witness recollections I provided, which fit with the 20+ witness recollections that JFK reacted to the first shot in ways not seen until after z193, which fit together with the motorcade witnesses, Betzner, Phil Willis, Linda Willis, Altgens, Hickey, Greer, and the witnesses along Elm who stated where JFK was in relation to where they were standing at the time of the first shot, were independent, the only rational conclusion is that the last two shots were close together, JFK reacted to the first shot and the first shot was after z186. In fact the way the three bodies fit together with the zfilm (there is a five second time difference between JFK showing signs of being hit so that must be the first shot according to the shot spacing witnesses. And that fits all the 20+ who said that JFK reacted that way to the first shot. And that fits with where the witnesses in the motorcade, Elm St. witnesses, photographers etc put the first shot: i.e. after z186) tells you that the witnesses are independent.
? At z193, JBC's shoulders are turned right so that his chest is facing left the sightline from Zapruder, which is 30 degrees. For that to be 60 degrees too far right, you must think JBC is facing to the left of forward in z193.
(https://i.postimg.cc/kg2zZGGV/image.png)
That's what the evidence indicated. You need imagination to conclude he got hit by second bullet. To believe your nonsense, we would have to believe that JBC got hit by the first shot and didn't even feel it. He had a clear memory of hearing that first shot and no memory of a wound to his thigh.Are you saying that bullets are always felt?
Your theory doesn't fit any of the hard evidence. Every explanation you give for that is a stretch.JBC isn't even close to being turned as far right as your drawing depicts and even then your drawing has his thigh flared in an unnatural position to the left while you have his body over rotated to the right. This is what I mean by a stretch. It's downright goofy.I have him turned about 2 o'clock from car-forward. Here is what it would look like with people:
Are you saying that bullets are always felt?Probably 99.99% of the time. If the victim is experiencing sensory overload, such as JBC after a bullet tore through his lung, he didn't feel the strike on his wrist and thigh but if a person is conscious and not otherwise in distress. they are going to feel it.
I have him turned about 2 o'clock from car-forward. Here is what it would look like with people:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Sx71ZqxW/JBC-z200-rear1-reenactment.jpg)
JBC was sitting on a seat mounted on the floor. Try that and see where your knees naturally go.
Probably 99.99% of the time. If the victim is experiencing sensory overload, such as JBC after a bullet tore through his lung, he didn't feel the strike on his wrist and thigh but if a person is conscious and not otherwise in distress. they are going to feel it.That is a popular view. But it is not accurate. Rapid injuries are often not felt unless they cause loss of function or make a forceful impact on bone. A flesh wound in an extremity is often not felt immediately. Here is a woman who was shot and never felt the bullet pass through her chest:
You can spin this all you want. It's not going to help. At Z193, JBC is nowhere near the position your drawing depicts him and he would have to be turned the way your drawing shows for the bullet to go from JFK's throat into JBC's thigh. It didn't happen the way you claim because it couldn't have happened the way you claim. It's absurd.So you don't like my drawing. How about the picture showing the path from a position 24 inches behind and to the right of the midline of the JBC stand-in and turned not even as far as JBC in z193?
| (https://i.postimg.cc/Z5L7bYxw/JBC-z200-side-reenactmen-croppedt.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/Sx71ZqxW/JBC-z200-rear1-reenactment.jpg) |
Where did JC hold his hat upside with his right hand if JC had his left hand gripping his lower right ankle as the green shirt guy in the photo?I am not suggesting that JBC held his ankle. He had the side of the door to lean his leg against. My stand-in found he couldn’t hold a turn to the right without having something to hold his right leg in. The natural position in the floor mounted seat - at least for a male - is not to have the legs together. We found that, by turning right and holding the right leg the left leg was in that position naturally.
Maybe have the green shirt guy hold a Stetson hat upside down and try some other position and post that or make another drawing for those of us trying to imagine it in our minds.The position of the hat has nothing to do with a shot going to the left side.
And if possible show the position that JC s body was in during the Z frames from 270-275 and make a diagram of the trajectory of this 2nd shot because I’m having a problem envisioning how the bullet traversed thru JCs back, exited his chest , and was aligned to go thru JCs right wrist without going thru his hat (since it’s still being held upside down).The trajectory from the SN through JBC is not a straight line at z271-272. For a bullet from the SN at z271, the path from the entry wound location to the exit wound location requires a bit of a deflection to the right
And after that 270ish bullet exited JCs wrist bone where did THAT bullet go?According to the evidence of Tague it fragmented and at least one of the fragments went up over the windshield and struck the curb near him and deflected up to strike his cheek. Other fragments struck the windshield and frame. Greer said he sensed a concussion effect on the second shot as if something impacted in the car. He did not notice such an effect on the other two shots.
I’d need to see an experiment conducted with some more replica human models before I would believe that a Z193 1st shot CE 399 bullet bypassing the mass of JCs body , hence traveling probably still at 1500ft/sec (or even greater) ) would have come to a complete stop in JCs left thigh.I agree. But I am not suggesting that it came to a stop in his thigh.
And what about the % of missing metal from the nose of CE 399? Theres no evidence ( as far as WC that is) of any flakes of metal found in JCs thigh muscle or thigh bone, so…There was no metal missing from the nose of CE399. There was a small piece of lead in his thigh but that would have been from the butt end.
Perhaps if the Z 193 1st shot shot was a tangential strike to the flesh part of JCs inner left thigh and then continued on, the bullet could have gone thru the front seat and into the front floorboard. If that’s the case then that might explain missing % of metal from the nose of CE 399.Again, there was no metal missing from the nose of CE399.
EXCEPT.. how can that be possible if the WC conclusion is correct that the missing % of metal from the nose of CE 399 was due to having passed thru JCs wrist bone.?
That is a popular view. But it is not accurate. Rapid injuries are often not felt unless they cause loss of function or make a forceful impact on bone. A flesh wound in an extremity is often not felt immediately. Here is a woman who was shot and never felt the bullet pass through her chest:Your drawing looks nothing like the photo. The guy in the green shirt has his left shoulder farther back and farther to the left. Your drawing shows JBC's shoulder moved way forward and in front of the middle of the seat and even with that exaggerated turn, you create barely enough room for the bullet to pass his left side. If you your drawing showed JBC in the same position as the green shirt guy, the line to the thigh wound would have gone through JBC's left siide.
(https://i.postimg.cc/52qz4shk/Jennifer-Vaughan.jpg) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V94pR6vrFaL8P_1taiJq2V13XKw7VOxC/view?usp=sharing)
In this case, JBC never felt it.
So you don't like my drawing. How about the picture showing the path from a position 24 inches behind and to the right of the midline of the JBC stand-in and turned not even as far as JBC in z193?
| (https://i.postimg.cc/Z5L7bYxw/JBC-z200-side-reenactmen-croppedt.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/Sx71ZqxW/JBC-z200-rear1-reenactment.jpg) |
Here is Governor Connally at Z-272 still holding onto the Stetson after having been shot through the chest and the wrist.
Note that Connally has made a near 180-degree in his seat, despite having been shot through the chest according to the SBT.
Connally said he was checking up on JFK after hearing the first shot.
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZqXH27m0/Screen-Shot-2569-04-14-at-07-12-47.png)
| (https://i.postimg.cc/Z5L7bYxw/JBC-z200-side-reenactmen-croppedt.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/Sx71ZqxW/JBC-z200-rear1-reenactment.jpg) |
Here is Andrew Mason's drawing showing how he thinks the bullet exiting JFK's throat could have struck JBC in the thigh without first passing through his torso:I appreciate the fair critique of my Sketchup 3D skills. Jerry Organ does a much better job.
(https://i.postimg.cc/g0cYmfG8/AM-model3D-z195.jpg)
Here are some photos which he says simulate JBC's position at Z193:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z5L7bYxw/JBC-z200-side-reenactmen-croppedt.jpg) (https://i.postimg.cc/Sx71ZqxW/JBC-z200-rear1-reenactment.jpg)
Even the photo looks to me that JBC is turned farther to the right than we see in Z193 but let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say the photo acurately depicts JBC's position. The drawing shows an exaggerated turn to the right and even then shows there was barely enough room for the bullet to miss JBC's torso and still find his thigh. Note how dissimilar these two representations are. The drawing shows an extreme turn to the right. Note how much further forward JBC's left shoulder is in the drawing than in the photo. Note how much more it is turned to the right in the drawing than in the photo.
So even using his photo of JBC's simulated position, JBC's left shoulder is not turned anywhere near far enough to create an open path from JFK's throat to JBC's thigh. He has to exaggerate JBC's position at Z193 to even show a theoretical possibility of his SBT 2.0 scenario. This is why I said earlier it is impossible.
You made your reply before I added the actual Z193 frame to my original post but we now have that for comparison as well.
I appreciate the fair critique of my Sketchup 3D skills. Jerry Organ does a much better job.
But the position of the shoulder is really not that important. It is the position of the lower and middle back that matters because the bullet is travelling on a downward slope of 18 degrees relative to the car at that point and just passes over the back of the jump seat:
It only looks possible in your exaggerated drawing, not in the photo of JBC's simulated position and not in the actual Z-frame.
So it would have to pass by the middle/lower back, not the shoulder or upper back, in order to strike the thigh directly. But I do appreciate that you think the trajectory intersecting with the left side of JBC is possible.
It all depends on how much JBC is turned in z193. I suggest he is turned to past the sightline to Zapruder which is 30 degrees or a 1 o'clock position but it is difficult to be exact because of the poor resolution. It is at least a 1:30/45 degree turn.
I suggest you are seeing what you want to see. JBC's shoulder rotation in your photo looks about 30 degrees to me. Your drawing shows a turn that is well past 45 degrees. If the shoulders in the forward facing position are at the 9:00 position and the perpendicular position to that is 12:00, I would put JBC's rotation in the photo at 10:00 and 11:00 in your drawing. That's a 30 degree difference?? The angle of the sightline to Zapruder is a tad more than 30 degrees as I showed in my map of DP. Connally is turned well past that sightline so it is definitely more than 30 degrees.
?? The angle of the sightline to Zapruder is a tad more than 30 degrees as I showed in my map of DP. Connally is turned well past that sightline so it is definitely more than 30 degrees.
(https://i.postimg.cc/R0FQSs24/image.png)
If you think that is wrong, then you should do your own measurement on a scale drawing of DP. I used the drawing in the inside cover of Trask's book: Pictures of the Pain. It is also what I built my 3D sketchup model of DP on.
Okay I got confused about the “missing metal”from the nose of CE399 vs the “flakes” of metal that Dr. Gregory described. Some metal was removed from the nose of CE399 for testing after it was found.
Nevertheless , those “flakes” that Dr. Gregory removed came from JCs WRIST and are claimed to be from the CE 399 bullet. So my question still is how could Andrews proposed 1st shot at Z193 possibly CE 399 since it did NOT hit JCs wrist?
I have no problem with that drawing. I'll take it at face value. I disagree with your assessment of JBC's shoulder turn. If you are talking about the relationship of JBC's shoulders to the Zapruder sight line, I would say at most they are perpendicular. If anything, they look slightly less. His head is turned much more sharply to his right but certainly not his shoulders. Check the Z193 frame I added to my earlier post. I see more of JBC's jacket on his right side than on his left. That indicates to me his shoulder turn is short of perpendicular to the sight line. If he was turned beyond perpendicular, we would see more of his left side.Maybe we should have a poll taken to determine what others think on two points:
That JFK limo front seat is solid all the way across , no gap , so a Z193 bullet that’s not stopping in JCs thigh would continue on INTO the seat. So unless there’s some weird physics happening with springs in the seat it’s dubious if the bullet would deflect upward enough to strike the windshield or even if it could do so without hitting the dashboard 1st. And then, where does that bullet go?As I said, there is not enough information to do anything other than speculate.
I don’t see the Z193 bullet fragmenting into multiple pieces if it just went thru JFKs back and neck and only strikes into the inner left side of JCs thigh. Maybe it could have fragmented by striking springs in the seat but that’s just pure speculation and there’s no evidence of a hole in the front seat is there?The thigh bullet was definitely CE399.
As I said, there is not enough information to do anything other than speculate.
The panel in front of JBC has a metal panel and ashtray just above where JBC's knee may have been:
(https://i.postimg.cc/tTNntp8Y/Limo-CE874-cropped-measure.jpg)
so it may have struck that and bounced back onto his clothing without doing any visible damage.
The thigh bullet was definitely CE399.
Maybe we should have a poll taken to determine what others think on two points:
In z193:
(https://i.postimg.cc/DyddTS5P/image.png)
A. Is JBC's face turned relative to his chest or is it facing the same direction as his chest?
B. Is JBC's chest turned to JBC's right of the sightline from Zapruder, to the left of that sightline, or is his chest facing directly at Zapruder ?
I suggest that his face and chest are facing about the same direction or possibly a bit farther to JBC's right a few degrees. I suggest that his chest, therefore, is facing well to JBC's right because we can see the entire left side of JBC's face and none of his right side.
If you can do that then I could live with the shooter having shot thru some tree foliage at Z193 because he might have been using the scope if it were aligned and zeroed , thus have his LOS very narrowly focused around JFK and his peripheral vision limited such the tree foliage “snuck up” on him just as he fired the 1st shot.
The truth is not up for a vote. There is only one truth whether a majority believe it or not. If a poll could decide these questions, we might as well drop this discussion now because a majority of people believe JFK died as a result of a conspiracy and that would make us both wrong.You are right that it does not matter what people believe. But it does matter what people see. All I am asking is what they see.
I don't know what you are looking at. There is no question JBC's head is turned far more than his shoulders. His head/shoulder relation looks very similar to what we see in JFK whose head is turned sharply to his right while his shoulders are turned slightly left of Zapruder's sight line. We can see the left side of JBC's face and we'd even be able to see his ear if the overhead bar were not blocking the view. If his shoulders were turned that far, we'd be able to see the outside of his left arm. Instead we have a frontal view of his chest.If JBC's shoulders were not turned we would not see the right side of his shirt collar. A collar doesn't change with the neck. It follows the shoulders. We can't see the outside of his left arm because it is blocked by Kellerman (green lines):
I don't know why I didn't think of that before but of course Oswald's view of JFK would have been blocked by the tree from Z166 until Z210 which make highly unlikely Oswald would have even attempted a shot at Z193. Why would he do that when he would have a clear shot at JFK if he just waited one more second. JFK cleared the tree at Z210 which is why the WC concluded that is the earliest time he could have fired the single bullet. In reality, he squeezed the shot off about a half second after JFK came into the clear. He might have been tracking is target while JFK was passing under the tree, but it would have been very stupid to try to force the shot before he had a clear line of fire.The FBI re-enactment in May 1964 was with the Oak tree after spring growth and will full leaves. They also used the wrong car. Even then, it showed the whole back of the car to be visible at z210.
This same line of thinking casts aspersions on the HSCA conclusion that the single bullet was fired at Z189. I don't know what they were sniffing when they came up with that one. I'll bet they based that conclusion on the flawed acoustics evidence and not on the genuine Z-film.
The FBI re-enactment in May 1964 was with the Oak tree after spring growth and will full leaves. They also used the wrong car. Even then, it showed the whole back of the car to be visible at z210.
The Secret Service film 10 days after the assassination showed the tree closer to as it was on Nov. 22/63. It showed that JFK was quite visible at all times when passing under the tree and completely clear when he had just passed the lamp post and before he pass the Thornton sign which is between z190 and z200:
(https://i.postimg.cc/vBMdXbB2/JFK-clear-0.jpg)
JM-The shape of the wound was described as elliptical. An ellipse is a symmetrical shape that cannot be made by the asymmetrical shape of the side of the bullet. An ellipse can be made by a pristine bullet striking the back where the bullet direction is not perpendicular to the skin surface at the point of entry. The wound was noted by Dr. Shaw to have created a small tunnelling wound (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0080a.htm) which is also inconsistent with a tumbling bullet.
The bullet was not tumbling when it struck JBC's back.
The shape of the wound was described as elliptical. An ellipse is a symmetrical shape that cannot be made by the asymmetrical shape of the side of the bullet. An ellipse can be made by a pristine bullet striking the back where the bullet direction is not perpendicular to the skin surface at the point of entry. The wound was noted by Dr. Shaw to have created a small tunnelling wound (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0080a.htm) which is also inconsistent with a tumbling bullet.
JM-
The bullet was not tumbling when it struck JBC's back.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Gm5kJtR7/Posner-Single-Bullet.png)
JohnM
The NOVA program which somebody recently posted in another thread included an excellent segment showing what happens when a Carcano bullet exits a body. It does tumble and they proved that by firing the Carcano through ballistic gel and ballistic soap with a board in front that matched the distance from JFK to JBC. The bullets consistently tumbled and made an elongated entry through the board almost the exact length of the Carcano bullet.
The NOVA program which somebody recently posted in another thread included an excellent segment showing what happens when a Carcano bullet exits a body. It does tumble and they proved that by firing the Carcano through ballistic gel and ballistic soap with a board in front that matched the distance from JFK to JBC. The bullets consistently tumbled and made an elongated entry through the board almost the exact length of the Carcano bullet.But the wound on the skin Connally’s right armpit was elliptical, not bullet shaped. The bullet was a cylinder rounded at one end. And how did a bullet striking sideways make a small tunnelling wound?
But the wound [place missing word here] Connally’s right armpit was elliptical, not bullet shaped. The bullet was a cylinder rounded at one end. And how did a bullet striking sideways make a small tunnelling wound?
But the wound on the skin Connally’s right armpit was elliptical, not bullet shaped. The bullet was a cylinder rounded at one end. And how did a bullet striking sideways make a small tunnelling wound?
Choose one: "In" or "Near"(https://i.postimg.cc/YSszMwx4/IMG-2675.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/YSszMwx4/IMG-2675.jpg)
You don't "get" it."Near" not accurate and is vague. "In" is more correct but does not tell you a location because the armpit is a large area. I wanted to be precise so I provided Dr. Shaw's statement.
(https://i.postimg.cc/DZzNxWVX/Zapruder3.gif)
Excellent! Thanks Robin. Nothing like revisiting the Z film. Look at that pained expression on JC face when he turns around right just about 1/2 sec after Z224. He’s definitely been hit and is felling pain.
Question is if it’s a delayed pain from being hit in the thigh at Z193 or is it a more immediate pain in sync with JFK hit at Z224 and the bullet (CE399) having struck JC in the right side upper back. For Andrews Z193 shot BOTH JFK and JC must be having delayed pain reactions.
I still believe it’s more likely that both men are reacting immediately in sync to a shot at Z224 which went thru both men and the reason both men lurch forward , because of impact of the bullet into JFK at 2000ft/sec and then at 1500ft/sec into JC.
And there has already been a fairly convincing experiment that shows that the bullet impacting JC upper body at 1500ft/sec went thru it and was still traveling at 900 ft/ sec when it exited JCs chest and then went thru his wrist and into his left thigh.
To me the single best evidence that both men were hit by the same bullet is that both men suddenly and simultaneously flipped their arms upward at Z226 in an involuntary, reflexive response to the bullet passing through their torsos, a millisecond or two apart.
Excellent! Thanks Robin. Nothing like revisiting the Z film. Look at that pained expression on JC face when he turns around right just about 1/2 sec after Z224. He’s definitely been hit and is felling pain.Yet he said he did not feel pain until he got to Parkland and got out of the car. So the expression on his face is not pain. Perhaps it is fear - the fear, having just heard a rifle shot, that an assassination of the President was underway. If only we had evidence that this is what he did after JFK started reacting to the shot through his neck.....
Yet he said he did not feel pain until he got to Parkland and got out of the car. So the expression on his face is not pain. Perhaps it is fear - the fear, having just heard a rifle shot, that an assassination of the President was underway. If only we had evidence that this is what he did after JFK started reacting to the shot through his neck.....
Yet he said he did not feel pain until he got to Parkland and got out of the car. So the expression on his face is not pain. Perhaps it is fear - the fear, having just heard a rifle shot, that an assassination of the President was underway. If only we had evidence that this is what he did after JFK started reacting to the shot through his neck.....
(https://i.postimg.cc/xj6jRZ7R/Zapruder4.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/xj6jRZ7R/Zapruder4.gif)
Connally said he did not feel pain until he got to Parkland and got out of the car. So, the expression on his face is not pain. Perhaps it is fear -- the fear, having just heard a rifle shot, that an assassination of the President was underway.
LOL!
Nice try,
He said it felt as though he'd been hit in the back with a fist.
ME: Did Governor Connally say it felt as though he'd been hit in the back with a fist?
GROK: Yes, Governor John Connally did say exactly that.
In his own accounts of the November 22, 1963, assassination in Dallas (including his autobiography and interviews), he described the impact of the bullet that struck him as feeling like a powerful blow to the back, such as being hit with a fist. Key quotes include:
From his autobiography excerpt: “In the middle of my turn [back to his left to look over his left shoulder to see if JFK was okay after having tried to do so over his right shoulder as we can see in Z-167], I felt a thud, as if someone had pounded me on the back with a fist, a blow so hard I doubled over.” He noted it was not a sharp, searing pain but a heavy impact, after which he saw blood on his shirt and realized he’d been hit.
In a 1965 interview and other retellings, he referred to it as feeling “like a fist hitting my shoulder” or “back with a closed fist.”
This description is frequently cited in discussions of the Warren Commission’s single-bullet theory, as Connally initially thought the first shot (which hit President Kennedy) had missed everyone, and he didn’t immediately realize he’d been wounded until feeling that impact (widely interpreted as the second shot). The Zapruder film timing and his reactions have been debated, but his wording about the “fist” sensation is consistent across his testimony and recollections.
This comes directly from Connally’s own words, not secondhand reports.
LOL!Not only was it not a sharp searing pain he said there was no pain at all. Impact is not pain. Connally said he felt no pain until he reached Parkland. You really should read his testimony (4 H 145)
Nice try,
He said it felt as though he'd been hit in the back with a fist.
…In his own accounts of the November 22, 1963, assassination in Dallas (including his autobiography and interviews), he described the impact of the bullet that struck him as feeling like a powerful blow to the back, such as being hit with a fist.
Key quotes include:
From his autobiography excerpt: “In the middle of [sic; about 1/8 of] my turn [back to his left to look over his left shoulder to see if JFK was okay after having tried to do so over his right shoulder, as we can see him trying to do in Z-177], I felt a thud, as if someone had pounded me on the back with a fist, a blow so hard I doubled over.” He noted it was not a sharp, searing pain but a heavy impact, after which he saw blood on his shirt and realized he’d been hit.
This description is frequently cited in discussions of the Warren Commission’s single-bullet theory, as Connally initially thought the first shot (which hit President Kennedy) had missed everyone, and he didn’t immediately realize he’d been wounded until feeling that impact (widely interpreted as the second shot). The Zapruder film timing and his reactions have been debated, but his wording about the “fist” sensation is consistent across his testimony and recollections.I agree that he did not realize he was wounded and it wasn’t until the second shot impact that he realized he had been hit. But I didn’t think you agreed that he was wounded before the second shot.
This comes directly from Connally’s own words, not secondhand reports.Yes. That is why it is good to actually read the sources and not just rely on AI.
Not only was it not a sharp searing pain, he said there was no pain at all. Impact is not pain. Connally said he felt no pain until he reached Parkland. You really should read his testimony (4 H 145)
When he arrived at Parkland he tried get up and then experienced pain. It was excruciating pain and he collapsed.
That is why it is good to actually read the sources and not just rely on AI.
Nellie said he recoiled (4 H 147):
One might expect to see sudden fairly uniform movement of the body from such an impact - movement that is not associated with any muscle movement.
Where does that occur?
LOL!???. Did you press “Post” accidentally??
Do you think JFK or Jackie punched JBC in the back right when he heard a shot, as if to say, "How you doin', old boy?"
Not only was it not a sharp searing pain, Connally said there was no pain at all. Impact is not pain.
Or he was correct because the 80+ witnesses whose evidence is inconsistent with a missed shot were not hallucinating and the first shot struck JFK in the neck.
MY comment:
Connally was correct in saying that he felt the blow to his back “after I heard the first rifle shot,” because said missing-everything rifle shot had been fired about five seconds earlier at “Z-124,” i.e., at hypothetical Z-124, half-a second before Zapruder resumed filming (after a 17-second pause) at Z-133.
Or he was correct because the 80+ witnesses whose evidence is inconsistent with a missed shot were not hallucinating and the first shot struck JFK in the neck.
Or, maybe you're hallucinating, again.How can accepting what 80+ witnesses recalled be a hallucination?
Or Connally was correct because the 80+ witnesses whose evidence is inconsistent with a missed shot were not hallucinating and the first shot struck JFK in the neck.
How can accepting what 80+ witnesses recalled be a hallucination?
Or he was correct because the 80+ witnesses whose evidence is inconsistent with a missed shot were not hallucinating and the first shot struck JFK in the neck.
ME: Is it true that the statements of 80-plus witnesses to the JFK assassination are inconsistent with the idea the first shot missed everything?This is why you shouldn't rely on AI. You need to look at the evidence from the original sources.
GROK: No, that claim is not accurate or well-supported. It appears to be a misrepresentation or exaggeration often circulated in conspiracy-oriented discussions, but it does not align with the body of witness statements, physical evidence, or official investigations.
Last time it was 40 witnesses. Did 40 more come forward?I gave you 46 witnesses whose evidence was that there was only one shot before the midpoint between the three shots and the last two were in "rapid succession", "real close" or words to that effect. They are:
There was only one shot before the midpoint between the three shots.
Is English your second language?.
.
Sorry about that. I meant the midpoint between the first and last of the three.
You seem to be saying that since there were lots of witnesses who said there were three unevenly spaced shots and the second and third shots were closer together than the first and second ones, JFK must have been hit by the first shot because he started reacting before the "late" second shot had been fired.It is not just that they were closer. They were described as being in “rapid succession”, “not more than two seconds. It was - they were real rapid”, “real close”, “about one and one-half seconds after the second shot”, “just about as fast as you could expect a man to operate a bolt action rifle”. That doesn’t fit with 91 frames of the zfilm.
Is that what you're saying?
It is not just that they were closer. They were described as being in “rapid succession”, “not more than two seconds. It was - they were real rapid”, “real close”, “about one and one-half seconds after the second shot”, “just about as fast as you could expect a man to operate a bolt action rifle”. That doesn’t fit with 91 frames of the zfilm.
The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 9 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the spacing of the shots. For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the spacing? Then you have the witnesses saying there wasn't more than 2 seconds between the second and third shots. If those people are correct, there were two gunman. Oswald could not have accurately fired his rifle that rapidly.I might suggest that one of the flaws in your approach is that you would not raise those arguments but would readily accept the evidence of witnesses if it fit with the second shot SBT.
In stressful situations, events seem to speed up. After the first shot which missed, a lot of people weren't even aware there was an assassination attempt going on. JBC was one of the few exceptions. Once they saw, JFK's reaction to being hit by the second shot, suddenly the gravity of the situation would have become apparent to those people. It's not surprising that those people thought it SEEMED like the third shot came much more rapidly than it actually did. Things aren't always what they seem. People's ability to perceive and accurately remember an event like that is going to be compromised. That's why I have far more faith in one witness, Zapruder's camera, than all the other DP witnesses combined. That witness was not surprised by what happened. That witness was not experiencing stress. That witness viewed and recorded the event as calmly and accurately as it would a child's birthday party.
Keep putting total faith in your witnesses. It wii prevent you from ever learning the truth of the assassination.
Then you have the witnesses saying there wasn't more than 2 seconds between the second and third shots.The actual timing (z271-z313) is 2.3 seconds. Would you expect any witness to say they thought they were 2.3 seconds apart? In whole seconds, not more than two seconds means less than three.
I might suggest that one of the flaws in your approach is that you would not raise those arguments but would readily accept the evidence of witnesses if it fit with the second shot SBT.Not if their recollections conflicted with what the Z-film shows.
BINGO!!! No eye or ear witness account should be accepted as factual without corroboration. If a witness tells us something, we should immediately tell ourselves, "That might or might not be true". We should then compare what that witness tells us to the body of evidence to see if fits or not. If an eyewitness account can neither be corroborated nor refuted, we should neither assume it is correct nor incorrect. It could be either. When I read or hear an eyewitness account and there is no other evidence to compare it to, I would consider it a coin flip whether or not that witness is correct. If I ever serve on a jury again and the prosecution's case rests primarily on the account of an eyewitness and there was no corroborating evidence, I would vote to acquit because I would certainly have reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused.
The arguments could apply to all the facts observed by witnesses, including the number of shots, just like this :
The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 6 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the number of shots fired? For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the number of shots?
The actual timing (z271-z313) is 2.3 seconds. Would you expect any witness to say they thought they were 2.3 seconds apart? In whole seconds, not more than two seconds means less than three.
When I read or hear an eyewitness account and there is no other evidence to compare it to, I would consider it a coin flip whether or not that witness is correct.What if there was another independent witness who said the same thing? What if you flipped a coin for 21 witnesses who said that JFK reacted to the first shot and rejected them if it said tails? Would you get 21 straight tails? What if you did the same thing for the 63 witnesses who provided evidence of the relative shot spacing, would you get 53 or 57 tails?
If I ever serve on a jury again and the prosecution's case rests primarily on the account of an eyewitness and there was no corroborating evidence, I would vote to acquit because I would certainly have reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused.I want you on my next jury.
I'm saying no witness would have any idea what frame of the Z-film the second shot was fired at. Therefore any computation based on the elapsed time in the Z-film is meaningless in terms of corroborating the witnesses.Of course no one was counting in zframes! But it is easy to place their recollection of the time of the first shot in relation to the zfilm.
What if there was another independent witness who said the same thing? What if you flipped a coin for 21 witnesses who said that JFK reacted to the first shot and rejected them if it said tails? Would you get 21 straight tails? What if you did the same thing for the 63 witnesses who provided evidence of the relative shot spacing, would you get 53 or 57 tails?
I want you on my next jury.
Of course no one was counting in zframes! But it is easy to place their recollection of the time of the first shot in relation to the zfilm.
How do we know that? Because he said so? You're using Croft to corroborate himself.
For example, we know that Croft took his photo at z161 and that it was taken before the first shot.
And, as I said, the same factors apply to counting the shots. But you accept that evidence.
All of your selected witnesses were subject to the same challenges of witnessing a sudden, unexpected, and traumatic event which took place over the course of just 9 seconds. Then were asked to piece together what they saw, in what order they saw it, and the time frames of those events. How could anybody be expected to get it all right under such stressful circumstances.
There is only one witness that wasn't subject to any of these difficulties, and that witness is Zapruder's camera and I know that witness got it right even if it conflicts with all the other witnesses.I would agree. But I doubt there has ever been a case in which the film unequivocally conflicts with what the vast majority of witnesses said occurred - UNLESS - there is a reason based on evidence that caused the witnesses to make the same mistake. In any event, the zfilm does not conflict with the evidence at all. You see JFK and JBC turning their heads right at z164-170 and you say that is in response to the first shot? Why? Did anyone say JFK turned his head right after the first shot? No. In fact, Mary Woodward explained that this turn was immediately after she shouted to the President. She said the President turned, smiled and waved at them and that they were the last people he acknowledged because the first shot immediately followed as his car passed by where she was standing and he turned forward.
What isn't easy is corroborating their accounts of the event.How do we know that? Because he said so? You're using Croft to corroborate himself.No. I am using many others to corroborate his evidence that z161 was before the first shot. Corroboration of a witness is simply independent evidence that supports the witness recollection. Betzner corroborates him (after his z186 photo). Karen Westbrook corroborates him. Mary Woodward corroborates him. The occupants of the VP car corroborate him. Mrs. Cabell corroborates him. T.E. Moore corroborates him (the first shot occurred as JFK approached the Thornton sign). All those whose evidence puts JFK reacting to the first shot corroborates Croft. All those who said that the last two shots were rapid and noticeably closer together than shots 1 and 2 corroborate him.
A whole bunch of "so-and-so said" accounts without any corroboration for what they said.You appear to have some odd notion that witnesses cannot independently corroborate each other. You might want to try your AI on that: "can a witness provide independent evidence that is considered corroboration of what another witness said?
And, as I said, the same factors apply to counting the shots. But you accept that evidence.
I would agree. But I doubt there has ever been a case in which the film unequivocally conflicts with what the vast majority of witnesses said occurred - UNLESS - there is a reason based on evidence that caused the witnesses to make the same mistake. In any event, the zfilm does not conflict with the evidence at all. You see JFK and JBC turning their heads right at z164-170 and you say that is in response to the first shot? Why? Did anyone say JFK turned his head right after the first shot? No. In fact, Mary Woodward explained that this turn was immediately after she shouted to the President. She said the President turned, smiled and waved at them and that they were the last people he acknowledged because the first shot immediately followed as his car passed by where she was standing and he turned forward.
How do you know what he is trying to do?
You are using JBC's statement that he turned his head in response to the first shot but the turn at z164 not only doesn't fit (he doesn't even try to see JFK, which is why he said he turned)
but you ignore actual evidence that the turn of JFK (at the same time) was not in response to the first shot because it was before the first shot.So you say.
No. I am using many others to corroborate his evidence that z161 was before the first shot.
You only look at the witnesses who fit your narrative. You ignore the others like Patricia Ann Donaldson. And JBC. And SS Agent Bennett.
Corroboration of a witness is simply independent evidence that supports the witness recollection. Betzner corroborates him (after his z186 photo). Karen Westbrook corroborates him. Mary Woodward corroborates him.
The occupants of the VP car corroborate him. Mrs. Cabell corroborates him. T.E. Moore corroborates him (the first shot occurred as JFK approached the Thornton sign). All those whose evidence puts JFK reacting to the first shot corroborates Croft. All those who said that the last two shots were rapid and noticeably closer together than shots 1 and 2 corroborate him.
You appear to have some odd notion that witnesses cannot independently corroborate each other. You might want to try your AI on that: "can a witness provide independent evidence that is considered corroboration of what another witness said?
We know that Croft took his photo at Z-161 and that it was taken before the first shot.
Did you miss this in another thread:Unfortunately, you picked the wrong witness. This is the same Patricia Ann Donaldson who said that there was a pause after the first shot and the last two shots were fired rapidly "bam bam", as we see in the Youtube clip:
Eyewitness "Patricia Ann Donaldson" said that the Limo was in this position when she heard the first shot.
(https://i.postimg.cc/8cnfDVvT/PDVD-046.jpg)....
How does that fit with your theory the first shot was fired at Z193.How do you know what he is trying to do? So you say.
It's easy to corroborate your witnesses when you cherry pick the witnesses. How about providing some hard evidence to support your theory of the first shot at Z193.
If witnesses can corroborate other witnesses, they can also refute other witnesses. Why are your cherry picked witnesses more credible than my cherry picked witnesses.
Patricia Ann Donaldson said that the limo had just straightened out on Elm Street and that the last two of the three shots were fired very close together. (paraphrased)
Given the nature of the beast (Dealey Plaza created different echoes in different places; people were affected differently by the trauma and chaos they experienced), very few witnesses to the assassination got everything right.No one said there were distinct echoes. There were too many different surfaces reflecting sound so the rifle shots sound would have reverberated, probably for more than a second before the reflections died out.
Donaldson at least got the position of the limo basically correct, and from where she was standing, she probably did hear two very close-together echoes.The car was placed there by Holland. In the film, she was not asked where she was standing. We know she wasn’t standing anywhere near there. So I am not sure how you conclude that she got the position of the car at the time of the first shot right..
No one said there were distinct echoes.
We know Lawrence / Donaldson wasn’t standing anywhere near where she was in "The Lost Bullet."
So, I am not sure how you conclude that she got the position of the limo at the time of the first shot right.
How else are we to explain why several witnesses reported hearing four or more shots, and why so many people disagreed about where they had come from?Maybe they weren’t counting. There were only four witnesses [Edit: the correct number is six, not four, as pointed out by Tom Graves. ] who thought there were four shots, according to the HSCA compilation of 178 witnesses.. And they weren’t very convincing. For example there is Robert Edwards (6 H 205):
Regardless, she was standing about 30 feet away -- in the street in front of the TSBD entrance -- and had an excellent view down Elm Street.[Edit]Your reference to Lawrence/Donaldson made me do some further checking. I have to apologize for thinking that Holland’s witness Patricia Ann Donaldson was the same person as the witness Ann Donaldson standing with Mary Woodward . Holland’s witness was Patricia Ann Lawrence in 1963 and she was standing in front of the TSBD. Donaldson must be her later married name. I thought there couldn’t be two different people with the names “Ann” and “Donaldson” but apparently there were!
There were only four witnesses who thought there were four shots, according to the HSCA compilation of 178 witnesses.
Still looks to me like JCs face is indicating he felt at the very least the impact of a bullet about 0.5 sec after S224.
If instead of at Z224 JC is getting hit somewhere between Z 270-Z280, by a 2nd bullet traveling 2000ft/sec hit his upper body mass , shoujd there not be be some indication of some moment of his upper body forwards?
Since I’ve seen no alternative drawing to the one that JohnM posted to explain the wrist wound, I have to remain doubtful about a shot at Z270-z280 where the bullet exits JCs chest and goes thru the top of his right hand wrist bone , exits the bottom of palm, and misses the hat. The trajectory line from TSBD is the question if it can be aligned with the entry and exit wound line thru JCs upper body in some position between Z270-z280.
The wrist bone wound IDK if it’s reasonable to suggest that it could have been caused from a fragment from Z 313, because I can’t really tell where JC’s right hand is at the Z313 shot.
[quote author=Zeon Mason link=topic=4893.msg177294#msg177294 date=
Still looks to me like JCs face is indicating he felt at the very least the impact of a bullet about 0.5 sec after S224.
If instead of at Z224 JC is getting hit somewhere between Z 270-Z280, by a 2nd bullet traveling 2000ft/sec hit his upper body mass , shoujd there not be be some indication of some moment of his upper body forwards?
Since I’ve seen no alternative drawing to the one that JohnM posted to explain the wrist wound, I have to remain doubtful about a shot at Z270-z280 where the bullet exits JCs chest and goes thru the top of his right hand wrist bone , exits the bottom of palm, and misses the hat. The trajectory line from TSBD is the question if it can be aligned with the entry and exit wound line thru JCs upper body in some position between Z270-z280.
The wrist bone wound IDK if it’s reasonable to suggest that it could have been caused from a fragment from Z 313, because I can’t really tell where JC’s right hand is at the Z313 shot.
Unfortunately, you picked the wrong witness. This is the same Patricia Ann Donaldson who said that there was a pause after the first shot and the last two shots were fired rapidly "bam bam", as we see in the Youtube clip:
She describes the very short time the last two shots. So Donaldson must be mistaken about the placement of the President at the time of the first shot because the time between the last two shots that she describes does not permit JFK to have been hit in the neck by the second shot.
But Donaldson's mistake about the car location is understandable because she is mistaken about where she was standing. Patricia Ann Donaldson, known by "Ann" worked at the Dallas Morning News and was standing with Mary Woodward just to the west of the lamp post as shown in the Roberdeau map:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z5N3ySq5/image.png)
and as noted by Woodward in her DMN story written a few hours later: "Four of us from Women's News, Maggie Brown, Aurelia Alonzo, my roommate Ann Donaldson, and myself had decided to spend our lunch hour by going to see the President. ... The President was looking straight ahead and we were afraid we would not get to see his face. But we started clapping and cheering and both he and Mrs. Kennedy turned, and smiled and waved, directly at us, it seemed. .... [after talking about the second shot she says:] "This was followed rapidly by another shot."
i didn't present Patricia Ann Donaldson as an endorsement of her account. I presented her as an example of a witness who gave an account that conflicts with your pet theory that the first shot was fired at Z193. Your willingness to accept her description of the spacing of the shots but not her account of where the limo was when the first shot was fired shows a clear confirmation bias on your part.I accept her general description of the shots because it a) was volunteered without coaching and b) it fits with the general pattern that the vast majority of witnesses also recalled (most without promoting). I also note that in her original statements 24Nov63 and 20Mar64 she grouped the shots the same way.
You will only accept the things she said that agrees with your beliefs. I don't think she got either right.If you had said “You will only accept things she said that agrees with the total preponderance of the evidence as a whole” I would accept that. I don’t base my conclusions on “beliefs”.
I accept her general description of the shots because it a) was volunteered without coaching and b) it fits with the general pattern that the vast majority of witnesses also recalled (most without promoting). I also note that in her original statements 24Nov63 and 20Mar64 she grouped the shots the same way.You cherry pick the witnesses you choose to believe and then you cherry pick the parts of their statements you choose to believe.
But when it comes to the time of the first shot she just said that the first shot was a few seconds after he passed by. She said that the President looked in her direction and she waved as he passed by and that the first shot sounded “a few seconds” after that. Z193 is about 5 seconds after.
She also noted that the first shot sounded when the President was waving. If that was accurate, that would fit a time from just before the end of the Towner film to z142 but also after z175.
So there is nothing inconsistent with her statements and what the other witnesses said about the location of JFK at the time of the first shot - generally after z186.
If you had said “You will only accept things she said that agrees with the total preponderance of the evidence as a whole” I would accept that. I don’t base my conclusions on “beliefs”.
You cherry pick the witnesses you choose to believe and then you cherry pick the parts of their statements you choose to believe.You seem to have difficulty admitting that without “cherry picking” and without interpreting and just taking what they all said at face value, the overwhelming preponderance of all the witness evidence is that:
Actually, you do and you base them on whom you choose to believe.Yes, exactly. But I choose to believe those whose evidence is independently corroborated and consistent the preponderance of all the rest of the evidence. That point seems to be missed.
You seem to have difficulty admitting that without “cherry picking” and without interpreting and just taking what they all said at face value, the overwhelming preponderance of all the witness evidence is that:I choose to believe the witnesses whose account jibe with the Z-film which is probably a minority of the witnesses.
1. JFK reacted to the first shot
2. the last two shots were closer together and in fairly rapid succession
3. the first shot occurred with JFK in a position that is inconsistent with his position before z186.
That is all I am doing. If I was cherry picking I would not have included in my 9 pages all the witnesses who recalled a different shot pattern, or you would be able to provide me a list of witnesses who stated that they observed JFK at the time of the first shot and saw that he did not react.
Yes, exactly. But I choose to believe those whose evidence is independently corroborated and consistent the preponderance of all the rest of the evidence. That point seems to be missed.
I choose to believe the witnesses whose account jibe with the Z-film which is probably a minority of the witnesses.
When you say "the preponderance of all the rest of the evidence" you really mean the preponderance of the witnesses accounts of the shooting. You rarely if ever offer hard evidence to support you beliefs. Since you seem to place most of your faith in the witnesses over the forensic evidence, explain this:
https://22november1963.org.uk/jfk-assassination-documents/grassy-knoll-witnesses
Witnesses to Shots from the Grassy Knoll
Here is a list, in alphabetical order by surname, and no doubt incomplete, of those witnesses to President Kennedy’s assassination who claimed that one or more shots came from the general direction of the grassy knoll:
Victoria Adams
Danny Garcia Arce
Virginia Baker (née Rackley)
Jane Berry
Charles Brehm
Ochus Campbell
Faye Chism
John Chism
Harold Elkins
Ronald Fischer
Buell Wesley Frazier
Dorothy Garner
Jean Hill
Sam Holland
Ed Johnson
Dolores Kounas
Paul Landis
Billy Lovelady
Austin Miller
A.J. Millican
Luke Mooney
Thomas Murphy
Jean Newman
William Newman
Kenneth O’Donnell and David Powers
Roberta Parker
Frank Reilly
Arnold Rowland
Edgar Smith
Joe Marshall Smith
Forrest Sorrels
James Tague
Roy Truly
Harry Weatherford
Seymour Weitzman
Otis Williams
Mary Woodward
Abraham Zapruder
How do you suppose 38 earwitnesses pointed to the same wrong location as the source of the shots? Did these witnesses corroborate each other?
[quote author=Zeon Mason link=topic=4893.msg177294#msg177294 date=Perhaps you mean this kind of uniform forward motion immediately before he goes back onto Nellie’s lap:
If instead of at Z224 JC is getting hit somewhere between Z 270-Z280, by a 2nd bullet traveling 2000ft/sec hit his upper body mass , shoujd there not be be some indication of some moment of his upper body forwards?
Since I’ve seen no alternative drawing to the one that JohnM posted to explain the wrist wound, I have to remain doubtful about a shot at Z270-z280 where the bullet exits JCs chest and goes thru the top of his right hand wrist bone , exits the bottom of palm, and misses the hat. The trajectory line from TSBD is the question if it can be aligned with the entry and exit wound line thru JCs upper body in some position between Z270-z280.If the bullet deflected off the back of the wrist as Dr. Shaw suggested and as the shirt cuff might suggest:
[...]
I choose to believe the witnesses whose account jibe with the Z-film which is probably a minority of the witnesses.That is pretty simple to explain because humans perceive sound direction not source direction.
When you say "the preponderance of all the rest of the evidence" you really mean the preponderance of the witnesses accounts of the shooting. You rarely if ever offer hard evidence to support you beliefs. Since you seem to place most of your faith in the witnesses over the forensic evidence, explain this:
https://22november1963.org.uk/jfk-assassination-documents/grassy-knoll-witnesses
Witnesses to Shots from the Grassy Knoll
Here is a list, in alphabetical order by surname, and no doubt incomplete, of those witnesses to President Kennedy’s assassination who claimed that one or more shots came from the general direction of the grassy knoll:
Victoria Adams
Danny Garcia Arce
Virginia Baker (née Rackley)
Jane Berry
Charles Brehm
Ochus Campbell
Faye Chism
John Chism
Harold Elkins
Ronald Fischer
Buell Wesley Frazier
Dorothy Garner
Jean Hill
Sam Holland
Ed Johnson
Dolores Kounas
Paul Landis
Billy Lovelady
Austin Miller
A.J. Millican
Luke Mooney
Thomas Murphy
Jean Newman
William Newman
Kenneth O’Donnell and David Powers
Roberta Parker
Frank Reilly
Arnold Rowland
Edgar Smith
Joe Marshall Smith
Forrest Sorrels
James Tague
Roy Truly
Harry Weatherford
Seymour Weitzman
Otis Williams
Mary Woodward
Abraham Zapruder
How do you suppose 38 earwitnesses pointed to the same wrong location as the source of the shots? Did these witnesses corroborate each other?
You're so full of beans I can smell you from here.Thank-you for providing an excellent example from the “I can’t win the argument so I will resort to the ad hominem approach” school of rhetoric.
That is pretty simple to explain because humans perceive sound direction not source direction.
The perceived direction of a sound is something your brain figures out by itself from the time difference between the arrival of a sound wave front at the left ear and the arrival of that same wave front at the right ear. The brain then interprets that to be the same direction as the source. That is how we evolved. And on the buildingless, treeless African savannah that was a pretty good way to determine the sound source. The problem is that this time difference is skewed if sound wave fronts are arriving from multiple directions.
In Dealey plaza with all the concrete surfaces including large pillars and curved pergola walls, the direction of the sound waves was not necessarily the direction of the source of the sound: the SE 6th floor TSBD.
So there were many witnesses whose brain told them where it appeared the sound came from. Few of those far away from the corner of Houston and Elm could identify a specific location of the source. Within those 38 witnesses there is a large range in where they thought the shots came from. Many admitted confusion about where the sounds came from e.g. Powers thought it came from his right or from the underpass. Mary Woodward also thought the sounds came from “possibly behind her” or from the right where the underpass was located.
The fact that the witnesses in different locations and differed on where they perceived the source was located but almost all thought three shots appeared to them to come from the same direction tells you that the sounds reaching their ears came from more than one direction.
It's all earwitness evidence and it is all subject to error by large numbers of people. Anyone who bases their beliefs primary on what earwitnesses said has a very shaky foundation.So you must have absolutely no confidence in the accuracy of any memory that you have.
So you must have absolutely no confidence in the accuracy of any memory that you have.
I know I remember somethings but I also know of a number of instances where I misremembered what happened. Sometimes I have a resource that will tell me if what I remembered is correct or not. Sometimes I am and sometimes I am not.If you observed a car accident a few hours ago do you think that you could give an account of details of what occurred that are clear in your mind? If so, I gather you would still think that your recollection, though clear in your memory a few hours after the events is unreliable.
If you observed a car accident a few hours ago do you think that you could give an account of details of what occurred that are clear in your mind? If so, I gather you would still think that your recollection, though clear in your memory a few hours after the events is unreliable.
Like most witnesses, I would probably get some things wrong and some things right. I'm guessing I would get more wrong than right.Suppose you were in Dealey Plaza to watch the President’s motorcade and you heard three loud rifle shots each separated by about 5 seconds. You were then asked to give a statement a few hours later and asked what you recalled.
Perhaps you mean this kind of uniform forward motion immediately before he goes back onto Nellie’s lap:
(https://i.postimg.cc/0N71dcZw/JBC-movement-268-283-wide.gif)
If the bullet deflected off the back of the wrist as Dr. Shaw suggested and as the shirt cuff might suggest:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Hs2cwJSj/JBC-shirt-cuff.jpg)
and if the narrow slit in the palm side was caused be one of many small bone shards created by the impact, then maybe that would explain why the fragments deflected up to the top of the windshield area….
Suppose you were in Dealey Plaza to watch the President’s motorcade and you heard three loud rifle shots each separated by about 5 seconds. You were then asked to give a statement a few hours later and asked what you recalled.
1. If you did not recall the spacing of the shots clearly in your memory would you mention it?
2. If you did recall the spacing of the shots and it was clear in your mind so that you mentioned it in your statement, would you think your statement was reliable?
The single most compelling argument against a shot at Z275 is that it is only 36 frames before the headshot which was fired at or just before Z311. That is less than 2 seconds which is less than the minimum time of 2.4 seconds the FBI determined the Carcano could be fired accurately. It has been shown that the Carcano can be fired in less than 2 seconds between shots but that is without taking time to reacquire the target and take aim. Oswald could not have fired a shot at Z275 and followed it with a precise shot at Z311. Why would he have even attempted such a rapid fired shot? At a bare minimum, there would have been 44 frames between Oswald's shots and even that is a stretch. For the headshot, he took almost 5 seconds to reacquire his target, aim, and squeeze the trigger.The head shot did not strike until after z312 was exposed. And the second was not as late as z275 because the forward recoil-like motion begins at z271-272. There is a change in the appearance of the wrist area between those two frames as well. Also there is this apparent movement of the left sunvisor:
Andrew, you need to go back to the drawing board.
1. I would mention it if asked and take a guess.So what if the shot pattern had a pattern that enabled you to remember the number of shots because there was one shot and a longish pause of about 4-5 seconds and then two rapid shots close together and this was clear in your mind. Would you think that your memory at the time you gave your statement was reliable
2. Absolutely not.
The head shot did not strike until after z312 was exposed.
And the second was not as late as z275 because the forward recoil-like motion begins at z271-272. There is a change in the appearance of the wrist area between those two frames as well. Also there is this apparent movement of the left sunvisor:
(https://i.postimg.cc/k5CFf0J8/z271-272-visor.gif)
and JFK’s hair flies up at z273-276 just as Hickey observed at the time of the second shot:
(https://i.postimg.cc/yxcWyDBs/JFK-hair-flip.gif)
I expect may have taken a frame or two for the air movement from the bullet shock wave to reach the head and start lifting the hair.
From the beginning of z271 to the beginning of z313 is 42 frames or 2.3 seconds. Are you suggesting that Oswald could not have fired the third shot 2.3 seconds after the second in a last desperate attempt to hit his mark? He wouldn’t even have to move the rifle held in place by the strap and boxes as the target moved a bit more to the right as it followed the left to right curve toward the underpass.
So what if the shot pattern had a pattern that enabled you to remember the number of shots because there was one shot and a longish pause of about 4-5 seconds and then two rapid shots close together and this was clear in your mind. Would you think that your memory at the time you gave your statement was reliable
1. as to the number of shots?
2. as to the shot pattern?
I might or might not correctly remember the number of shots.The premise of my question was that you did clearly remember the number of shots because you also clearly remembered the pattern. |1 |2 3|.
….
I don't think I would accurately remember the shot pattern if I wasn't trying to discern the shot pattern at the time of the event. What reason would I have to do that.
Many people did. Some did not. Some people did not recognize the first blast as a gunshot. Brehm can be seen still clapping his hands after JFK had brought his hands in front of his throat and slumped over following the second shot. At that point he apparently was not aware there was gunfire.Does that mean they forgot that the first “horrible ear-shattering noise” had occurred seconds earlier after they heard more shots and realized what they were? Come on. Try to make sense.
The premise of my question was that you did clearly remember the number of shots because you also clearly remembered the pattern. |1 |2 3|.
So it appears that you don’t think you are capable of making observations that form clear memories that last for a few hours.
I would suggest that you are in a small minority of the human population in that respect.
Does that mean they forgot that the first “horrible ear-shattering noise” had occurred seconds earlier after they heard more shots and realized what they were? Come on. Try to make sense.
The head shot would have to have been fired at Z311 or earlier to cover the 88 yards before striking JFK's head at Z313. That is based on an estimated average velocity of 2000 fps.The survey data at CE884 (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0464b.htm) puts the Kennedy to Rifle distance 218.0 feet at z255 and 265.3 feet at z313. That means that he travelled 47.3 feet in 58 frames. At that rate at z271 JBC was 233 feet from the rifle. At 2000 fps that means the trigger was pressed about 233/2000=116.5 ms earlier.
88 yards is 264 feet.
264 / 2000 = 0.132 seconds to cover the 88 yards.
1 / 18.3 = 0.546.... elapsed time for a single frame.
0.132 / 0.546... = 2.4156 frames for the bullet to travel 88 yards
I don't suppose you considered the possibility that JFK's hair movement could be cause by the fact he is in a moving open top car.Certainly. Hickey just said that JFK’s hair flew up at the moment he heard the second shot. There could have been movement of the air caused by something other than the bullet. But that wouldn’t alter the observation that the hair flutter-which occurs at no other time-coincided with the sound of the second shot. But I don’t see the hair of anyone else move.
Oswald could have fired a shot 2.3 seconds after a previous shot as long as he didn't bother to take time to aim the rifle. The FBI determined it would take a shooter a minimum of 2.4 seconds between shots if the shooter took time to aim.
One might correctly remember one and not the other.That misses the point. Why would anyone provide a statement containing details that they did not remember? I wasn’t expecting you to do that. I asked whether, assuming that you gave a statement containing details that you did remember clearly in your mind whether you would maintain your statement was not reliable. I thought it was a rhetorical question. Apparently, you have very low confidence in your ability to make observations that you can retain in memory for a few hours. Either that or you think you would make a statement to police authorities containing details that you could not recall.
For the record, I didn't remember either. I was not in Dealey Plaza when the shooting took place. I was in 7th grade math class.
I have said on a number of occasions that I might or might not remember specific details about an event. That makes me the same as the other 8 billion people on the planet.
The survey data at CE884 (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0464b.htm) puts the Kennedy to Rifle distance 218.0 feet at z255 and 265.3 feet at z313. That means that he travelled 47.3 feet in 58 frames. At that rate at z271 JBC was 233 feet from the rifle. At 2000 fps that means the trigger was pressed about 233/2000=116.5 ms earlier.
It's a miniscule difference but since your data doesn't take into account elevation, it becomes even less relevant.
For the shot that struck at z313 when JFK was 265.3 feet from the rifle, the trigger would have been pulled 265.3/2000=133 ms earlier.
So we are talking about a difference of 16.5 ms or .0165 of a second
Since the exposure time of Zapruder’s camera was 1/40th of a second or 25 ms., there was 30 ms of non-exposure between frames.
Even with your tweaking, you don't bring the time between shots to what the FBI determined was the minimum time needed to fire an aimed shot. Even that is a theoretical time, it's very unlikely Oswald would have tried to fire the rifle as fast as he could. Accuracy would be far more important than speed. That's why he took almost 5 seconds between the second and third shots.
When I say z271-272 I mean the shot occurred at some time either very late during the exposure of z270 up to very early in the beginning of the exposure of z272. Since the time between frames is 1000/18.3=55 ms, that provides a range of the time of the shot of 55+30=85 ms. The head shot could have occurred very late in the exposure of z312 to the middle of the exposure of z313. That is about 45 ms. Total uncertainty is 130/2=65 ms=.065 sec.
So the time difference t between trigger pulls between the second shot striking JBC at z271-272 and the third shot striking JFK at z312 to z313 a distance of 32.3 feet farther from the rifle is:
t=(312-270)/18.3-(32.3/2000) ± .065 seconds
t=(42)/18.3-.0165 ± .065 seconds
t=2.28 ± .065 seconds or 2.22 to 2.34 seconds
What Hickey says doesn't establish the bullet caused his hair to fly up. The bullet would have arrived before the sound because the bullet was traveling almost twice the speed of sound.
Certainly. Hickey just said that JFK’s hair flew up at the moment he heard the second shot. There could have been movement of the air caused by something other than the bullet. But that wouldn’t alter the observation that the hair flutter-which occurs at no other time-coincided with the sound of the second shot. But I don’t see the hair of anyone else move.
The Warren Commission found that a minimum of about 2.3 seconds was required to fire, reload aim and fire again using Oswald’s rifle. This appears to be based on the FBI re-enactment using that rifle. FBI ballistics expert Robert Frazier, who actually fired 3
shots in 4.6 seconds, said “4.6 seconds is firing this weapon as fast as the bolt can be operated, I think”. (3H407). The FBI’s Ronald Simmons noted that one marksman fired three shots in 4.6 seconds using the telescopic sight and three shots in 4.45 seconds using the iron sights.(3H446). There was no time placed on the middle shots so we cannot determine the smallest interval between shots.
That misses the point. Why would anyone provide a statement containing details that they did not remember? I wasn’t expecting you to do that. I asked whether, assuming that you gave a statement containing details that you did remember clearly in your mind whether you would maintain your statement was not reliable. I thought it was a rhetorical question. Apparently, you have very low confidence in your ability to make observations that you can retain in memory for a few hours. Either that or you think you would make a statement to police authorities containing details that you could not recall.
One might correctly remember one and not the other.I wasn’t asking whether you would have remembered those details. I asked whether, assuming that you gave a statement containing details that you did remember clearly in your mind, you would maintain your statement was not reliable. I thought it was a rhetorical question.
For the record, I didn't remember either. I was not in Dealey Plaza when the shooting took place. I was in 7th grade math class.
I have said on a number of occasions that I might or might not remember specific details about an event. That makes me the same as the other 8 billion people on the planet.
I would suggest you greatly overestimate the general populace's ability to perceive accurate details of an event, especially a shocking event that happens with no warning and lasts less than 10 seconds.I would suggest that you underestimate the honesty of innocent average citizens when making statements to police. You seem to think most would volunteer details that they did not really remember. And then when the vast majority of the witnesses reported the same details that you think they couldn’t remember, you are ready to conclude that the agreement on those details could be just a random coincidence.
It's hard to forget something you didn't notice in the first place. Most people did hear 3 shots but some only remembered hearing 2. I find it probable that the one they either didn't hear or didn't remember hearing was the first shot. For whatever reason, that shot didn't seem to register with them.If they could hear, they heard them. They just were not counting them or afterward could not remember anything that enabled them to say how many there were, such as a shot grouping of one, pause and then two close together.
Many of those who recalled only two shots were occupied doing other things (Landis, Hill, Darnell, Jackie) so their minds were focused on what they were seeing. Jean Newman wasn’t occupied that way but seemed to be really focused on watching Jackie.
….
Do you have a better explanation for why some of the witnesses such as Jackie or Clint Hill only remembered 2 shots?
Since it's survey data, I doubt it took into account the elevation. Adding the elevation increases the distance.It's a miniscule difference but since your data doesn't take into account elevation, it becomes even less relevant.If you had just clicked the link you would see that it took into account elevation. That is how they determined the distance between the rifle and JFK.
Why would you think Oswald was would try to fire his rifle as fast as was humanly possible? Was he trying to win a prize?Maybe because the first two did not kill JFK and he wanted to make other shots before the target too far away
Studies have shown that even when witnesses were confident about their recollections, they could still be wrong. I don't care if the witnesses were clear in their mind. That doesn't mean what they remember was accurate.I was asking whether you think a statement containing details that YOU clearly remembered would be reliable. Apparently not.
What Hickey says doesn't establish the bullet caused his hair to fly up. The bullet would have arrived before the sound because the bullet was traveling almost twice the speed of sound.The difference in bullet speed (2000 fps) and speed of sound (1127 fps) means that over a distance of 233 feet from muzzle to target the difference in arrival times is 233(1/1127-1/2000)=90 ms or about 2 frames. So if the bullet sound coincided with the hair flying up, as Hickey said, and that hair motion began at z273 then the bullet arrived 90 ms or almost 2 frames earlier ie. at z271.
The difference in bullet speed (2000 fps) and speed of sound (1127 fps) means that over a distance of 233 feet from muzzle to target the difference in arrival times is 233(1/1127-1/2000)=90 ms or about 2 frames. So if the bullet sound coincided with the hair flying up, as Hickey said, and that hair motion began at z273 then the bullet arrived 90 ms or almost 2 frames earlier ie. at z271.
I was asking whether you think a statement containing details that YOU clearly remembered would be reliable. Apparently not.
That doesn't establish that JFK's hair movement was the result of a passing bullet. That is a supposition on your part.My point is that it doesn‘t matter AT ALL whether the bullet passing near caused the hair to fly up. All that matters is that there is evidence (from Hickey and Kinney) that the sound of second shot coincided with that hair movement. The evidence that it struck JBC in the right armpit puts it pretty close to JFK at that point but it does not matter what caused the hair to move.
My point is that it doesn‘t matter AT ALL whether the bullet passing near caused the hair to fly up. All that matters is that there is evidence (from Hickey and Kinney) that the sound of second shot coincided with that hair movement. The evidence that it struck JBC in the right armpit puts it pretty close to JFK at that point but it does not matter what caused the hair to move.
Of course it's not. People who think they clearly remember an event can be dead wrong. Being certain isn't the same as being correct.It is NOT a matter of putting blind faith in witnesses. That a witness can be a poor observer is a given. A good example would be AJ Millican who recalled 8 shots over several minutes or Jean Hill who reported seeing a small dog in the limo. But these stand out because no one else made that same observation.
I continue to be amazed at your willingness to put so much faith in the weakest form of evidence we have which is witness testimony.
There is no evidence that a bullet struck JBC even close to Z271. That is the result of your FUBAR figuring.That is simply an incorrect statement. There is evidence (shot pattern, Altgens, Hickey Nellie, Greer, etc). You just refuse to accept it. Do you really think the FBI went to the trouble building all these models without some evidence:
In order to believe your scenario, I would have to believe that both JFK and JBC were hit by Oswald's first shot at a time both would have been obscured from Oswald's view by the pin oak tree in front of the TSBD.JFK was visible when he passed the lamp post. You obviously have trouble recalling what I have posted many times:
I would have to believe that neither reacted at that time to being hit. I would have to believe that JFK began to slowly lower his right arm and that neither man showed any reaction for 33 frames, almost 2 seconds, and then suddenly both flipped their arms upward rapidly at the same instant (Z226).JFK is obviously reacting before z225 because he is already in a contorted position. Look at his face and hands.
You are apparently not familiar with what he said he did in reaction to the first shot. What he did from z230-270 is generally consistent with what both he and Nellie he said he did after the first shot-he turned around to his right and uttered “oh, no, no” because he knew he had just heard a rifle shot and thought assassination was underway. Jackie turns to look at him, as she said she did, when he starts shouting in the mid z240s. Nellie said he uttered that before the second shot, which fits. JBC said it was as he was hit, although he said it might have been before he was hit (to the HSCA).
I would have to believe that JBC after rapidly flipping his right arm up and down then dipped hard to his right, doubled over, then began twisting around dramatically until he was facing JFK at Z265. All of this movement was a reaction to his shallow wound in his left leg.
Now comes the really weird part. You expect us to believe that Oswald fired a shot at Z271 that hit JBC in the back, exited from his chest, and struck his wrist at frame Z271. This frame Z271:It just requires a slight deflection to the right on the bullet hitting the back.
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z271.jpg
Just how in the hell does Oswald shoot JBC in the back at Z271 and have the bullet exit from the right side of his chest and go on to fracture his wrist?
If that isn't unbelievable enough, you then have Oswald firing a precision headshot just 42 frames later at the bare minimum time a shooter could theoretically have done so. Am I really supposed to believe all that?No. That is just what the evidence says happened. You don’t have to accept it.
That is simply an incorrect statement. There is evidence (shot pattern, Altgens, Hickey Nellie, Greer, etc). You just refuse to accept it. Do you really think the FBI went to the trouble building all these models without some evidence:
(https://i.postimg.cc/NMTxbm6Y/kennedy-john-f-3-shots-jan-1964-0124.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/rwzySSfg/6130052-low-res-600px.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/kGJChG6X/IMG-2680.jpg)
JFK was visible when he passed the lamp post. You obviously have trouble recalling what I have posted many times:
(https://i.postimg.cc/289MSfvF/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends.jpg)
JFK is obviously reacting before z225 because he is already in a contorted position. Look at his face and hands.
(https://i.postimg.cc/qM4CmwP4/Compare-z193-z224.gif)You are apparently not familiar with what he said he did in reaction to the first shot. What he did from z230-270 is generally consistent with what both he and Nellie he said he did after the first shot-he turned around to his right and uttered “oh, no, no” because he knew he had just heard a rifle shot and thought assassination was underway. Jackie turns to look at him, as she said she did, when he starts shouting in the mid z240s. Nellie said he uttered that before the second shot, which fits. JBC said it was as he was hit, although he said it might have been before he was hit (to the HSCA).
It just requires a slight deflection to the right on the bullet hitting the back.No. That is just what the evidence says happened. You don’t have to accept it.
It is comical the mental gymnastics you are willing to go through to try and make your scenario seem plausible. It's not working. JBC's position at Z271 alone blows your theory out of the water. It is not remotely possible he could have shot JBC in the back at that point and have the bullet come out the right side of his torso. It would take a hell of a lot more than "a slight deflection to the right" for that to happen. It would require the most magical of all magic bullets. Just what would cause such a dramatic deflection? The bullet hit no bone until it exited from JBC's chest. If it was even possible for the bullet to enter JBC's back at Z271, it would be a tangential strike and the bullet would only graze him. It's unbelievable the things you have convinced yourself of to try and salvage your cockamamie theory. Give it up. You're embarrassing yourself.You seem to have an incorrect understanding of JBC’s torso wound. It forcefully struck the fifth rib at the edge of the right scapula. The rib is a bone. This was so forceful that it resulted in a fracture of the rib at the spine. Since the angle of the bullet trajectory to the car direction was about 5 degrees at that point - almost directly behind - and because the torso was twisted, the right nipple was slightly to the right of the point where the bullet entered the back (ie following along the initial trajectory). Since the bullet struck the fifth rib at a glancing angle and followed it around the pulmonary wall without passing through it, it had to have been deflected right.
You seem to have an incorrect understanding of JBC’s torso wound. It forcefully struck the fifth rib at the edge of the right scapula. The rib is a bone. This was so forceful that it resulted in a fracture of the rib at the spine. Since the angle of the bullet trajectory to the car direction was about 5 degrees at that point - almost directly behind - and because the torso was twisted, the right nipple was slightly to the right of the point where the bullet entered the back (ie following along the initial trajectory). Since the bullet struck the fifth rib at a glancing angle and followed it around the pulmonary wall without passing through it, it had to have been deflected right.
A bullet exiting the chest at that point would necessarily have struck the right forearm. Since the bullet did this to the back of the french cuff:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Hs2cwJSj/JBC-shirt-cuff.jpg)
causing a wound to the radius 5 cm (2 in) above the wrist crease but left no exit hole in the other side of the cuff, whatever caused the slit in the volar side of the forearm 1.5 cm from the wrist crease did not leave a mark in the cuff. Explaining how all that could have been caused by an intact 3cm long bullet, CE399, requires real mental gymnastics.
Have you really convinced yourself of this nonsense. One look at frame Z271 should tell you that what you are claiming is impossible. It didn't happen because it couldn't happen. Not one in a million.The path through JBC at z271 would be something like this:
Yet here is Gov. JBC at Z-272 still holding onto the Stetson, after having been shot through the wrst (and the chest).:If his arm had been down, the bullet could have gone through the arm. But with the arm up, it entered at the posterior edge of the right armpit.
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZqXH27m0/Screen-Shot-2569-04-14-at-07-12-47.png)
Right hand is too high. Bullet goes thru the hat and JC has rotated almost 180 degree around. He would have been hit in the right arm not the back. That the way my eye sees it.
John Mytton, Where are you Superman LN? We need your measuring skills here Lol.
The path through JBC at z271 would be something like this:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6pgWmKxH/image.png)
except that the forearm is up higher and closer to the chest with the forearm wound in the path of the bullet exiting just below and medial to the right nipple where it is deflected slightly left and up. The fifth rib is struck on entry and is bent (breaking near the spine) before the bullet passes through and destroys the last 10 cm of rib sending shards of bone into the lower lobe of the right lung. The bullet did not pass through the right lung and did not penetrate the chest wall - unlike a shot at z222 which would have had to pass through the chest wall and lung to exit where it did.
Total nonsense. You don't have JBC turned nearly as far as he is in Z271, when his head has turned almost 180 degrees and he is almost facing Oswald.The ribs don't turn much more if one turns the shoulders so they are aligned with the car direction. Try it yourself and turn about 45 degrees, put your hand on your right ribs near the right armpit and then turn your shoulders another 45 degrees. The fifth rib barely moves. The right nipple moves a tiny bit farther right relative to the shoulder blade.
Just look at the Z272 frame in the previous posts. JBC is in full profile and his shoulders are about 45 degrees to the path of the bullet. Your drawing would have to rotate both JBC's head and shoulders 90 degrees to be even close to accurate.
Even with the manipulated drawing you are forced to postulate a magic bullet. The harder you try to save this turkey of a scenario, the worse it gets.
Yet here is Gov. JBC at Z-272 still holding onto the Stetson, after having been shot through the wrst (and the chest).:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZqXH27m0/Screen-Shot-2569-04-14-at-07-12-47.png)
Right hand is too high. Bullet goes thru the hat and JC has rotated almost 180 degree around. He would have been hit in the right arm not the back. That the way my eye sees it.
John Mytton, Where are you Superman LN? We need your measuring skills here Lol.
The ribs don't turn much more if one turns the shoulders so they are aligned with the car direction. Try it yourself and turn about 45 degrees, put your hand on your right ribs near the right armpit and then turn your shoulders another 45 degrees. The fifth rib barely moves. The right nipple moves a tiny bit farther right relative to the shoulder blade.
I was just giving a general idea of where the bullet path might have gone to explain the wounds. Here is the same idea with the shoulders turned much more. The problem is that I am just turning the photo rather than twisting the torso, so it gives a bit of a distorted position of the fifth rib:
(https://i.postimg.cc/XNBXRFST/JBC-turned-with-path-through-EXTREME-RIGHT.jpg)
Some will say that the bullet doesn't enter just lateral to the shoulder blade. I am using my own torso to locate the shoulder blade. It does not change position much relative to the right nipple by just turning the shoulders another 45 degrees or so. Try it. (My photo shows a normal forward facing person turned but without twisting the torso). I am just guessing as to how much the fifth rib flexed. It may have flexed inward more. It was a pretty forceful glancing impact and ribs are somewhat flexible. The rib did fracture at the spine so maybe I haven't shown enough displacement of the rib.
All I can say is that if JBC was hit in the chest by the second shot, as everyone says he was, the evidence from three independent bodies of evidence is overwhelming that this is very close to the time that shot occurred. So your anatomical arguments don't really work because they don't deal with that evidence.
While you are critiquing the z271-272 second shot, try explaining why the change in appearance of the wrist, as well as the movement of the left sunvisor occurs at that time (this shows z268 followed by z271 followed by z272 with a 2 second pause after z272):
(https://i.postimg.cc/gcD1kLH7/268-271-272.gif)
Ok I am not sure in this Z270 frame if JC is still holding the hat with his right hand because it looks now like it’s in his LEFT hand.If that is his left hand, in addition to switching the hat, he must have also switched his left arm to his right shoulder.
At Z frame 230, it looks like the right hand was holding it , so did he inadvertently switch to holding it with left hand?
You're only fooling yourself. Nobody else is buying this.I follow the Feynman principle: quote, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool,"
I follow the Feynman principle: quote, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool,"
That is why I base conclusions on the evidence. I don’t rely on my own interpretation of ambiguous head turns in the zfilm and speculate why all the evidence must be wrong. When it comes to choosing between independent bodies of independently and well corroborated evidence and my spidey senses, I go with the evidence. Apparently, you don’t.
You go with your interpretation of cherry picked witnesses' accounts and ignore all the hard evidence that proves your interpretations are dead wrong. Frame Z271 alone disproves your theory. Oswald could not have shot JBC in the back at that frame because JBC was facing Oswald and JBC's shoulders were turned roughly 45 degrees off perpendicular to the bullet flight. That makes a back entry wound impossible. You ignore hard evidence because that doesn't support your fairy tale version of the assassination.That you would suggest that presenting ALL the witnesses represents "cherry picking" requires a new definition of cherry-picking. That you believe that your interpretation of why you think people turned their head, while ignoring the evidence of why they turned (eg. Mary Woodward) and when they turned (80+ witnesses - virtually all of the witnesses who gave evidence on when JFK reacted and where he was when the first shot occurred), is "hard evidence" is a perfect example of not following Feynman's first principle.
That you would suggest that presenting ALL the witnesses represents "cherry picking" requires a new definition of cherry-picking. That you believe that your interpretation of why you think people turned their head, while ignoring the evidence of why they turned (eg. Mary Woodward) and when they turned (80+ witnesses - virtually all of the witnesses who gave evidence on when JFK reacted and where he was when the first shot occurred), is "hard evidence" is a perfect example of not following Feynman's first principle.
You don't present all of the witnesses. You ignore the ones who said the shots were evenly spaced and you ignore the ones who said the first two shots were closer together.No I don't. And you would know that if you had read those 9 pages I posted. Not only do I not ignore them, I quote what they said and provide cites. The fact is there are only three general possibilities of the spacing of three shots and not everyone will recall it correctly.
On top of that, you ignore what some of the witnesses said about those last two shots. Some said the last two shots were right on top of each other with almost no time between them. That would suggest they heard two sounds from the same shot. That could be an echo. It could be the sound of the impact on JFK's skull. Such impacts on a hard surface can be quite loud. The other possibility is they heard the sonic boom of a supersonic bullet, which also can be quite loud and which the would have heard about 1/10 of a second before hearing the muzzle blast.They would have heard reverberations, not distinct echos. Mary Woodward also said that the shots were on top of each other and explained that the sound of the second had not completely died out before the third shot sounded. That may be why so many recalled those two distinct shots being close together.
https://gunsamerica.com/digest/two-sources-of-sound-when-you-shoot-subsonics-vs-supersonics/
"The crack or sonic boom of the bullet passing just over your head, if you’re close enough, will cause hearing damage."
No I don't. And you would know that if you had read those 9 pages I posted. Not only do I not ignore them, I quote what they said and provide cites. The fact is there are only three general possibilities of the spacing of three shots and not everyone will recall it correctly.
There were six people who seemed to recall the reverse pattern: Nellie Connally, William Newman, Gayle Newman, Ken O'Donnell, Cecil Ault and Steven Wilson. Only the Newmans gave their statements within a short time after the event. The others were months after. William Newman initially (22Nov63) described only two shots 19 H 490:
- "We were standing at the edge of the curb looking at the car as it was coming toward us and all of a sudden there was a noise, apparently gunshot. The President jumped up in his seat, and it looked like what I thought was a firecracker had went off and I thought he had realized it. It was just like an explosion and he was standing up. By this time ha was directly in front of us and I was looking directly at him when he was hit in the side of the head."
Then in his next statement on November 24 (22 H 842), he said he recalled two shots close together for a total of three. He thought the first two were closer together though.
So one is left with having to assess the evidence. I not only found the witnesses as to the 1.....2..3 pattern to be clearer and more descriptive and sure, but I also understood that the probability that the distribution of witnesses was such that it was highly improbable that almost 80% would hear the shots and recall the same distinctive pattern and all agree on the same wrong pattern. If witnesses were generally able to recall the pattern there would be a clear preference for one possibility and the errors would be distributed randomly over the other two possibilities. If everyone were really confused, one would expect a random distribution over all three possibilities. This distribution is what one would expect only if the witnesses correctly recalled that the last two were closer:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6qpJx35q/Statistical-corroboration-pattern-shots.jpg)
They would have heard reverberations, not distinct echos. Mary Woodward also said that the shots were on top of each other and explained that the sound of the second had not completely died out before the third shot sounded. That may be why so many recalled those two distinct shots being close together.
At 200 feet, the crack would be heard 77 ms before the muzzle blast and would not be confused with separate shots.
If the "second had not completely died out before the third shot sounded" that could not possibly be two shots from Oswald's rifle. You keep arguing for things that are impossible.If you know how long a rifle shot in Dealey Plaza would have persisted, then you should provide it along with the source.
If you know how long a rifle shot in Dealey Plaza would have persisted, then you should provide it along with the source.
There was a large post office building a bit more than 600 feet (188 m measured on Google maps, which is 616 feet) directly south of the TSBD. There were also buildings on the east side over that distance, pavement and concrete structures in Dealey Plaza. There was also the triple underpass about 500-550 feet south west of the SN as well as a railway embankment all along the west side. There were also reflective surfaces in between the TSBD and the underpass. So it was a real reverberation chamber:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Mpq3XLBR/aerial-view-DPlaza-far-south.jpg).
Sound from the 6th floor TSBD would have reflected off all those surfaces and then back to the people standing on the north side of Elm St. where Mary Woodward was. The sound wave front would have taken a tad more than half a second: .55 seconds (speed of sound at 68F is 1127 fps) to directly reach the Post Office building and a bit more for sound waves reflected from the street, buildings along Houston and other concrete structures. The sound then would have bounced back off the Post Office building as well as back off the triple underpass and arrived at the ears of Mary Woodward. So she would definitely have heard the first round of continuous echos (reverberation) for at least 1.2 seconds after the blast.
But the reverberation doesn't just end on that first reflection. It would have gone back and forth a bit. The reverberations from the first reflection back off the TSBD would have traveled south toward the Post Office building and bounced again of that large surface, arriving at Mary Woodward over the next 1.2 seconds. Same with the sound reflecting from the triple underpass back off the building along Houston and structures in between, although with a bit less travel time.
So unless the sound reflected only one time before ending completely, the reverberations could easily have continued for about 2.4 seconds.
Mary Woodward said that there was a third shot within the period of reverberation of the second shot. She recalled three distinct shots. She said she would go to her grave swearing that there were three shots. See this Youtube clip (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtDOZYvksQE). Her statement begins about 2:50.
If you are going to postulate that the sound of a single shot could reverberate for 2 seconds or more, the burden is on you to prove that.I have. I cited evidence from Mary Woodward. You just said she must be wrong-that she did not hear what she swore she heard. I provided other evidence that the shots were in that kind of rapid succession.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how Oswald shot JBC in the back at a time JBC had spun around and was facing him.The shot occurred with JBC in that position. Nellie told Dr. Shires that he was turned around to the right when he was hit in the back. Shires commented that this would explain why the back of his forearm was turned toward his chest. JBC thought he had started to turn back around when he was hit but could not say for sure how far he had gotten.
Here is Andrew Mason's drawing showing how he thinks the bullet exiting JFK's throat could have struck JBC in the thigh without first passing through his torso:
(https://i.postimg.cc/g0cYmfG8/AM-model3D-z195.jpg)
Here are some photos which he says simulate JBC's position at Z193:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z5L7bYxw/JBC-z200-side-reenactmen-croppedt.jpg) (https://i.postimg.cc/Sx71ZqxW/JBC-z200-rear1-reenactment.jpg)
Even the photo looks to me that JBC is turned farther to the right than we see in Z193 but let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say the photo acurately depicts JBC's position. The drawing shows an exaggerated turn to the right and even then shows there was barely enough room for the bullet to miss JBC's torso and still find his thigh. Note how dissimilar these two representations are. The drawing shows an extreme turn to the right. Note how much further forward JBC's left shoulder is in the drawing than in the photo. Note how much more it is turned to the right in the drawing than in the photo.
So even using his photo of JBC's simulated position, JBC's left shoulder is not turned anywhere near far enough to create an open path from JFK's throat to JBC's thigh. He has to exaggerate JBC's position at Z193 to even show a theoretical possibility of his SBT 2.0 scenario. This is why I said earlier it is impossible.
EDIT: I should have included the actual Z193 frame when I first posted this so I am adding it now:
(https://i.postimg.cc/fL6CF1jf/20260421-044524.jpg)
Compare JBC's shoulder turn in the actual frame to Andrew's photos and drawing.
I have. I cited evidence from Mary Woodward. You just said she must be wrong-that she did not hear what she swore she heard. I provided other evidence that the shots were in that kind of rapid succession.
You have provided nothing except your interpretation of equivocal head turns in the zfilm and you suggest that all that evidence must be wrong.
The shot occurred with JBC in that position. Nellie told Dr. Shires that he was turned around to the right when he was hit in the back. Shires commented that this would explain why the back of his forearm was turned toward his chest. JBC thought he had started to turn back around when he was hit but could not say for sure how far he had gotten.
Gayle Newman said the second shot sounded after the car had been 10 feet from her. She saw that JBC grabbed his chest and lay back:
(https://i.postimg.cc/9QZdw6Kt/IMG-2682.jpg)
In her first interview by Jay Watson of WFAA TV (https://youtu.be/iC1ebqkXGTk?si=naAELr4E6BnEyouC) within an hour or so of the assassination (before it had been announced that the President was dead) Gayle Newman said that Connally was turned to his side and he grabbed his stomach.
How the bullet passed through his body requires an anatomical understanding of the human torso when it is turned like that. The shoulders can turn without changing the position of the shoulder blade. JBC was hit in the armpit which fits with having the armpit turned to face the rifle.
So the evidence is consistent and overwhelming that the second shot occurred close to the third shot which necessarily means JBC was turned sideways right as that is his position at z250-270 … just as Gayle Newman reported seeing less than an hour after seeing Connally hit by second shot.
Too rapid to have both been fired by Oswald. Either those witnesses were wrong or there were two gunmen. I know which one I am betting on.That is an interesting comment. We know from other evidence that Oswald was deeply involved and we know that there is very little likelihood of, and no evidence of, anyone else being involved. We also know from the three men just below the SN on the sixth floor that all shots came from the same location. So we know that the was only one person shooting and that person was Oswald and no other. We both agree on that.
I don't recall ever having used the head turns of the limo occupants as evidence of anything.I guess it was the other John Corbett who said (April 19/post #30 in this thread):
I have not suggested that all that evidence must be wrong. I have stated that your cherry-picked witnesses who put the last two shots close together are wrong.Again, this is not cherry picking. It is rational reasoning. It is you who is cherry picking. There are three possibilities of shot pattern. This is the witness distribution of those three possibilities:
This is your turn to dismiss what a witness said. JBC said he was facing almost forward when he felt the bullet hit him in the back. That pretty much blows your theory out of the water. We know he wasn't shot in the back at Z271 because that would have been impossible with JBC facing Oswald at that frame.Yes, but he wasn't sure how he was facing. That is understandable. So one looks to other evidence to see if JBC's vague recollection of where he thought he was facing was correct. Not a single witness supports him facing forward at the time of the second shot.
Here we go again with a cherry-picket uncorroborated witness. You have built a house of cards with these flawed accounts of what happened.Again, in what universe is choosing 6 out of 63 not cherry picking but choosing 47 out of 63 is?
Kind of like this at Z245:Yes. But also z270. Definitely NOT z222-230.
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z245.jpg
That is an interesting comment. We know from other evidence that Oswald was deeply involved and we know that there is very little likelihood of, and no evidence of, anyone else being involved. We also know from the three men just below the SN on the sixth floor that all shots came from the same location. So we know that the was only one person shooting and that person was Oswald and no other. We both agree on that.Yes, we agree Oswald was the lone shooter which leaves us with the conclusion that the witnesses who said they heard two shots at the end that were almost right on top of each other with almost no time between them were wrong. They didn't hear two shots together at the end, They might have heard two sounds from the same shot, but they didn't hear two shots.
But the SBT scenario has many problems that feed conspiracy theories, so CTs persist. And they convince many using just this argument: there is too much evidence that conflicts with the SBT and the only alternative is multiple shooters.
Not a true statement
And it is not just the shot pattern or the fact that JFK was reported by everyone watching him to have reacted to the first shot,
Reports are often wrong. The ones that don't fit a first shot before Z186 are definitely wrong.
or the many reports that do not fit a first shot before z186.
It is also a problem with the condition of CE399 after allegedly pulverizing JBC's fifth rib and doing this to the forearm:
(https://i.postimg.cc/vTmqZw41/Gov-Connally-report-photos-damagedclothing18-Page-06.jpg)
while still looking like this:
(https://i.postimg.cc/5yv2GrPK/carcano-65bullet-side-closeup.jpg)
And there's more. The trajectory at z222 doesn't begin to work because even with JFK as far right as possible, the bullet exits 8 inches left of the wall of the car on JFK's right side and travels another 5 inches farther left before passing the plane of the jump seat. So JBC's right armpit has to be 13 inches inside that wall. The most extreme position proposed for JBC is 8 inches or 20 cm. Not nearly enough.
He tried to look at JFK beginning at Z164 but didn't turn around far enough to see him. That doesn't mean he didn't try.
And then you have the problem of z230-270 being the only time JBC makes any attempt to see JFK. Before then, he never turns his head to look at JFK.
And then there is a the problem of a phantom missed first shot for which there is absolutely no physical evidence. There is also no clear witness evidence that it missed - and a lot of witness evidence that it did not miss.
And there's even more. There is the problem with the evidence that Tague was struck by a fragment from the second shot (not the first, not the third) which is corroborated by Greer sensing an impact inside the car on the second shot and no other.
The evidence isn't wrong. It's the myths that have grown out of people's misunderstanding of the evidence that are wrong.
So for you to maintain that all of these independent bodies of evidence must be completely wrong and does not at least provide a consistent rational alternative to the SBT (although one with which you still can disagree) is difficult to understand.
The time for that expired many years ago. We have solid evidence as to what happened and it only happened one way. This isn't a multiple choice exercise.
Is it not time to admit that there are at least two possible ways that Oswald could have fired all three shots?
I guess it was the other John Corbett who said (April 19/post #30 in this thread):
- "I'm all for that. JBC's sworn testimony is evidence. I don't put complete faith in eye and earwitnesses unless they can be corroborated. JBC said he turned and looked over his right shoulder in reaction to a shot that sounded to him came from the right rear and from an elevated position. We see JBC start to turn to look over his right shoulder beginning at Z164. That's corroboration. That tells us the shot came before Z164."
- "He started his reaction at Z164. The first shot came before that unless you want to argue he was anticipating the first shot."
[/list]Again, this is not cherry picking. It is rational reasoning. It is you who is cherry picking. There are three possibilities of shot pattern. This is the witness distribution of those three possibilities:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6qpJx35q/Statistical-corroboration-pattern-shots.jpg),
So choosing the one with the least (6) witnesses is NOT cherry picking but choosing the one with by far the most (47) is? Explain that reasoning!
Yes, but he wasn't sure how he was facing. That is understandable. So one looks to other evidence to see if JBC's vague recollection of where he thought he was facing was correct. Not a single witness supports him facing forward at the time of the second shot.
Nellie said he was turned round to the right when hit by the second shot. Gayle Newman said JBC was turned sideways when the shot occurred.
And that, of course, fits with the recollection of 21+ witnesses who said that the first shot caused JFK to react. Another 15 or 16 said that the first shot occurred at a time that is inconsistent with any time before z186, which means that JFK was hit by the first shot. And the vast majority said that the last two shots were closer together and many said in rapid succession. Altgens said that his z255 photo was after the first and before any other shots. Hickey said he was turned forward looking at JFK for the last two shots, yet he is still facing rearward in Altgens z255 photo. etc. So not only do no witnesses corroborate JBC's vague recollection of where he was facing when he felt the second shot, the witnesses say he was turned around sideways. And those witnesses are supported by the shot timing evidence that put the second shot at a time when he WAS turned sideways.
Again, in what universe is choosing 6 out of 63 not cherry picking but choosing 47 out of 63 is?
Yes. But also z270. Definitely NOT z222-230.
Yes, we agree Oswald was the lone shooter which leaves us with the conclusion that the witnesses who said they heard two shots at the end that were almost right on top of each other with almost no time between them were wrong. They didn't hear two shots together at the end, They might have heard two sounds from the same shot, but they didn't hear two shots.You should let Bob Jackson know that he didn’t hear what he still says he heard, two shots closer together (at 1:40):
Not a true statementSo who was watching JFK and said he continued to wave and smile after the first shot? If the first shot was before z164 and they were watching JFK, that is how they would have seen him react.
Reports are often wrong. The ones that don't fit a first shot before Z186 are definitely wrong.How do you know that reports are often wrong? Are you saying the the studies cited by Loftus showing 98% completeness and accuracy scores for witness recollection of the most salient details were faked? Or are you just going by your spidey senses about witnesses?
You actually believe that nonsense? The explanation for the condition of CE399 has been known for years. The nose of the bullet was not smashed because it never hit hard bone.So the less structurally strong base or sides smashed the bone did not get smashed? You might think it is not a problem but no one has ever duplicated anything like just JBC’s wrist damage with a missile looking anything like CE399.
Yes, there is no physical evidence of where the missed shot hit nor should we expect there to be. No one was looking for evidence of a missed shot because the initial belief was that JFK and JBC were hit by 3 separate shots with no misses. The SBT wasn't developed until months later.The FBI inspected the street and found no evidence of a bullet strike except on the curb near where Tague was standing.
It has never been established which shot cause Tague's wound. It's an open question.Open to you, maybe. Not to Tague.
The evidence isn't wrong. It's the myths that have grown out of people's misunderstanding of the evidence that are wrong.So the 47 or so who recalled the last two shots closer together weren’t wrong, just misunderstood? The 21 who recalled JFK react to the firsr shot weren’t wrong, just misunderstood?
You should let Bob Jackson know that he didn’t hear what he still says he heard, two shots closer together (at 1:40):
It would be a shame for him not to know the real truth, you being a much better judge of the shot spacing after seeing silent film than he is after actually hearing the shots.
So who was watching JFK and said he continued to wave and smile after the first shot? If the first shot was before z164 and they were watching JFK, that is how they would have seen him react.
How do you know that reports are often wrong?
Are you saying the the studies cited by Loftus showing 98% completeness and accuracy scores for witness recollection of the most salient details were faked? Or are you just going by your spidey senses about witnesses?
So the less structurally strong base or sides smashed the bone did not get smashed? You might think it is not a problem but no one has ever duplicated anything like just JBC’s wrist damage with a missile looking anything like CE399.
The FBI inspected the street and found no evidence of a bullet strike except on the curb near where Tague was standing.
Open to you, maybe. Not to Tague.
So the 47 or so who recalled the last two shots closer together weren’t wrong, just misunderstood? The 21 who recalled JFK react to the firsr shot weren’t wrong, just misunderstood?
[...]
Thanks to both LNs JohnC and AndrewM for exposing the main problem with the 3 shot theory as proposed by the WC.
The conventional WC theory for 3 shots is that the 1st shot missed the entire limo and the 2nd shot is the SBT at Z224 that went thru both men and thru JC’s wrist bone and came out looking like CE 399. 3rd shot is Z312-Z313 the head shot.
The conventional LN theory SEEMS to work except that the 1….2..3 shot pattern heard by a super majority of witnesses (2/3rds to 3/4ths depending how witness are counted) requires that the jury must believe that those majority of witnesses are wrong. The jury must accept CE 399 as evidence even though the witnesses who first saw the bullet would not verify the bullet. A report by FBI agent Odum that the bullet WAS verified by the 1st witness who found it, being denied by Odum 50 years later , must be due to Odum just being old and not remembering the report.
So AndrewM the alternative LN tries to solve this 1…2.3 patten by proposing the 1st shot was at Z-190, and was a hit , rather than a miss and that the movements of JFK and JC in sync at z224-z227 are not from being hit by a single bullet at that instant.
Instead the jury is told that the reaction of JFK at Z224 is a delayed response to the Z190 bullet going thru JFK which then hit JC in just his left thigh , bypassing JCs entire upper body. JC moving forward as seen at Z225-z227 and then JC turning back with a painful look on his face is NOT an expression of pain, rather it’s simply a delayed reaction to hearing a shot at Z190. JC’s facial expression is expressing fear rather than pain.
The jury is asked to accept that JCs upper body / shoulder angle at Z190-Z193 far more turned rightward than 45 degrees to the right than what appears in the actual Z film. In other words, you cannot trust what you see in the Z film with just your eyes alone. Measuring overlays or computer modeling by an expert such as Dale Myers is not offered however by AndrewM to prove the proposed twisted position of JC at Z190-Z193.
The 2nd shot proposed by AndrewM. at Z 270 approx is more problematic than the Z 190 shot.Here the jury must believe the entry /exit bullet path thru JCs upper body is aligned with a TSBD 6th floor trajectory even though JCs upper body/shoulders appears in Z 270-z273 frames to be nearly rotated 180 looking back at JFK. As JC leans back , this could possibly be movement “forward” indicative of being struck. by the Z270 bullet traveling at 2000 ft/sec. The jury should accept this because AndrewMs suggests his edited chopped off Z/film sequence from Z-270-Z280 depicts possibly forward movement and that a portion of JCs white shirt cuff damaged is reason to believe his right wrist was tangentially knicked only on the upper part of the wrist.
Finally , the jury must believe that as JC is falling back into his wife’s lap after the Z270 shot and there is an even more pronounced look on his face indicating pain, that even though he’s had one wound in the thigh and now a second wound going thru his upper body and hitting his wrist, that he is NOT in pain, rather it is just more “fear”.
So I have to congratulate these 2 remarkable LNs JohnC and AndrewM. for demonstrating to me that LNs are willing to go just about as far as CTs are in making excuses for a flawed theory they propose or for the conventional WC theory even if it means suggesting that a super majority of witnesses did not hear what they thought they heard.
It is not a problem that a majority of the witnesses said the last two shots were closer together because we know a majority of the witnesses can be wrong.
Garbage.
that has been the nutter's problem for 60+ years.
Nutter's know how to weigh evidence and determine what is probative and what is not. Eye and earwitness testimony that conflicts with what we see in the Z-film is not at all probative.
Actually, Nutters know how to cherry-pick witness statements and ignore other corroborating accounts.
Thumb1: it is necessary to get to their phony preset conclusion.
For the most part, Nutters don't rely on fallible human witnesses and instead look at the hard evidence which clearly points to Oswald as the lone gunman. There is no hard evidence of any other shooter from any other location. Witnesses have some value but only to the extent their accounts can be corroborated by the hard evidence. If one were to rely on witnesses to tell them what happened, it would be easy to construct a dozen or more scenarios depending on which witnesses one chooses to believe. The assassination only happened one way and the hard evidence tells us what that one way was.
IOW; we pick and choose the statement that serves us best
The case against Oswald can be made on the forensic evidence alone without a single eyewitness.
The case against Oswald can be made on the forensic evidence alone without a single eyewitness.I agree that one doesn't need Zapruder's camera to make the case against Oswald.
If I were to use an eyewitness, only one is needed, Zapruder's camera. It has perfect recall.
I agree that one doesn't need Zapruder's camera to make the case against Oswald.
But Zapruder's camera was silent and it did not have great resolution. If Zapruder's camera had sound, better resolution and a steady tripod, the zfilm might have perfect recall. In any event, you are relying on witnesses to support an early missed shot. The zfilm does not show that without an interpretation based on preferred witness evidence.
If we don't read the reactions of JBC and Willis as evidence of a gunshot, there is nothing in the Z-film that would tell us when Oswald's missed shot was firedOr that any shot missed.
That is why the WC never determined which shot missed. They allowed that it could be the first, second, or third shot.Until the HSCA used bogus acoustic evidence to conclude that there was a shot at around z160 and another shot at z190, most observers interpreted the WC report as favouring a missed second or third shot. This was certainly John McCloy's view.*
Or that any shot missed. Until the HSCA used bogus acoustic evidence to conclude that there was a shot at around z160 and another shot at z190, most observers interpreted the WC report as favouring a missed second or third shot. This was certainly John McCloy's view.*A lot of people misinterpreted what the WC said about the missed shot even though the WC clearly showed no favoritism to which shot missed. They presented the pros and cons of each one. Anyone who believes otherwise has very poor reading comprehension skills.
*McCloy testified to this before the HSCA (3 HSCA 599-612). He thought JBC could have been hit in the back and not noticed it until after it had struck. He even used two examples from his own experience. He related the story of a soldier standing beside him in a parade square in Berlin after WWII as they were preparing to welcome President Truman. The soldier was the stand-in for President in the parade rehearsal. He was shot by a sniper and had a delayed reaction before he said, "Jack, I think I'm shot". He survived. (3 HSCA 604-605)
A lot of people misinterpreted what the WC said about the missed shot even though the WC clearly showed no favoritism to which shot missed. They presented the pros and cons of each one. Anyone who believes otherwise has very poor reading comprehension skills.Well the WC also said that the SBT was not necessary and we know that only four of seven members agreed with it. Russell, Cooper and Boggs disagreed with the SBT.
As far as "most observers interpreted" goes, I don't know where you get that. For at least 20 years there is a clear consensus among the LNs I have engaged with that the missed shots was the first shot.I was referring to the period after 1964 until after the HSCA report in 1978…
You are the only LN I've ever met who doesn't think there was a missed shot.I think you are forgetting about Russell, Cooper and Boggs and the Connallys plus the Secret Service agents whose views are collected in Gerald Blaine’s book: The Kennedy Detail.
If there wasn't a missed shot, why was only one bullet found in the limo? Why were there only two bullets recovered?Well, one whole bullet and several fragments. But we also know that some fragments defelected up and struck high in the car and at least one fragment left the car. We don’t know if any others left the car but that is certainly possible or even probable.
That's nice but JBC didn't show a delay reaction. He reacted to being shot at the same instant JFK did. Both men suddenly flipped their arms upward at Z226. How do you explain that if they weren't both hit at the same time?The WC thought the neck shot was close to z210 and concluded that he was already reacting behind the sign based on how he appears when he first appears in z225. JBC is not reacting in z222-z226 so they thought his reaction was delayed.
PS, Are you ever going to get around to explaining how Oswald could have shot JBC in the back at Z271 when JBC was facing him at that time or does that question have you stumped?I have. You just don’t agree that it fits the medical evidence.
Well the WC also said that the SBT was not necessary and we know that only four of seven members agreed with it. Russell, Cooper and Boggs disagreed with the SBT.That means 4 of them figured it out and the other 3 didn't.
A lot has been learned since 1978. Most people hadn't even seen the Zapruder film by 1978. It was sometime in the latter 1980s that I first saw it.
I was referring to the period after 1964 until after the HSCA report in 1978…
I think you are forgetting about Russell, Cooper and Boggs and the Connallys plus the Secret Service agents whose views are collected in Gerald Blaine’s book: The Kennedy Detail.Well, one whole bullet and several fragments. But we also know that some fragments defelected up and struck high in the car and at least one fragment left the car. We don’t know if any others left the car but that is certainly possible or even probable.There is nothing in the WC conclusions that indicate they thought the shot was closer to Z210. They said it struck between Z210 and Z225. They were right about that.
The WC thought the neck shot was close to z210 and concluded that he was already reacting behind the sign based on how he appears when he first appears in z225.
WRONG!!! JBC is most definitely reacting in Z226 when he starts flipping his right arm upward in perfect unison with JFK bringing his arms up. That up and down motion of his right arm lasted just a half second and was immediately followed by him doubling over and dipping to his right. In addition, JBC's right shoulder dips at Z225 and in Z224 his jacket bulges out noticeably. All these are indications he has just been shot.
JBC is not reacting in z222-z226 so they thought his reaction was delayed.
I have. You just don’t agree that it fits the medical evidence.
.
You seem to think that it was a tumbling bullet that struck when JBC was facing forward but made a neat tunneling wound first along the fifth rib without damaging the adjacent muscles. After pulverizing the last 10 cm of rib, you think it then exited the chest passing through the chest and making a long ragged tear in the back if the cuff (but not the other side) and then made a nice round hole in the thigh in the direction of and along the femur.
That scenario is the one that strains belief.
The Z-film alone gives us clues as to when the first shot was fired without using any witnesses. We see JBC turn to look over his right shoulder at Z164. Here's where a CORROBORARED witness can come into play. He said he turned in response to hearing the first shot which he recognized as the sound of a high powered rifle. The film and JBC's statement jibe. Without JBC's statement it would be hard to determine that his turn to look over his right shoulder was a reaction to the first shot. The fact the film and his statement jibe strengthens the probative value of both. In addition we have Rosemary Willis running alongside the limo. She begins to slowdown during the Z160s and when she comes to a stop, she turns and looks back to the TSBD. She later said she did that upon hearing a gunshot. She didn't testify before the WC but was called by the HSCA. None of this is proof positive as to when the first shot was fired but taken as a whole, it is probative of a shot prior to Z164. If we add to that the blurring and frame jump in Z155, it is a strong indication of a shot around Z147-148.
If we don't read the reactions of JBC and Willis as evidence of a gunshot, there is nothing in the Z-film that would tell us when Oswald's missed shot was fired. That is why the WC never determined which shot missed. They allowed that it could be the first, second, or third shot.
Once again, you talk out of two sides of your mouth.
There is no sound on any film. You are backing into your a preset conclusion with no basis of fact.
You said witnesses cannot be relied on and are often times wrong. How do you know JBC was correct about when he turned?
He disputed the SBT directly. You cherry pick what you want.
A whole lot of "so-and-say said" arguments with nothing to support that so-and-so accurately remembered exactly what happened when.
Phil Willis took his number 5 picture when he heard a shot. That was about Z-frame 202.
Hugh Betzner took his number 3 picture and was winding his camera when he heard the same shot.
Sam Holland, was on the bridge. He heard the same shot when JFK reached for his brow. That occurs about Z-204.
Look at Betzner 3 and Willis 5 - see where the car is between two shots. WC didn't. Look at "Black Dog Man" in both pictures.
A human figure taken with 2 different cameras - both oddly without any flesh tone or distinct characteristics. (a black man huh?)
Rosemary told the HSCA: Ms. Willis stated that she was present with her father and a sister in the area of the grass section of the plaza at
the time of the Presidential motorcade on November 22, 1963. The other was a person who was standing just behind the
concrete wall near the triple underpass. "That person appeared to "disappear the next instant."
:) Your time line isn't proof of anything
Interesting, she actually stops short right around z- frame 200.
I've said UNCORROBORATED witnesses can't be relied upon.
JBC said he turned when he heard the shot. I can see when he turned It was Z164.
JBC disputed the SBT because he had been led to believe JFK was hit by the first shot and he KNEW he had been hit by the second shot. When asked if the single bullet could have occurred on the second shot, he said that's possible.A whole lot of "so-and-say said" arguments with nothing to support that so-and-so accurately remembered exactly what happened when.
How do you know when Rosemary Willis stopped and why? She ran ahead of the limo - how do you know she
wasn't looking back for the car. Her father told Shaw Trial he called her name - How do you know she didn't turn for that ?
She stopped for a shot. - When was the shot? You don't know. Witnesses are often wrong (but only when you want).
I can see when Rosemary Willis stopped. She started to slow down in the late Z160s. It took her about 3 steps to come to a complete stop and as soon as she did, she turned back toward the TSBD. Once again the Z-film shows it is the best witness available to us.
I've never claimed to have proof positive of when the first shot was fired. I have argued the best evidence is it was fired in the 147-148 time frame based on the camera jiggle at Z155. Others may disagree which is fine. Nobody else has definitive proof of when the first shot was fired either. It is all based on how we weigh the clues the Z-film provides us. I can say for fact that there was no shot at Z204 because I know Oswald fired all three shots and he couldn't have fired a shot at Z204 and another at Z219-200. In addition, the tree would have still blocked Oswald's view of JFK at Z204 making it unlikely Oswald would fire a shot then when his target was about to come into the clear in less than half a second.
All pretext by you. Disputed and corroborated as false by Phil Willis, Hugh Betzner, Sam Holland and Rosemary Willis.
If every witness is accurate in their recollections of how the shooting happened, then it happened a dozen or more different ways
...and you can pick and choose the ones you like.
Thumb1: that's what you do.
Yes one can pick and choose which ones they like which is what most conspiracy theories are based on. I choose to let the forensic evidence tell me which ones to like. It gives me a much clearer picture of what happened.
If this were a game of Clue, the winning answer would be Oswald did it with the Carcano from the TSBD.
There is nothing forensic or even valid in cherry-picking witness statements to a pretext while ignoring corroborated conflicts.Such as?
Since all the forensic evidence points to Oswald and nobody else, Oswald deniers have no choice but to claim it's the evidence that is invalid.
broken evidence short of proof.
Such as?
Such as?Since all the forensic evidence points to Oswald and nobody else, Oswald deniers have no choice but to claim it's the evidence that is invalid.
read much?As I explained earlier, JBC knew he had been hit by the second shot. His objection to the SBT was that he believed JFK had been hit by the first shot. That's why he refused to believe the SBT. In later years when asked if they could have been both hit by the second shot, he said it was a possibility. In fact if JFK was hit by the second shot (which he was) and JBC was correct that he was hit by the second shot (he was), the SBT is not only a possibility, it is a certainty.
Once again, you talk out of two sides of your mouth.
There is no sound on any film. You are backing into your a preset conclusion with no basis of fact.
You said witnesses cannot be relied on and are often times wrong. How do you know JBC was correct about when he turned?
He disputed the SBT directly. You cherry pick what you want.
Phil Willis took his number 5 picture when he heard a shot. That was about Z-frame 202.
Hugh Betzner took his number 3 picture and was winding his camera when he heard the same shot.If he was winding his camera when he heard the shot, how does that establish which frame of the Z-film he heard that shot?
Sam Holland, was on the bridge. He heard the same shot when JFK reached for his brow. That occurs about Z-204.JFK was not reaching for his brow at Z202. He had been waving to the spectators on his right and was starting to lower his hand by that time. That motion continued until he was behind the sign when the second shot was fired. Are we supposed to believe that Sam Holland could tell exactly where JFK's hand was at the time of the shot from his vantage point on the overpass?
Rosemary told the HSCA: Ms. Willis stated that she was present with her father and a sister in the area of the grass section of the plaza atOh that's some real compelling evidence.
the time of the Presidential motorcade on November 22, 1963. The other was a person who was standing just behind the
concrete wall near the triple underpass. "That person appeared to "disappear the next instant."
I can see her stop and look back toward the TSBD. The rest requires the ability to add 2 + 2.
How do you know when Rosemary Willis stopped and why?
She ran ahead of the limo - how do you know she
wasn't looking back for the car. Her father told Shaw Trial he called her name - How do you know she didn't turn for that ?
She stopped for a shot. - When was the shot? You don't know. Witnesses are often wrong (but only when you want).
That is less than two seconds from the time she started to slow down. That seems like a reasonable amount of time for her to come to a complete stop before she turned toward the TSBD.
:) Your time line isn't proof of anything
Interesting, she actually stops short right around z- frame 200.
WC defenders have no choice but to claim the evidence points to Lee regardless of any direct conflicts.There is no forensic evidence that conflicts with the conclusion Oswald was the assassin. That all points to him. It's inevitable that conclusion is going to conflict with some of the eyewitness testimony because that body of evidence conflicts with itself. There is no way to reach any conclusion that doesn't conflict with what somebody has said.
That means 4 of them figured it out and the other 3 didn't.Or the other way around.
A lot has been learned since 1978. Most people hadn't even seen the Zapruder film by 1978. It was sometime in the latter 1980s that I first saw it.There is nothing in the WC conclusions that indicate they thought the shot was closer to Z210.
WRONG!!! JBC is most definitely reacting in Z226 when he starts flipping his right arm upward in perfect unison with JFK bringing his arms up. That up and down motion of his right arm lasted just a half second and was immediately followed by him doubling over and dipping to his right. In addition, JBC's right shoulder dips at Z225 and in Z224 his jacket bulges out noticeably. All these are indications he has just been shot.The delay was based on the first shot striking JFK. They were trying to understand why JBC did not feel it immediately (WR 112):
Where are you getting your information? The entry wound on JBC's back was elongated almost the length of a Carcano bullet. The bullet had to be tumbling to make that kind of wound and the father/son Haas ballistics showed they a Carcano bullet will tumble after passing through ballistic gel as well as ballistic soap.I am not sure where you are getting your information but it is not correct. The wound in the back was 1.5 cm by .8 cm. The bullet was exactly 3 cm long. Dr. Shaw said the bullet made a nice tunnelling wound along the fifth rib and "The fact that the muscle bundles on either side of the fifth rib were not damaged meant that the missile to strip away 10 centimeters of the rib had to follow this rib pretty much along its line of inclination." (4 H 112). Difficult to imagine a sideways bullet doing that.
The WC scenario with a single bullet striking two men is the only explanation of the shooting that has stood the test of time. Any objections to it are easily refuted.
Or the other way around.How would JBC have known whether JFK was hit by the first shot or the second.
The Connallys always maintained 3 shots, 3 hits and they were in a very good position to know.
JFK and JBC both felt it at the same time and both reacted at the same time when both of them threw their arms upward in perfect unison at Z226. It's no wonder they had a hard time understanding how Oswald could have fired so rapidly AND so accurately if there had been a second shot miss.
(https://i.postimg.cc/KYf4L8cV/image.png)
The WC suggested that if the first shot did not miss and the third was the last shot (for which they cited much evidence) then the shooter was shooting at very near the minimum allowable time between shots, which would put the first shot striking JFK "at about frame z213" (WR 115).
The delay was based on the first shot striking JFK. They were trying to understand why JBC did not feel it immediately (WR 112):
(https://i.postimg.cc/4N8K21D3/image.png)
If the WC had the benefit of modern technology and more time to look at blow ups of the Z-frames. they might have figured out that JFK's right hand was still moving down at Z225 and didn't start upward until Z226, the same frame JBC's arm started up. Coincidence? Hardly.
They noted that JFK seemed to be reacting to his neck wound by raising his hands to his throat and that he was blocked by the Stemmons sign (WR 98). Although Shaneyfelt had suggested his reaction was "barely apparent" at z225, the Commission put that comment in quotes and did not adopt it as their conclusion. After all, JFK's left forearm had moved from a vertical position on his right side to a horizontal position in front of his chest by z 224 and the right hand from a vertical wave to a horizontal curl. The WC may have thought that was a bit more than a "barely apparent" reaction.
Another example of the WC missing clues because they lacked the technology to do a frame-by-frame study with magnified frames. What they did was create still photos of the magnified frames but that didn't allow them to see the subtle changes from frame to frame like the bulging of JBC's jacket or JFK's hand still moving downward at Z225. They also apparently missed the upward movement of JBC's right arm at Z226. I don't blame them for that. It took decades and armies of researchers to discover these very important clues.
The reduction in the amount of white area of the shirt from z223-224 appears to be the reverse of the increase in white area from z222-223. Besides, no one at the time had even suggested this was a bulge let alone a bulge from the bullet striking it.
So you have JFK reacting to getting shot and JBC reacting to the sound of a shot at precisely the same time and in precisely the same manner, even though according to you that even happened 33 frames, almost 2 seconds earlier. You also choose to ignore immediately after his arm flip, JBC doubled over and dipped to his right, then began twisting dramatically in his seat. And you want to pretend all those gyrations are not in reaction to being shot. Was he anticipating getting shot at 271?
In any event, both did react to the first shot so there is nothing "co-incidental" about their reactions being at roughly the same time. One might expect JBC's to be slower since his was a deliberate reaction after realizing that it was a rifle shot and an assassination was underway.
Most observers, including members of the Commission, thought there was a material delay in JBC's reaction.I am not sure where you are getting your information but it is not correct. The wound in the back was 1.5 cm by .8 cm. The bullet was exactly 3 cm long. Dr. Shaw said the bullet made a nice tunnelling wound along the fifth rib and "The fact that the muscle bundles on either side of the fifth rib were not damaged meant that the missile to strip away 10 centimeters of the rib had to follow this rib pretty much along its line of inclination." (4 H 112). Difficult to imagine a sideways bullet doing that.The reason they considered the possibility of a delayed reaction by JBC is because the way he said he reacted after being struck. He said he doubled over. The Z-film showed he dipped to his right as well as doubling over. Those reactions occurred in the Z230s, about a half second after his initial reflexive reaction of flipping his arm upward and Z226. Had they noticed that, they wouldn't have had to speculate about a delayed reaction. They probably would have narrowed down the time frame for the single bullet from between Z210 and Z225 to a few frames before Z225, probably in the Z221-222 window.
How about showing us an ACCURATE drawing of JBC's position at Z271 that show how a bullet could enter his back by his right armpit and exit from the right side of his torso. I know I'll be waiting a long time to see that. Like forever.
It is a much bigger challenge to explain how a shot with JBC turned forward could have entered at the back of the armpit and exited under and medial to his right nipple without penetrating the pleural cavity and without damaging any of the muscles around the rib. If the bullet had deflected to the right with him facing forward, it would not have exited where it did. However, with him turned around sharply to the rear, the right nipple moves to the right of the scapula. So the fifth rib keeping the bullet to the right before passing through the rib (at mid-armpit) keeps the bullet from penetrating the chest wall. Turn around like that from a sitting position and you can see how the right nipple moves a bit to the right of the scapula and you can see how the fifth rib makes an almost straight path between them.
How would JBC have known whether JFK was hit by the first shot or the second.He knew that JFK had moved. He mentioned that in his hospital bed interview. He would also know how difficult it is to miss a target the size of the limousine from anywhere in a place as small as Dealey Plaza.
As for Nellie, she didn't get much of anythingu right.JFK and JBC both felt it at the same time and both reacted at the same time when both of them threw their arms upward in perfect unison at Z226. It's no wonder they had a hard time understanding how Oswald could have fired so rapidly AND so accurately if there had been a second shot miss.
This passage shows just how wrong witnesses can be.Altgens did say “almost simultaneously” “a fraction ahead of my picture” in his testimony to the WC but in his wire story written shortly after the events on 22Nov63 he said he heard a noise like fireworks popping and he snapped a picture of the motorcade “at about that time”. The reverberation may have affected his perception of the exact time of the noise. The WC was suggesting that if he took his photo at the time of a shot that it was the second shot.
" According to Altgens, he snapped the picture "almost simultaneously" with a shot which he is confident was the first one fired."
His photo has been synced to Z255 which isn't even close to the time either the first or second shot was fired. The reality is it was taken 2 seconds after the second shot was fired and hit both men. Altgens statement doesn't even fit your theory that the shots were fired at Z193 and Z271.
I can't find the full set of Altgens photos but it would not surprise me if he actually took photo #5 simultaneously with the first shot, but that's speculation. What isn't speculation is that he got it wrong.His #5 photo was on Houston just after the turn at Main.
Clint Hill also got it wrong. He only remembers hearing 2 shots. He remembers the shot that hit JFK in the back thinking that was the first shot. He race forward and saw the head shot at what he estimates was 5 seconds. That's pretty close. It was actually 4.9 seconds between the two shots which struck JFK. So which shot didn't he hear.In his 6th Floor interview he said oither agents told him that there was a shot just after he jumped off as he was running beside the QM.
An earlier first shot or an intervening shot between the two that hit JFK. It's hard for me to believe he wouldn't have heard an intervening shot between the two which hit JFK.He may have been concentrating on other things when he was running.
So you have JFK reacting to getting shot and JBC reacting to the sound of a shot at precisely the same time and in precisely the same manner, even though according to you that even happened 33 frames, almost 2 seconds earlier.I suggest that the change in JFK’s head and hand beginning at z193-194 was the beginning of his reaction. Because it did not strike bone, he may not have realized what happened and the reaction began with a realization that something was wrong. It may be that it wasn’t until he tried to breathe about two seconds later that he began struggling to breathe. JBC may have taken about the same time or a bit less to process what he had heard and decide to turn around to see JFK. So it doesn’t strike me as being unexpected that JBC’s visible reaction began about the time that JFK’s struggling to breathe reaction appeared.
You also choose to ignore immediately after his arm flip, JBC doubled over and dipped to his right, then began twisting dramatically in his seat.I don’t ignore it at all. All I am saying is that it is not a reaction to being hit in the back by a bullet. Rather it is a reaction to hearing it and preparing to turn around, which he then does.
And you want to pretend all those gyrations are no in reaction to being shot. Was he anticipating getting shot at 271??? He was trying to get a look JFK, He was sitting on a low, cramped floor-mounted jump seat. It wasn’t easy to turn around especially since JFK had moved to the left.
How about showing us an ACCURATE drawing of JBC's position at Z271 that show how a bullet could enter his back by his right armpit and exit from the right side of his torso. I know I'll be waiting a long time to see that. Like forever.Without a proper model of a twisted torso the best I can do is ask you to turn around like JBCis at z271 and note the positions of the edge of the right scapula, the fifth rib and the right nipple.
He knew that JFK had moved. He mentioned that in his hospital bed interview. He would also know how difficult it is to miss a target the size of the limousine from anywhere in a place as small as Dealey Plaza.A whole lot of so-and-so-said evidence which is all you've got. It's not at all compelling.
But JBC doesn’t have to provide that evidence. There at least 21 witnesses plus another 15 witnesses along Elm St . who put the first shot striking JFK. Then there are the 47 witnesses who recalled the last two shots closer together that further nuke the first shot miss.
Now you have to make excuses for why one of your witnesses got it so wrong. In what universe is a 2 second difference almost simultaneous.
Nellie was no worse a witness than any of the other 20 first shot hit witnesses that you reject. According to the SBT adherents, all those 80+ witnesses got it completely backward.
Altens did say “almost simultaneously” “a fraction ahead of my picture” in his testimony to the WC but in his wire story written shortly after the events on 22Nov63 he said he heard a noise like fireworks popping and he snapped a picture of the motorcade “at about that time”. The reverberation may have affected his perception of the exact time of the noise. The WC was suggesting that if he took his photo at the time of a shot that it was the second shot.
His #5 photo was on Houston just after the turn at Main.
WOW. Less than 30 seconds. He really zeroed in on it.
His sense of time was a bit peculiar. He thought the shots were quick but estimated the time between first and last to be “less than 30 seconds” (7 H 520).
In his 6th Floor interview he said oither agents told him that there was a shot just after he jumped off as he was running beside the QM.
He may have been concentrating on other things when he was running.
Suggest all you want. Nobody is buying it.
I suggest that the change in JFK’s head and hand beginning at z193-194 was the beginning of his reaction.
Now you are trying to rationalize. Your theory of what happened isn't the least bit plausible from beginning to end.
Because it did not strike bone, he may not have realized what happened and the reaction began with a realization that something was wrong. It may be that it wasn’t until he tried to breathe about two seconds later that he began struggling to breathe. JBC may have taken about the same time or a bit less to process what he had heard and decide to turn around to see JFK. So it doesn’t strike me as being unexpected that JBC’s visible reaction began about the time that JFK’s struggling to breathe reaction appeared.
I don’t ignore it at all. All I am saying is that it is not a reaction to being hit in the back by a bullet. Rather it is a reaction to hearing it and preparing to turn around, which he then does.Is that what you have convinced yourself of over all these years?
Are you serious? Who needs to be told that is what happened. We can see it with our own eyes. Look at the damn Z271 frame. JBC is looking backward in the direction of Oswald. No way Oswald could shoot him in the back at that frame. It's no wonder you're so mixed up because you base all your beliefs on what people have said instead of looking at the evidence for yourself. The Z-film allows us all to be witnesses to the assassination but you choose to ignore what it is showing us because you want to believe your cockamamie theory instead.
You ignore the fact that no one said that JBC turned around after the second shot and looked rearward in the 3 seconds following the second shot before laying down? Hint: maybe it was because he didn’t.
?? He was trying to get a look JFK, He was sitting on a low, cramped floor-mounted jump seat. It wasn’t easy to turn around especially since JFK had moved to the left.Without a proper model of a twisted torso the best I can do is ask you to turn around like JBCis at z271 and note the positions of the edge of the right scapula, the fifth rib and the right nipple.I did. There's no way for someone I was facing could shoot me in the back. That shoots down your silly theory of JBC being shot at Z271.
A whole lot of so-and-so-said evidence which is all you've got. It's not at all compelling.Now you have to make excuses for why one of your witnesses got it so wrong. In what universe is a 2 second difference almost simultaneous.I find it quite a bit more compelling than a missed first shot for which there are not only zero witnesses but over 80 witnesses who say it didn't happen. You will never find a real case where this has occurred.( And I am not even talking about the improbability of someone deciding to shoot when the target is moving across the field of view after piling boxes for a shot down the street and then missing not only the target but the entire 7 by 21 foot car at 160 feet; and I will overlook the complete absence of a mark in whatever it was supposed to have hit.)
The other agents were wrong. Being a SS agent doesn't endow somebody with super powers of perception. They are as prone to error as any other witness.Suggest all you want.On the off-chance you might want to view the discussion of the second shot, it begins at around the 33 minute mark:
I did. There's no way for someone I was facing could shoot me in the back. That shoots down your silly theory of JBC being shot at Z271.The bullet entered at the edge of the right scapula which is the rear border of the armpit and passed throught the fifth rib at the middle of the armpit. Explain how that happened if he wasn't turned sharply right as Nellie, Gayle Newman and 47 earwitnesses said he was.
If the WC had the benefit of modern technology and more time to look at blow ups of the Z-frames. they might have figured out that JFK's right hand was still moving down at Z225 and didn't start upward until Z226, the same frame JBC's arm started up. Coincidence? Hardly.Another example of the WC missing clues because they lacked the technology to do a frame-by-frame study with magnified frames. What they did was create still photos of the magnified frames but that didn't allow them to see the subtle changes from frame to frame like the bulging of JBC's jacket or JFK's hand still moving downward at Z225.
I find it quite a bit more compelling than a missed first shot for which there are not only zero witnesses
but over 80 witnesses who say it didn't happen.Do you think by exaggerating the split of witnesses you make your argument more compelling. It's not working.
I've already pointed out to you the large number of witnesses who said the shots came from the GK and were dead wrong.
You will never find a real case where this has occurred.
(And I am not even talking about the improbability of someone deciding to shoot when the target is moving across the field of view after piling boxes for a shot down the street and then missing not only the target but the entire 7 by 21 foot car at 160 feet; and I will overlook the complete absence of a mark in whatever it was supposed to have hit.)Why would anyone have looked for a mark in the street when for months after the shooting it was believed all three shots struck inside the limo. If you want to talk about missing evidence, explain why only two bullets were recovered if three struck inside the limo.
You're citing a witness who only heard 2 of the 3 shots to make your point. You are getting desperate. To make matters worse, Gary Mack mistakenly states the WC concluded the first shot hit both JFK and JBC and the second shot missed. Why do you rely on clueless people to make your points?
. On the off-chance you might want to view the discussion of the second shot, it begins at around the 33 minute mark:
The bullet entered at the edge of the right scapula which is the rear border of the armpit and passed throught the fifth rib at the middle of the armpit. Explain how that happened if he wasn't turned sharply right as Nellie, Gayle Newman and 47 earwitnesses said he was.JBC was turned to he right. That's never been in dispute.
Even more evidence.
Here's a recreation of Z222 with the Queen Mary(which was a mistake) and at first I thought this makes the SBF kind of impossible because Connally is obviously too high but thankfully they took two photos and the other was from Zapruder's position and when you compare Zapruder's view with the recreation view it's clear that in the actual Limo, the jump seat is much lower which makes the SBF a no brainer!
Oh, there is a witness who said JFK did not react to the first shot and continued to smile and wave after? Was this important witness called to testify to the WC?
Simply not true.
Do you think by exaggerating the split of witnesses you make your argument more compelling. It's not working.That you would suggest that it is an exaggeration shows you haven't been checking the lists of witnesses I provided. I gave you all their names. You have not provided the names or cites to anyone who said that 1. JFK did not react to the first shot 2. said the first shot occurred when the motorcade was in a position at a point before z186 3. the last two shots were not closer together whom I did not name and reference.
I've already pointed out to you the large number of witnesses who said the shots came from the GK and were dead wrong.Sigh. How many times do I have to respond to this? I am getting the impression that you don't want to engage in a serious discussion because you don't seem to read what I have written and you keep repeating this. Witness perception of sound source location is determined by the direction of the sound.so with reflective surfaces at different distances from observers in DP there will be different directions of sound arriving at different intervals. The ear witnesses were just relating where the sound appeared to the to be coming from. That differed depending on where they were located in Dealey Plaza and how they were facing. This did not affect ability to count the shots or observe the pattern of shots.
Why would anyone have looked for a mark in the street when for months after the shooting it was believed all three shots struck inside the limo.They did though. Do you think bullet marks just disappear?
JBC was turned to he right. That's never been in dispute.Not at z222-225 when you say the second shot occurred.
Oh, there is a witness who said JFK did not react to the first shot and continued to smile and wave after? Was this important witness called to testify to the WC?Yes, there is. Zapruder's camera.
That you would suggest that it is an exaggeration shows you haven't been checking the lists of witnesses I provided. I gave you all their names. You have not provided the names or cites to anyone who said that 1. JFK did not react to the first shot 2. said the first shot occurred when the motorcade was in a position at a point before z186 3. the last two shots were not closer together whom I did not name and reference.Sigh. How many times do I have to respond to this? I am getting the impression that you don't want to engage in a serious discussion because you don't seem to read what I have written and you keep repeating this. Witness perception of sound source location is determined by the direction of the sound.so with reflective surfaces at different distances from observers in DP there will be different directions of sound arriving at different intervals. The ear witnesses were just relating where the sound appeared to the to be coming from. That differed depending on where they were located in Dealey Plaza and how they were facing. This did not affect ability to count the shots or observe the pattern of shots.Yes. With months of traffic passing over it, asphalt surfaces will smooth out.
They did though. Do you think bullet marks just disappear?
Not at z222-225 when you say the second shot occurred.Once again you display your poor powers of perception. JBC shoulders are most definitely turned to the right during that time frame.
Yes, there is. Zapruder's camera.The camera was a deaf witness and it cannot explain itself. Hearing witnesses can.
Yes. With months of traffic passing over it, asphalt surfaces will smooth out.Once again you display your poor powers of perception. JBC shoulders are most definitely turned to the right during that time frame.I think you need to see what a deposit of 1900 joules of jacketed bullet kinetic energy into asphalt would look like.
And still you offer no illustration that shows how it was even possible for JBC to be shot in the back by Oswald at Z271. The impossibility of that alone destroys your entire premise. Unless and until you can do that, you are just blowing smoke.The illustration is made by a person turning like JBC is in z271 and seeing how the lateral edge of the shoulder blade, the fifth rib and the right nipple form a straight line going left to right without passing through the pulmonary wall. But you do have to do it and feel where these parts are in order to see it.
The camera was a deaf witness and it cannot explain itself. Hearing witnesses can.
All I am doing is pointing out as a matter of fact what witnesses recalled and then stating what conclusions the evidence leads to. I have given you the 9 pages of shot spacing witness accounts that are distributed this way:
(https://i.postimg.cc/GhM7gbHM/IMG-2692.jpg)
I gave you the lists of the others but you didn’t bother to read what they said so here is what they said:
(https://i.postimg.cc/d1vjtfhy/IMG-2696.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/gJdHk7xV/IMG-2695.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/hjg1PYXr/IMG-2694.jpg)
I think you need to see what a deposit of 1900 joules of jacketed bullet kinetic energy into asphalt would look like.
The illustration is made by a person turning like JBC is in z271 and seeing how the lateral edge of the shoulder blade, the fifth rib and the right nipple form a straight line going left to right without passing through the pulmonary wall. But you do have to do it and feel where these parts are in order to see it.
It's pointless even discussing any of this other crap because if you can't show it's even possible for JBC to be shot in the back at Z271, the rest of your theory collapses like a house of cards. I'm not even asking you to prove he was shot in that back at or about Z271. Just show us that it was possible. Apparently, you can't do that.I agree it is pointless if you can’t see that with your torso twisted and shoulders turned 90 degrees to the hips, the lateral edge of the scapula, middle of the right armpit and a point just below and medial to the right nipple align and form a left-to-right path that does not pass through the pleural cavity and right lung.
I agree it is pointless if you can’t see that with your torso twisted and shoulders turned 90 degrees to the hips, the lateral edge of the scapula, middle of the right armpit and a point just below and medial to the right nipple align and form a left-to-right path that does not pass through the pleural cavity and right lung.
Why not at least try sitting and, keeping your hips facing forward and with your finger on the edge of your shoulder blade, turn your shoulders 90 degrees. Your finger, fifth rib at mid armpit and right nipple will form a straight line going around the pleural cavity.
I am not a thoracic surgeon nor anatomist, but it may be that the known bullet path requires that kind of right turn for the bullet path not to penetrate the pleural cavity.
I am also saddened that you would consider the honest recollections of the witnesses to the murder of your President to be crap.
It's pointless even discussing any of this other crap because if you can't show it's even possible for JBC to be shot in the back at Z271, the rest of your theory collapses like a house of cards. I'm not even asking you to prove he was shot in that back at or about Z271. Just show us that it was possible. Apparently, you can't do that.All I have done is show that the recollections of witnesses overwhelmingly put the first shot hitting JFK in the neck and the second shot striking JBC in the right armpit after the midpoint between the first and third, and the third striking JFK in the head.
All I have done is show that the recollections of witnesses overwhelmingly put the first shot hitting JFK in the neck and the second shot striking JBC in the right armpit after the midpoint between the first and third, and the third striking JFK in the head.
So, according to that evidence the second shot occurred when JBC was turned sideways. That is not my “theory”. That just follows from that witness evidence. And, this is exactly what Nellie and Gayle Newman recalled seeing shortly after the events.
Now you are saying that you can prove that, despite being independent and mutually consistent, this evidence is all wrong. So it is up to you to show that what the witnesses said happened could not have occurred. So why don’t you show us why the bullet path through JBC ‘s torso doesn’t work at z271 but does at z222?
It's pointless even discussing any of this other crap because if you can't show it's even possible for JBC to be shot in the back at Z271, the rest of your theory collapses like a house of cards. I'm not even asking you to prove he was shot in that back at or about Z271. Just show us that it was possible. Apparently, you can't do that.And so it goes - my apologies to Monty Python:
And so it goes - my apologies to Monty Python:
MASON: Well an argument is not the same as contradiction.
CORBETT: Can be.
MASON: No it can’t. An argument’s a collective series of statements to establish a definite proposition. In this case, the witnesses say the first shot struck JFK and the vast majority said last two shots were closer together. That means a separate shot hit JBC after the midpoint between 1 and 3. If you want to contradict that it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary.
CORBETT: No it isn't and no I don't. You have to disprove my spidey senses and they tell me that JBC could not have been hit in the torso at z271.
MASON: No I don't. You keep just contradicting.
CORBETT: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
MASON: But it isn’t just saying, “no it isn’t.”
CORBETT: Yes it is!
MASON: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction’s just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
CORBETT: No it isn’t. ....
You've been given every opportunity to illustrate how it would even be possible for Oswald to shoot JBC in the back when JBC was facing him and you have declined to do so. We both know you can't do it because you know that would have been impossible. Since your entire theory of what happened collapses without that element, there is no point in even discussing the rest of your silly theory which has a whole bunch of other problems.I see that should have said:
You have managed to do one thing. You have the LNs and CTs agreeing with each other on something. We all know how ludicrous your theory is.
I see that should have said:
MASON: Well an argument is not the same as contradiction.
CORBETT: Can be.
MASON: No it can’t. An argument’s a collective series of statements to establish a definite proposition. In this case, the witnesses say the first shot struck JFK and the vast majority said last two shots were closer together. That means a separate shot hit JBC after the midpoint between 1 and 3. I have explained how the bullet path through the body, as found by Dr. Shaw, is consistent with hitting JBC while his torso is twisted around so his shoulders are sideways in the car. In that position a path from the lateral edge of the scapula to right nipple goes around the pleural cavity. The wounds are inconsistent with him facing forward because when facing forward the path from back wound to exit wound goes through the pleural cavity. If you want to contradict that it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary.
CORBETT: No it isn't and no I don't. You have to disprove my spidey senses and they tell me that JBC could not have been hit in the torso at z271.
MASON: No I don't. You keep just contradicting.
CORBETT: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
MASON: But it isn’t just saying, “no it isn’t.”
CORBETT: Yes it is!
MASON: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction’s just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
CORBETT: No it isn’t. ....
You continue to avoid the elephant in the room. Your theory is impossible due to JBC's position at Z271. Since you can't illustrate how JBC could be shot in the back while facing Oswald, nothing else matters. If you can't do that, and it's obvious you can't, there's no point in discussing any other aspect of your FUBAR theory. I don't even bother to read what you post anymore.His chest wasn't facing Oswald. His head was turned about 90 degrees to this shoulders and his shoulders were turned 90 degrees to the car forward direction. His chest was turned sideways in the car, not backward. When the shoulders turn the shoulder blade or scapula moves back exposing more of the armpit, which is where JBC was struck. There is no problem with a bullet going from just right of the right edge of the right scapula and striking the fifth rib, deflecting right and exiting under the right nipple, which was right of the entry wound with him turned as he was at z271.
He wasn't facing Oswald. His head was turned about 90 degrees to this shoulders and his shoulders were turned 90 degrees to the car forward direction. He was turned sideways in the car, not backward. When the shoulders turn the shoulder blade or scapula moves back exposing more of the armpit, which is where JBC was struck. There is no problem with a bullet going from just right of the right edge of the right scapula and striking the fifth rib, deflecting right a bit and exiting under the right nipple.
Why don't you illustrate? Oh, wait. You can't. Never mind.I have tried to find a cross section of the human torso with the hips facing forward and the shoulders turned 90 degrees. This should give you the general idea:
I have tried to find a cross section of the human torso with the hips facing forward and the shoulders turned 90 degrees. This should give you the general idea:
(https://i.postimg.cc/xCvBkMw6/image.png)
I ask for an illustration and you give me abstract art.Unfortunately, the human body is more complicated than ellipses and circles. The relative positions of shoulders, scapulas, ribs and skin changes with different turning positions. What I presented was a twisted torso with the shoulders aligned with the car direction and the hips facing forward. That was his position at z271.
How about just a basic drawing using simple ovals to represent JBC's head and shoulders. Use a long oval for his shoulders and a short oval for his head and show us how you think his head and shoulders were turned in relation to the path of the bullet. Then we can compare that to Z271 to see if it is even close to JBC's position at that frame. Your last illustrations was only off about 90 degrees for both his head and shoulders.
Unfortunately, the human body is more complicated than ellipses and circles. The relative positions of shoulders, scapulas, ribs and skin changes with different turning positions. What I presented was a twisted torso with the shoulders aligned with the car direction and the hips facing forward. That was his position at z271.
The impact felt by JBC is consistent with significant bullet momentum being imparted to the body suddenly. That is consistent with a forceful impact to what could only have been the fifth rib. We know the fifth rib flexed enough to cause a fracture near the spine. That same force is also applied by the rib to the bullet and that must cause a change in bullet momentum. Regardless of how JBC was turned, that would have been a force on the left side of the bullet meaning the change in direction had to be to the right. That would be the case whether he was turned forward or, as the witnesses said, sideways.
Many people have used ovals to show both head rotation and shoulder rotation and the relation of the head to the shoulders. You can't present an illustration in any form that will show JBC turned as he was in Z271 that would have allowed Oswald to shoot him in the back so you continue to try to bluff your way through. The shot you claim is simply impossible and we both know it and only one of us is willing to say it.First of all you need to get the basic medical facts straight. JBC was shot in the back of the right armpit just to the right of his right scapula. The bullet struck the fifth rib and made a tunnelling path along a few cm of rib without damaging the surrounding muscle before passing through and destroying the last 10 cm of the fifth rib before exiting just medial to and below the right nipple. The bullet exited through the right jacket pocket.
First of all you need to get the basic medical facts straight. JBC was shot in the back of the right armpit just to the right of his right scapula.
The bullet struck the fifth rib and made a tunnelling path along a few cm of rib without damaging the surrounding muscle before passing through and destroying the last 10 cm of the fifth rib before exiting just medial to and below the right nipple. The bullet exited through the right jacket pocket.Which wouldn't have been possible if he was facing JFK and Oswald as he was in Z271. I'm not surprised you have resisted illustrating that since it is not possible.
So the idea that he was hit in the back is not quite correct.
He was actually hit in the right armpit.
There is no difficulty for a bullet entering the back of the right armpit at z271. You seem to think that Connally's back had to be facing Oswald. This is incorrect. The bullet just had to impact him in the right armpit immediately right of the edge of the scapula.
Since you want to use ellipses and circles to show complex anatomy, why don't you show us how you think JBC is positioned at z271. I have already shown you my detailed graphic which has his shoulders turned to align with the car direction. You seem to have difficulty seeing that so why don't you show what you think JBC's position was there?
You seem to have an odd concept of human anatomy.
That means he was shot in the back. He got shot when his back was turned toward the exit wound in JFK's throat.Which wouldn't have been possible if he was facing JFK and Oswald as he was in Z271. I'm not surprised you have resisted illustrating that since it is not possible.
JBC said it felt like someone had punched him IN THE BACK with a doubled up fist. We know how much you rely on witnesses.
You seem to have an odd concept of human anatomy.You tell me I have an odd concept of human anatomy and then make a statement as ridiculous as that. Here is Z271.
The direction his face was facing is not material. What matters is that the back of the right armpit was "facing" Oswald at z271.
You're bonkers.
His back was twisted. The lowest part was "facing" the back seat and shoulders were aligned with the car direction and "facing" sideways. The parts in between were in between those directions.
You tell me I have an odd concept of human anatomy and then make a statement as ridiculous as that. Here is Z271.You do realize that at z271 JBC's right side is "facing" toward the TSBD/Oswald. I hope you realize that the right armpit is on the right side and that with his right arm up and in front of his chest the right armpit is exposed to a shot from the direction of the TSBD/Oswald. The right scapula is not "facing" the TSBD/Oswald although the right edge of it is exposed to a shot from that direction. It is "facing" the grassy area between Elm and Main. In any event, he was not hit in the scapula.
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z271.jpg
The back of his armpit is turned toward the grassy area between Elm and Main.I am not sure what you mean by the direction the back of his armpit is facing. The back of his armpit is a particular location. It doesn't face anywhere. What matters is whether the back of his armpit was exposed to a shot from Oswald's rifle. Not only was the back of his armpit exposed = the entire armpit was exposed. If you think it wasn't, what on earth could have blocked it?
It would require the most magical of all magic bullets for a shot fired from the sniper's nest to enter the back of his right armpit and exit under his right nipple. Your continued refusal to even attempt to diagram such a shot is tacit admission of that fact.You're bonkers.I have given you the diagram showing the exit location. What more do you need? It shows the bullet coming from the TSBD/Oswald direction. It shows the direction of the shoulders. It shows the location of the entrance and exit wounds. It shows the location of the forearm in relation to the exit wound.
You do realized that at z271 JBC's right side is "facing" toward the TSBD/Oswald.
I hope you realize that the right armpit is on the right side and that with his right arm up and in front of his chest the right armpit is exposed to a shot from the direction of the TSBD/Oswald.The front of his right armpit is exposed to Oswald. That's not where the bullet entered. The bullet entered at the rear near his right armpit. That is turned away from Oswald.
When's the last time you had your eyes checked?
The right scapula is not "facing" the TSBD/Oswald although the right edge of it is exposed to a shot from that direction. It is "facing" the grassy area between Elm and Main. In any event, he was not hit in the scapula.
The back of his armpit is turned toward the grassy area between Elm and Main.
I am not sure what you mean by the direction the back of his armpit is facing. The back of his armpit is a particular location.
It doesn't. Not even close. JBC's torso would have to rotate at least 90 degrees counter clockwise to make an entry in his back near his armpit possible.
It doesn't face anywhere. What matters is whether the back of his armpit was exposed to a shot from Oswald's rifle.
Both sides of that equation are ludicrous.
Not only was the back of his armpit exposed = the entire armpit was exposed.
The FRONT of JBC's torso. That is what is exposed to Oswald. He could have hit the outside of JBC's right arm with a grazing shot. No way to enter anywhere on JBC's back. Why do you keep lying to yourself by telling yourself that could have happened.
If you think it wasn't, what on earth could have blocked it?
I have given you the diagram showing the exit location.The exit location has never been in dispute. It is how an entrance wound in the BACK of JBC's could have been made by a shot from the sniper's next at Z271. That is the impossibility.
What more do you need? It shows the bullet coming from the TSBD/Oswald direction. It shows the direction of the shoulders. It shows the location of the entrance and exit wounds. It shows the location of the forearm in relation to the exit wound.I don't know which diagram you are referring to. The one that looks like an abstract art painting or the earlier one in which you have JBC rotated 90 degrees counter clockwise from his actual position at Z271 and even then you needed a magical deflection of the shot to have it come out the right side of JBC's chest.
The FRONT of JBC's torso. That is what is exposed to Oswald. He could have hit the outside of JBC's right arm with a grazing shot. No way to enter anywhere on JBC's back. Why do you keep lying to yourself by telling yourself that could have happened.Here is a rough 3D Sketchup drawing of the position of the two men from the front and the side showing the location of the TSBD:
Here is a rough 3D Sketchup drawing of the position of the two men from the front and the side showing the location of the TSBD:Well, at least you tried. Finally.
(https://i.postimg.cc/TP7FmyvT/271-trajectory-from-TSBD-carfront.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/rp0Cnztz/271-trajectory-from-TSBD-side.jpg)
Here is the model built on the Trask map of DP:
(https://i.postimg.cc/kgx7xvTd/271-trajectory-from-TSBD-overview-DP.jpg)
You will have to explain why you think JBC's front is facing the SN.
Well, at least you tried. Finally.I have published those many times before.
You don't have JBC's shoulders turned even close to how they were at Z271. The middle sketch approximates Zapruder's perspective but in reality, Zapruder was still slightly ahead of the limo at Z271. From Zapruder's position, JBC's shoulders were rotated clockwise away from Zapruder. You have his shoulders rotated counterclockwise from square to Zapruder. You have his head rotated more than his shoulders were turned.As I have explained, I do not have a model that duplicates a torso twist. I am trying to get the position of his torso at the level of his fifth rib correct, so the shoulders are not turned as much as they are in z271. But the fifth rib is about right. You can see this yourself if you took the time to twist your torso from a forward seating position so you could see behind you.
I have published those many times before.Which does nothing to improve on the inaccuracy of them.
As I have explained, I do not have a model that duplicates a torso twist.You seem to have a goofy idea that the human torso can twist like a rubber band. The torso moves as a unit and the shoulders can move very little independently of the torso. Anyone can try this out for themselves. See how much they can rotate their shoulders while keeping the torso square to the front. Very little.
I am trying to get the position of his torso at the level of his fifth rib correct, so the shoulders are not turned as much as they are in z271. But the fifth rib is about right. You can see this yourself if you took the time to twist your torso from a forward seating position so you could see behind you.The torso does not twist. The chest and abdomen rotate together. There is no twisting. The torso can turn independently of the hips but that does nothing to bolster your argument.
You keep twisting words to try to make your goofy theory sound plausible. It's not working. The wound was not in the armpit. It was in his BACK near the armpit. No part of JBC's back was exposed to the sniper's nest at Z271 which makes it impossible for Oswald to have shot JBC in the back at that frame. Not even close to being possible.
Here is JBC at z254-255 from the front-left (Altgens No. 6):
(https://i.postimg.cc/13Thj9H3/Altgens6-closeup-JBC.jpg)
Here is JBC as seen in the Zfilm at z254 for comparison:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Dw1dt6Qw/zf116.jpg)
And here is what he looks like in z268:
(https://i.postimg.cc/3J13n5V1/zf130.jpg)
Now if you think the entry wound in his right armpit is not visible to a shooter in the SN (Oswald) you will have to explain what is blocking it.
Keep in mind that the angle to the SN is very small at this point. The shot from the SN looks like this:
(https://i.postimg.cc/MHxvf0fT/View-through-scope-z269L.jpg)
So if Z271 is hitting JC at 2000ft/sec, an impact which JC recalled , surely there should be some forward moment from that impact. Where is it?
All I see in this Z270-Z280 range is a movement of JC leaning BACK while his shoulder line is still approx parallel with the right side door of the limo. Nothing anywhere near like the very dramatic movement forward of JC at Z224 by the SBT bullet which was only 1500ft/sec.
That one edited Z film sequence that Andrew posted i think is mistaking the perspective of JC leaning back motion as “forward”. I’d have to see some other measurement technique like John Mytton used prove that JFKs head moved forward from Z312 to Z313.
Also a Z270 bullet would be exiting JC at about 1500ft/sec and that bullet is still a downward angle albeit slightly less than Z224. So that bullet likely goes into the seat of Kellerman at the least and probably even into Kellermans body.
Maybe someone can hire Dale Myers to do some new computer wizardry with this Z190 and Z270 shot proposal. Good luck though as Myers is convinced by his own previous work that he had proved the SBT at Z224 beyond reasonable doubt.
Which does nothing to improve on the inaccuracy of them.You seem to have a goofy idea that the human torso can twist like a rubber band. The torso moves as a unit and the shoulders can move very little independently of the torso. Anyone can try this out for themselves. See how much they can rotate their shoulders while keeping the torso square to the front. Very little. The torso does not twist. The chest and abdomen rotate together. There is no twisting.With my chest and hips facing forward I can extend the right arm to the rear reaching back as far as possible and the left extending to the front as far as possible. This puts the right shoulder behind me and the left in front. So with my hips facing in a 12 o'clock position my shoulders turn to about a 1:30 position or 45 degrees. I suspect I am not anatomically unique in that respect. My upper chest does turn a bit but not as much as the shoulders.
The wound was not in the armpit. It was in his BACK near the armpit.
So if Z271 is hitting JC at 2000ft/sec, an impact which JC recalled , surely there should be some forward moment from that impact. Where is it?Do you not see movement of JBC here:
All I see in this Z270-Z280 range is a movement of JC leaning BACK while his shoulder line is still approx parallel with the right side door of the limo. Nothing anywhere near like the very dramatic movement forward of JC at Z224 by the SBT bullet which was only 1500ft/sec.The momentum transfer is in the direction the car is moving.
With my chest and hips facing forward I can extend the right arm to the rear reaching back as far as possible and the left extending to the front as far as possible. This puts the right shoulder behind me and the left in front. So with my hips facing in a 12 o'clock position my shoulders turn to about a 1:30 position or 45 degrees. I suspect I am not anatomically unique in that respect. My upper chest does turn a bit but not as much as the shoulders.Do you see JBC reaching his right arm to the rear. If not, your whole exercise is pointless.
The twist occurs because each rib is connected by a flexible joint to its own vertebra in the spine and the vertebra are connected to each other by flexible material that allow each vertebra to turn a different amount than its immediate neighbours. If a person has had back surgery resulting in fused vertebrae, the ability to twist is lost for those vertebrae. But Connally appears to have had a normal spine.
The wound was lateral to the lateral edge of the right scapula. It missed the scapula. The posterior border of the axilla or armpit is the lateral edge of the scapula. See:
https://teachmeanatomy.info/upper-limb/areas/axilla/
The author shows a diagram of the (left) axilla or armpit region from above which shows that the anterior surface of the scapula forms the posterior boundary of the axilla:
(https://i.postimg.cc/hjp84VBx/Axilla-armpit.jpg)
and from the front it shows the right axilla:
(https://i.postimg.cc/2SZPqS3W/Axilla-anterior-view.jpg)
The armpit region actually changes depending on the positions of the shoulders and ribs. But you can easily see that any bullet that misses the scapula enters the armpit.
With Connally turned sharply right as he was in z254 in Altgens 6, the path from the SN looks like this:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Dwm4KRjZ/Altgens-inshoot-drawn.jpg)
So by entering laterally missing the scapula it hits the fifth rib with a significant impact, deflects right, passes along the fifth rib to about mid-axilla and then passes through the fifth rib and exits an inch or so below the right nipple, (which has moved to the right).
I don't see the bullet path through JBC at z271 to be a problem if the bullet deflected to the right on impacting the fifth rib (and bending it so much that it fractured at the spine). I don't see how it could not have deflected given the evidence of impact. By deflecting, instead of going through the lung it went around the pulmonary cavity exiting below the right nipple before then hitting the right forearm.
All I can say is that the evidence says he was hit there (the first shot hitting JFK, the second hitting JBC which was closer to the third shot that hit JFK in the head). Not my interpretation of the evidence: just the evidence at face value. If you think it is impossible you need to show why. Just spewing a bunch of pejoratives at it doesn't do anything, other than lower the quality of the discussion.
Do you see JBC reaching his right arm to the rear. If not, your whole exercise is pointless.I was responding to your comment that the shoulders could not turn without the chest turning. It is generally a good idea to read the quoted part to which the response is referring.
Quit trying to play doctor. Your arguments are silly enough as a layman.You weren't playing doctor in suggesting that the bullet entrance was not in the armpit, but now I am?
In order to save this turkey of a scenario you dreamed up years ago, you keep sounding more and more foolish. In order to buy this crapola, we would have to believe:I have shown you many times that JFK was clear when he was between the lamp post and the Thornton sign and was visible and trackable from the SN at all times he was under the tree. He may have wanted to fire the first shot without further delay. You, on the other hand, believe that he waited for the car to travel a full car length after he was completely clear before deciding to fire a shot.
1. Oswald fired at JFK while he was still passing under the tree when all he had to do is wait on more second to have a clear shot.
2. JFK and JBC were both hit at Z193, but neither reacted immediately. JFK slowly and calmly started to lower his right arm while JBC just continued to turn to look over his right shoulder oblivious to a deep puncture wound in his thigh.When have I ever said that? Do you actually read what I have written?
3. Almost two seconds later at Z226, both men exhibited a delayed reaction to being shot at exactly the same instant when both men suddenly and dramatically flipped their arms upward, JFK in reaction to his throat wound and JBC to his thigh wound.Again, where did I ever say that JBC was reacting to his thigh wound? (correct answer: Never). He turned around, as he said, because he recognized the sound as a rifle shot and realized an assassination was unfolding.
Nellie said he was turned to the right when hit. JBC wasn't sure how he was turned. Gayle Newman said he was turned sideways when hit. Who have I missed?
4. JBC began twisting to his right and doubled over in reaction to being shot in the thigh, even though he said he did that in reaction to having been shot in the back. Amazing how willing you are to disregard witnesses when they don't fit your BS story.
5. JBC, continued to turn dramatically in a clockwise direction until he was facing JFK and the shooter, all in reaction to being shot in the thigh.Again, that is not what I have ever suggested he was reacting to. He never felt the thigh wound.
6. With JBC turned to the rear and his shoulders roughly parallel to the sides of the car and Oswald behind him and slightly right, Oswald managed to fire a shot into his back near his right armpit, even though he had no view of JBC's back, and the bullet made about a 60 degree turn to the right to exit under JBC's right nipple.Not anything close to a 60 degree deflection. I measure it as 24 degrees:
7. After having fired his first shot, Oswald took 4.3 seconds to take aim for his second shot but completely missed JFK and hit JBC instead.He didn't miss by much to hit JBC. Remember that hair flutter seen by Hickey and Kinney and seen in the zfilm starting about z273?
8. After missing JFK with his second shot after taking 4.3 seconds to aim, Oswald took only 2.3 seconds, the bare minimum time needed to fire an aimed shot with the Carcano, and made a precision headshot, killing JFK.That's right. By just missing JFK's head on the second shot and having the gun strapped to his body and resting on boxes, as the car moved a bit right as it proceeded to the underpass the target moved into position.
One of these items is hard to believe.I agree. None of them are accurate, as I have shown. You don't seem to read or retain my posts very well.
You don't seem to read or retain my posts very well.
Why should I? It's all nonsense.I have fired a similar rifle (a WWI Lee Enfield .306) from a standing position. It does pack quite a kick. But Oswald knew that because he had fired it many times before. He knew that he would have a limited time to get up to four shots off. That is why he used the strap and put the rifle on boxes. That keeps the recoil going directly back. With a secure stance the shoulder would have absorbed the recoil without any change in lateral or vertical position. The FBI conducted their own tests with three agents firing three aimed shots using a similar set-up to that found in the SN. See Agent Simmons' WC testimony at 3 H 444 ff. The shots were remarkably accurate on the targets place at distances and angles replicating shots from the SN.
You don't even seem to know that the recoil of the rifle would move the rifle off the intended target. Oswald would have to reacquire the target in his scope, place the crosshairs on his intended target, and then squeeze the trigger in order to fire an accurate shot. If he rushed any of these, he's not going to hit his target. What reason would Oswald have to try to fire the third shot in as little time as possible.
Your theory depends on 8 highly improbable to impossible events. It is not even close to being plausible. There is no talking any sense into you. You will continue to delude yourself no matter how many problems with your goofball theory are pointed out to you.If you had actually had read my reply you would realize that your items 2, 3 and 5 are patently wrong and your number would be 5 not 8. And if you actually read and understood the other five you would have realized they required a response.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over an over again and expecting a different result. It appears no matter how many problems I point out to you, you will continue with your silly rationalizations to convince yourself the impossible occurred. There is no point in me bothering to dissuade you from your fantasy. It is a joke and the joke is on you.
Do you not see movement of JBC here:
(https://i.postimg.cc/cLgHyk4g/z261-to-z290.gif)
The momentum transfer is in the direction the car is moving.
I see in this Z260-Z290 range that JC’s right shoulder appears to be rotating in the opposite direction from what would normally be expected from an impact of a 2000ft/ sec bullet hitting (presumably) the right of his upper back and exiting the right side of chest . Hitting the mass to the right of center of mass will usually impart angular momentum causing that mass to spin about the vertical axis ( JCs vertical spine) in the direction the bullet is traveling.You are seeing correctly! That sudden rotation to the left is what one would expect from the deflection of the bullet to the right. And you can see that the body suddenly rotates clockwise (from above) beginning at z272. It is particularly evident from the change in sunlight reflection on the head and chest. Here is a comparison of JBC at z268 and at z272, about a quarter of a second later:
Note: As JC begins to lean back into Mrs Cs Lap, I think Andrew might concede that the expression on JCs face is “painful “ especially if I suggest that he has just felt the “ impact of the Z270 bullet 🙂Not a good idea to interpret facial expressions based on what one may think he may be feeling without regard to the evidence. One has to examine the evidence. JBC said he felt no pain. But he said he immediately realized he had been shot, fatally he thought, and just lay back. He felt no pain until he got up to get out of the car at Parkland. That’s the evidence. So, according the evidence that appears to be what he is experiencing: sadness and fear perhaps but not pain.
I see in this Z260-Z290 range that JC’s right shoulder appears to be rotating in the opposite direction from what would normally be expected from an impact of a 2000ft/ sec bullet hitting (presumably) the right of his upper back and exiting the right side of chest . Hitting the mass to the right of center of mass will usually impart angular momentum causing that mass to spin about the vertical axis ( JCs vertical spine) in the direction the bullet is traveling.
But I am not a physics expert , nor do I know for certain the angle of this Z270 bullet hitting JC. If the bullet deflected rightward going out of his chest, that might induce some % of counterspin which could cancel out the initial entry spin.
I think it’s going to require an experiment with some replica human bodies that include head arms and legs ( and a hat in the right hand of the JC model) to prove this Z190 and Z270 shot theory.
Generally I think probably most of the LNs prefer Z224 as a shot because of the forward movement of JC and his right shoulder rotating counter clockwise at Z225-Z230 to be indicative of transfer of momentum caused by bullet impact.
Note: As JC begins to lean back into Mrs Cs Lap, I think Andrew might concede that the expression on JCs face is “painful “ especially if I suggest that he has just felt the “ impact of the Z270 bullet 🙂
Why would you need an experiment to know how ludicrous this theory is?
Yes it does seem ludicrous which is why it’s on Andrew and not us, to prove this Z190 and Z270 shot , beyond just his drawings and words which is why I suggested that it would take an experiment to overcome the many logically deduced criticisms that you and I and others have posted in this thread.
Yes it does seem ludicrous which is why it’s on Andrew and not us, to prove this Z190 and Z270 shot , beyond just his drawings and words which is why I suggested that it would take an experiment to overcome the many logically deduced criticisms that you and I and others have posted in this thread.I wanted to try an experiment but I had trouble finding someone who would agree to be shot. There was also a problem in drafting an effective consent form but I never got that far.
I wanted to try an experiment but I had trouble finding someone who would agree to be shot. There was also a problem in drafting an effective consent form but I never got that far.
I’m serious about an experiment with replica (not real ) human bodies.
And I would like an actually CORRECT set up of the SN with boxes and pipes and and a tree and a curbing road and the shooter required to not set up in a reduction fire position and there’s a car with the 2 remote control androids that can be adjusted and the JC android will be holding a Stetson hat with the right right hand.
I think this could be and interesting and channeling opportunity for Elon Musk to set up this experiment both for testing androids, Self driving cars AND proving or disproving the viability of the Z190/Z270 sequence shot theory.
I think such an experiment would be every expensive and even Elon Musk wouldn't be interested in spending the money to do it. The experiment I would like to see is Oswald's first shot, simulating the low windowsill and the window only raised part way. This would have been an extremely awkward shot which I think would explain why he missed so badly. Having to fire almost vertically would have forced him to raise the butt of the rifle significantly and I think that would have caused him to raise up from a kneeling position to a crouching position. I also wonder with butt of the rifle in such a position, would the bottom of the sash have blocked the view from the scope, forcing him to use the fixed sights. In addition, with JFK about to go under the tree, he might have hurried that shot. It's easy to understand how that shot would have struck the pavement.
The TSBD shooter was not likely a professional shooter. It would have been much easier to shoot at a stationary JFK giving a speech. And one shot thru the chest from 200 yds away is not that difficult for the professional.
So the choice of the TSBD points to Oswald because it’s convenient being his place of work. It could also be some other TSBD worker without an alibi such as Jack Dougherty.
The TSBD shooter wasn’t apparently wearing a mask and he exposed himself to being photographed as he stuck his rifle OUT the window and KEPT it stuck out for several seconds AFTER the last shot fired. That’s not what a professional would likely do.
The CT alternatives for why a professional shooter would do such stupid actions would be that his employer required him to set up Oswald, or the shooter himself had a personal vendetta against Oswald.
I’m sure some CT has suggested that LBJ had his hit man Malcolm Wallace do the job but why the need to set up Oswald?
I’m serious about an experiment with replica (not real ) human bodies.An experiment duplicating the wounds exactly would be difficult to do. None of the so-called tests of the SBT really duplicated the wounds. The best of these is probably the AST test:
And I would like an actually CORRECT set up of the SN with boxes and pipes and a tree and a curving road and the shooter required to not set up in fire position until a car moves past with 2 remote control androids that can be adjusted and the JC android will be holding a Stetson hat with the right hand.
I think this could be an interesting opportunity for Elon Musk to set up this experiment both for testing androids, Self driving cars AND proving or disproving the viability of the Z190/Z270 sequence shot theory.
It does pack quite a kick. But Oswald knew that because he had fired it many times before.
That is why he used the strap and put the rifle on boxes.
cite?He had fired similar rifles before as a Marine. Marina said he admitted firing the MC at General Walker. He just had to have fired the MC once to experience the recoil.
Mr. Rankin: …there are a good many stories about his practicing with a gun, you know, around various rifle ranges and so forth,
we have checked those out and none of them stand up at all. (Executive Session | Jan. 27, 1964)
How does he shoot a rifle mounted on boxes out of a window, that is about 12 inches from the floor and only open about 13 inches?Use your imagination:
He had fired similar rifles before as a Marine. Marina said he admitted firing the MC at General Walker. He just had to have fired the MC once to experience the recoil.
Use your imagination:
cite?He would have paid cash at a rifle range so there would be no record of it. He also could have found an open area somewhere where he wouldn't have to pay. Some have speculated he could have practiced down by the Trinity River. In any case, lack of a record of his practicing does not rule out that he practiced. Carcano ammo is sold in boxes of 20. He fired one shot at Walker and had four rounds left when he shot JFK. That leaves 15 rounds unaccounted for. It's also possible he could have bought more than one box of ammo. We don't know how much he practiced or when, but it is probable he practiced somewhere, sometime. Regardless, there is conclusive evidence he fired three shots on 11/22/63 and three of those shots hit JFK.
Mr. Rankin: …there are a good many stories about his practicing with a gun, you know, around various rifle ranges and so forth,
we have checked those out and none of them stand up at all. (Executive Session | Jan. 27, 1964)
How does he shoot a rifle mounted on boxes out of a window, that is about 12 inches from the floor and only open about 13 inches?
He would have paid cash at a rifle range so there would be no record of it. He also could have found an open area somewhere where he wouldn't have to pay. Some have speculated he could have practiced down by the Trinity River. In any case, lack of a record of his practicing does not rule out that he practiced. Carcano ammo is sold in boxes of 20. He fired one shot at Walker and had four rounds left when he shot JFK. That leaves 15 rounds unaccounted for. It's also possible he could have bought more than one box of ammo. We don't know how much he practiced or when, but it is probable he practiced somewhere, sometime. Regardless, there is conclusive evidence he fired three shots on 11/22/63 and three of those shots hit JFK.
Not difficult at all. He could have fired from a kneeling position which he would have practiced in the USMC. He showed proficiency from that position. Only the first shot would have been complicated by the low window which might explain why he missed.
You guys own rifles. I don't. How long can you go without cleaning it and still use it?Depends on how often you fire it.
Interesting there is no sign of any maintenance kit for the gun. It is required.
He had the gun for 8 months. The bolt would stick, the crappy scope wobbled. The gun nut never bettered it.
And no cleaning kit. No empty shells. No shell boxes. Nothing.
What excuse do you have for these?
Depends on how often you fire it.
No excuse needed. Whatever flaws the rifle had, real or imagined, the ballistics prove that someone killed JFK with that rifle. There is ample evidence that the someone was Oswald.
:D There they are. Excuses every one. Forget about proof, there is no evidence for any of it.No proof of practice is needed. We have ample proof Oswald fired that rifle on 11/22/63. That is all that is needed.
:D
No proof of practice is needed. We have ample proof Oswald fired that rifle on 11/22/63. That is all that is needed.
Np surprise at all that you would scoff at ballistics evidence which has been used to solve countless gun crimes and convicted many bad guys.
Not at all. Your lame excuses for certain lack of evidence is entertaining enough.
He hadn't fired a Marine rifle in four years. Marina is an admitted liar.He would have forgotten that rifles kick back when fired?
Yes, very cartoon like. Especially an early shot before z-210.Try the arrangement of boxes that fits this photo by Tom Dillard taken seconds after the shots:
Which box set up should I use?
Try the arrangement of boxes that fits this photo by Tom Dillard taken seconds after the shots:+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Crossfire | Jim Marrs
"Mrs. [Lillian] Mooneyham estimated that it was about four and a half to five minutes following the shots fired by the assassin,
that she looked up towards the sixth floor of the TSBD and observed the figure of a man standing in the sixth floor window behind
some cardboard boxes. This man appeared to Mrs. Mooneyham to be looking out of the window, however, the man was not close up to
the window but was standing slightly back from it, so that Mrs. Mooneyham could not make out his features...Adding support to
Mrs. Mooneyham’s account of a man standing in the “ sniper’s nest” window minutes after the shooting are photographs taken about
that time by military intelligence agent James Powell and news photographer Tom Dillard.
Dillard, who was riding in the motorcade, said he took a picture of the Depository facade seconds after the last shot was fired. Powell estimated
his picture was made about thirty seconds after the final shot. A comparison with photos taken just prior to the shooting led photographic
experts of the House Select Committee on Assassinations to conclude: “ There is an apparent rearranging of boxes within two minutes
after the last shot was fired at President Kennedy.” Obviously, Oswald could not have been in the Depository lunchroom meeting Baker and Truly
while arranging boxes on the sixth floor at the same time. Needless to say, Mrs. Mooneyham was never called as a witness before
the Warren Commission. Her credible testimony remains buried in the Commission’s twenty-six volumes."
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53568612232_2d896316e0_z.jpg)
Which does nothing to improve on the inaccuracy of them.You seem to have a goofy idea that the human torso can twist like a rubber band. The torso moves as a unit and the shoulders can move very little independently of the torso. Anyone can try this out for themselves. See how much they can rotate their shoulders while keeping the torso square to the front. Very little. The torso does not twist. The chest and abdomen rotate together. There is no twisting. The torso can turn independently of the hips but that does nothing to bolster your argument.(https://i.postimg.cc/WbbJcWnK/IMG-2746.jpg)
That is, of course, former Masters champion Hideki Matsuyama. There are reams of golf articles about the extent to which pros turn their shoulders while restricting their hip turn. It's called the X Factor. You're right, there's nothing I don't know.I've known about the X-factor for years. I believe Jim McLain was the one who first talked about it back in the 1980s. Hideki Matsuyama is a well-conditioned professional athlete and most pro golfers spend hours in the fitness trailer working on their flexibility to allow them to move their bodies in ways the human body wasn't evolved to doing. Even at that Matsuyama's hips are not stationary. They have turned. Just not as much as the shoulders. My comment had to do with the relation of the shoulders to the torso, not the hips. As your photo shows, Matsuyama's shoulders and torso have turned as a unit.
I've known about the X-factor for years. I believe Jim McLain was the one who first talked about it back in the 1980s. Hideki Matsuyama is a well-conditioned professional athlete and most pro golfers spend hours in the fitness trailer working on their flexibility to allow them to move their bodies in ways the human body wasn't evolved to doing. Even at that Matsuyama's hips are not stationary. They have turned. Just not as much as the shoulders. My comment had to do with the relation of the shoulders to the torso, not the hips. As your photo shows, Matsuyama's shoulders and torso have turned as a unit.
I just got done watching the PGA championship. Unbelievable performance by Aaron Rai. Throughout the weekend, CBS used technology to measure the shoulder and hip turns of various golfers and how they compared to the Tour average. It was interesting but not of much use to me. If I tried to make that big a turn, I would end up in traction.
As they used to say when I was an avid runner, "If you want to be an elite runner, choose your parents carefully." At the elite level of all sports, genetics is the one factor that can't be overcome. My father and half-brother were both professional golfers (not tour players) and I worked at PING, but I was never better than "sometimes I break 80" due largely to vision and back problems. There are sooooo many players who are "really good" or even "really, really good" but just do not have what it takes to play at the elite level - something that's difficult to admit to yourself. I used to stand in front of a mirror and try to contort myself into Ben Hogan's positions in his Power Golf-era swing before the bus accident. Not swinging, just standing there. I couldn't come close. When Tiger Woods was tested at the Stanford athletic department, he was off the scale in comparison to other athletes, not just golfers. Most modern instruction is for 20-year-olds and irrelevant (or harmful) for the rest of us.
Butch Harmon once said "Give me 100 six-year-olds who have never seen a golf club. I will tell you at the end of a week which of them, if any, has the potential to play tour-level golf." I also had a funny experience when I was 14. I visited my grandmother, who was a member of Kansas City Country Club. I played the course twice, thought it was harder than hell, and probably shot 97 or higher; I remember I ran out of balls the first round. Looking at the handicap sheet in the locker room, one guy had posted consistently 67-67-67-64-65 and was a +3 handicap. I asked "What's a +3 handicap?" (having no idea there even was such a thing as + handicap). The pro, Stan Thirsk, said "Oh, that means he averages several strokes under par - and the funny thing is, he's exactly the same age as you." Tom Watson. Genetics.
I always had a dream that technology would create some sort of plastic shell I could step into that would duplicate Tiger Woods' swing so I could experience what it felt like for five balls. Even those of us who worked at PING and saw pros every day agreed that it all seemed almost magical when a long-hitting pro took a swing that looked not much different from ours but the results looked jaw-droppingly different (and this was in the persimmon driver, balata ball era).
If it’s fact that a whole bullet went thru JC’s right hand shattering his wrist bone and exited from the bottom of his palm, then a Z270 bullet exiting the right side of his chest and going thru his right hand has maybe about 1.5 ft? to travel to hit JC’s left inner thigh IF his left leg was turned right just as his right leg probably was.
What I’m suggesting is that maybe a Z190 shot exiting JFK missed JC entirely not even hitting his thigh because both his legs were turned right. Thus the rotated shoulder position at Z190 as per Andrew’s 3d figure drawing would be a much less strenuous on the torso.
And if that is plausible, then at Z270, JC’s left leg turned right also, would theoretically be in line of the Z270 bullet skewing thru JCs chest, and exiting and then it goes thru the right hand which was UP and NEXT to his chest with the palm rotated facing outwards as he held that hat upside down.
There would no end over end spinning of the bullet entering JCs wrist because his hand is against his chest or very close to it at Z270. Then it’s a question if it can be aligned to hit JCs left thigh if there was some more deflection cause by the wrist bone.
So a revised LN scenario is as follows:
1. Z190 bullet went thru JFK, exited , and missed JC entirely because he had both his legs turned right. The bullet went into the middle lower front seat cushion and springs at 1500ft/sec, was slowed down enough to either stop there or continued thru and stopped in the lower dashboard. That bullet was not found.
2. Z270 bullet goes thru JCs chest, then immediately thru his right hand as it was up and next to his chest. The bullet then exited and defected (or not) and hit JCs left thigh at the reduced velocity. The bullet fell out then latter on the stretcher as in the conventional WC theory.
I don't think it is remotely plausible that happened. For one, Oswald would have to shoot through the tree at Z190. Why would he do that when he'd have a clear shot a little more than 1 second later. It would also mean Oswald fired a precise head shot in the bare minimum of 2.3 seconds after firing his second shot. I don't see any way the bullet that exited JFK's throat could have missed JBC on either side of him. Most of all, the Z-film shows us JFK and JBC both reacting simultaneously at Z226 when the both flipped their arms upward. That is the clincher for the SBT and shoots down all alternative scenarios.You must be right because if that was the first shot that JFK is reacting to then JBC would not be reacting to being hit by it as he "clearly" is doing by z228. If it was the first shot JBC would be reacting to it by turning around to try to see JFK and then shouting "oh, no, no" (as Nellie said he did before the second shot and, as Jackie said, this drew her attention to the Governor). And we can see that there is nothing like that occurring after z226.
I briefly got down to a 3 handicap and kept a 4 for a couple years but as I aged, I gradually went up to double digits. I came close to shooting my age a couple years ago. I missed a 25 footer for birdie to miss by a stroke. Another time I birdied 2 of the last 3 holes to miss by a shot. The final hole I chipped in from about 15 years right of the green so I never threatened to hit the magic number. I've always thought golf was one sport where you could become very good through acquired skill rather than innate athletic ability but as you observed, there is a ceiling that most people could never break through. I read a long time ago that if you can't consistently shoot 65 on your home course, don't even bother going to the Q-school. I used to be part of a pot game on weekends of guys 40+ years old. One of them had a son who won a high school state championship, played college golf for a few years then tried it on the mini-tours. He would occasionally come out and play with us and had no trouble breaking 70. I saw him come out one day with a bad hangover. Our first hole is a 500 yard par-5 and he cold topped his first two shots. He than took out a 3 wood and knocked his third shot on the green from about 270 and made birdie. He shot 67 that day. He played on what is now the Korn Ferry Tour. I think it started out as the Hogan Tour. He never won enough to break even. He never came close to getting his card on the big tour. He did become pals with Nolan Henke on the Hogan Tour and caddied for him for a while but that was the only way he got on the big tour.
You must be right because if that was the first shot that JFK is reacting to then JBC would not be reacting to being hit by it as he "clearly" is doing by z228. If it was the first shot JBC would be reacting to it by turning around to try to see JFK and then shouting "oh, no, no" (as Nellie said he did before the second shot and, as Jackie said, this drew her attention to the Governor). And we can see that there is nothing like that occurring after z226.
And then you look at the career of someone like Kuchar or Furyk and say, "How is this possible?"
One of my favorite stories is from the early says of the senior tour, when unlikely characters like Walt Zembriski were winning. There was a phenomenon of 50+ year olds who said, "I've played to a 2 handicap for years just hitting balls on Wednesday and playing on Sunday. I'll bet if I worked at it 7 days a week, I could compete out there." So they'd quit their insurance jobs and study, practice and play 7 days a week. At the end of the year, their handicap was now 5. :D I'm going to play today at a course where I have shot par 72 once and 73 numerous times. 76 would be my age. I will be happy with 85.
Why would any sensible person put any credence in anything Nellie had to say. She was probably the worst witness in Dealey Plaza that day. Almost nothing she said was correct.Let' see:
Let' see:
Her evidence conflicts with the SBT.
Nellie's evidence doesn't conflict with the 20+ witnesses who said that JFK reacted to the first shot. It doesn't conflict with the motorcade witnesses, photographers and people standing along Elm St. who put the first shot after z186. It doesn't conflict with Gayle Newman who said that JBC was turned sideways when the second shot sounded. It doesn't conflict with the evidence of Greer or Hickey or Altgens.
Conclusion:?...
I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to dissuade you from your foolish theory. Believe whatever the hell you want to believe. Nobody is buying it.
I’m going to keep an open mind about it until I can prove beyond doubt that it is as ludicrous as it appears to be
...or until Andrew proves it via rigorous demonstration that 3/4ths of LNs agree with. 😬
I’m going to keep an open mind about it until I can prove beyond doubt that it is as ludicrous as it appears to be or until Andrew proves it viaA reasonable unbiased person looking objectively at the evidence realizes that the evidence against Oswald is very strong. It is really overwhelming. There is also strong evidence that three shots were fired from the SN. Several witnesses saw the rifle in the SN and three men on the floor below heard the three shots from above them. So it is easy to conclude from the evidence that Oswald was the sole assassin.
rigorous demonstration that 3/4ths of LNs agree with. 😬
A reasonable unbiased person looking objectively at the evidence realizes that the evidence against Oswald is very strong. It is really overwhelming. There is also strong evidence that three shots were fired from the SN. Several witnesses saw the rifle in the SN and three men on the floor below heard the three shots from above them. So it is easy to conclude from the evidence that Oswald was the sole assassin.
The problem is trying to reconcile the Zfilm with three shots from a bolt action rifle. Without the Zfilm there would likely not have been a need to invent the SBT.
LNs have been persuaded that Connally was reacting to being shot in the torso by z230. I don’t know why that is.
Maybe because we see him reacting to being shot, not at Z230 but at Z226.So how is is not reacting to being shot in the torso at z230?
So how is is not reacting to being shot in the torso at z230?
It is simply imprecise. JBC described how he remembered reacting to being shot and the frame he believed he was struck at. What he didn't recall was his immediate initial reflexive and involuntary response when he flipped his injured right arm in reaction to having his wrist shattered. He wasn't even aware of his wrist injury until he came out of surgery.My point is that LNs have convinced themselves that JBC is reacting to his torso wound by z230 without looking at the evidence first - just by watching the zfilm.
JBC believed he was facing straight ahead when he was hit by the second shot and looking at the Z-film frames, he saw he reached that forward facing position at Z230, The Z-film actually shows he was hit about a half second earlier as evidenced by the jacket bulge at Z224 and the arm flip which began att Z226.
My point is that LNs have convinced themselves that JBC is reacting to his torso wound by z230 without looking at the evidence first - just by watching the zfilm.
The evidence is conclusive that JBC had been hit roughly a half second before Z230. The fact that you refuse to see that doesn't change that fact.Thank-you for demonstrating my point that “LNs have convinced themselves that JBC is reacting to his torso wound by z230 without looking at the evidence first - just by watching the zfilm.”
Thank-you for demonstrating my point that “LNs have convinced themselves that JBC is reacting to his torso wound by z230 without looking at the evidence first - just by watching the zfilm.”
The Z-film is the best piece of evidence we have of what happened. We also have JBC's account of how he reacted after being shot in the back and we see him doing what he described in the Z-film. Your willful blindness and refusal to acknowledge what is obvious to most people doesn't change the fact he was shot before Z230.Thank-you again for demonstrating that SBT proponents don’t care that the theory does not fit with much of the evidence.
A reasonable unbiased person looking objectively at the evidence realizes that the evidence against Oswald is very strong. It is really overwhelming. There is also strong evidence that three shots were fired from the SN. Several witnesses saw the rifle in the SN and three men on the floor below heard the three shots from above them. So it is easy to conclude from the evidence that Oswald was the sole assassin.
The problem is trying to reconcile the Zfilm with three shots from a bolt action rifle. Without the Zfilm there would likely not have been a need to invent the SBT.
LNs have been persuaded that Connally was reacting to being shot in the torso by z230. I don’t know why that is.
When I first studied the issue I read the evidence of Connally and tried to match his evidence to the zfilm. I had no difficulty seeing that, according to Connally’s evidence, JBC was reacting to the first shot at z230 by turning around just as he said he did after hearing the shot and realizing that an assassination was unfolding. Further reading of the evidence of witnesses who described the shot spacing made it abundantly clear that there was only one shot by z230; that the second shot which was closer to z313 than to the first. Then the zfilm started to make sense.
So after the midpoint between the first and last shots is where the evidence says to look for an indication of the second shot hitting JBC in the torso. The motion of JBC beginning at about z271-272 and immediately falling back as Greer turns around fits the evidence perfectly. The hair on the right side of JFK’s head flying up at z273 fits what George Hickey saw at the time he heard the second shot. There are several other indications all pointing to JBC being hit in those frames.
But it is hard to see if you are not willing to even consider it.
Hey, believe it not, I’m still considering it because I just cannot dismiss a supermajority of witness on the 1… 2..3 pattern and I really don’t see the shooter misfiring the 1st shot accidentally or haphazardly aiming because he was excited.Always good to keep an open mind.
Yours is the only alternative LN theory so no harm testing it out some more. It would be nice though if a computer AI could be used.
.You may wish to check that again. JBC is looking left and facing forward in the Croft photo which corresponds to z161.
It appears on the Z film from Z133-Z190 that JC was maintaining a 45 degree turned right angle of his upper body and looking at the crowd to the right side of limo the whole way.
Therefore i think the most comfortable position would be that JC was sitting on the jump seat with both his legs turned 45 degrees rightward so that he could maintain that 45 degree upper body position without having to twist his torso. And I doubt he would have had half his buttocks off the left side of the seat as in JohnMs diagram. Nor imo would he hold his hat upside over the left side of his left leg because he would have to keep his arm stretched diagonally across his chest to do so. I see no indication his right arm is diagonally across his chest from Z133-Z200, so JohnM diagram is improbable.
This alternative simplifies the Z190 shot 1st because now the shot just goes past JC without hitting his thigh, thus apparent absence of physical reaction by JC to being hit by a bullet is no longer an issue.That scenario would depend on the Secret Service and FBI missing a hole in the upholstery or an impact mark in the car.
That bullet exiting JFK slowed down to 1500 ff/sec likely goes into the middle lower part of the front seat cushion and could have stopped there or if it continued thru, it gets embedded in the lower dashboard. That could be CE 399 which fell out and was found in the limo later or it’s the “lost “ bullet.
The Z270 shot could also be the CE 399 shot because that’s when JC had raised his hat up against or close to his chest and his right hand is rotated with the palm facing away from his chest as the well of the hat is visible.The impact that JBC described can only occur with a significant and sudden change in momentum of the bullet. That had to have occurred on striking the fifth rib. A full speed bullet impacting bone like that would deform, as Larry Sturdivan testified to the HSCA. When you the factor in the irregular characteristics of the chest exit wound and the wrist wound and clothing, not to mention the evidence of Tague that he was hit on the second shot, it is highly unlikely that a full speed bullet striking JBC first could end up as CE399.
So if you are able to figure out the angle of the shot going thru JC at Z270 then maybe you can determine if it’s plausible or not that the bullet could go thru JCs wrist where he had his hand up at Z 270 , exit thru his lower palm and continue on to hit his inner left thigh.The main reason the bullet that made the thigh does not fit with the bullet that caused the wrist wound is the striking difference in wound characteristics. The thigh wound looked like it was made by the butt end of an intact missile. No one said that about the wrist wound.
Always good to keep an open mind.
If the last two shots were in quick succession as the witnesses overwhelmingly reported
,
and the head shot was the last then it follows that the first shot did not miss.
We can see JFK already well into his reaction to his neck wound by z224:
(https://i.postimg.cc/FzwmLKGF/JFK-reaction-193-to-224-to-225.gif)
and that is almost five full seconds before the head shot.
Not many would describe shots five seconds part as rapid.
You may wish to check that again. JBC is looking left and facing forward in the Croft photo which corresponds to z161.
(https://i.postimg.cc/0y886f8m/croft-lined.jpg)
One can also conclude that JBC was not sitting with a buttock off the left side of his seat because we can see that he is not sitting like that in any of the photos. That scenario would depend on the Secret Service and FBI missing a hole in the upholstery or an impact mark in the car.
The impact that JBC described can only occur with a significant and sudden change in momentum of the bullet. That had to have occurred on striking the fifth rib. A full speed bullet impacting bone like that would deform, as Larry Sturdivan testified to the HSCA. When you the factor in the irregular characteristics of the chest exit wound and the wrist wound and clothing, not to mention the evidence of Tague that he was hit on the second shot, it is highly unlikely that a full speed bullet striking JBC first could end up as CE399.
The main reason the bullet that made the thigh does not fit with the bullet that caused the wrist wound is the striking difference in wound characteristics. The thigh wound looked like it was made by the butt end of an intact missile. No one said that about the wrist wound.
Not always. There are some things that are obvious and JBC being shot early in the Z220s in one of them. To deny that is pure nonsense. Should I be open minded about a flat earth?Not a good analogy. There is abundant evidence that the Earth is spherical and no evidence that conflicts with that. In the case of the SBT there is no one who witnessed it and some witnesses who said it didn’t happen. There is also abundant other evidence that conflicts with it. You just say that evidence is all wrong. I am saying: keep an open mind about it.
No we can't. At Z224, we cannot even see JFK except for his right forearm and left shoulder. When he comes into view at Z225, his right arm was still moving down.You don’t think this is in reaction to just being shot in the neck?:
It was at Z226 that both of his arms started upward, in perfect unison with JBC's sudden and rapid upward arm movement which was immediately followed by him doubling over and twisting hard to his right. If you can't see these things, you are being willfully blind, which is the only way to argue the silly things you believe.I never said I don’t see those things. I am just saying that it is quite consistent with how JBC and others said he reacted to the first shot.
More silliness. There is not only no evidence that the second shot caused Tague's wound, it's not even possible.Tague’s testimony is not evidence? Greer’s is not evidence? That’s why you should keep an open mind.
Not a good analogy. There is abundant evidence that the Earth is spherical and no evidence that conflicts with that.
In the case of the SBT there is no one who witnessed it and some who witnesses who said it didn’t happen.
There is also abundant other evidence that conflicts with it. You just say that evidence is all wrong. I am saying: keep an open mind about it.
You don’t think this is in reaction to just being shot in the neck?
I never said I don’t see those things. I am just saying that it is quite consistent with how JBC and others said he reacted to the first shot.
Tague’s testimony is not evidence? Greer’s is not evidence? That’s why you should keep an open mind.
Well I’m kind of stuck in this middle ground area kind of like Neo was in the subway.
I can’t ignore 3/4th witness hearing the 3 shots rapidly fired and in the 1….2..3 pattern.
But I cannot ignore that Z film z223-Z230 sequence of JFK and JC moving in sync.
I don’t buy that JCs jacket bulge coincident with this in sync movement was caused by just a random gust of wind.
I don’t buy that the expression on JCs face is fear rather than pain. JC may have thought he felt no pain at the time but his body is reflexively responding to the force of the bullet causing his body to rotate and move forward. And the sudden jerk of his right hand upward holding the hat, is another indication of an involuntary nervous system reaction.
So the Z224 shot I think is more probable than the Z270 shot, especially given the computer modeling that Myers has done for Z224 which lines up the chest wound with the wrist wound and thigh wound.
However, I’m stuck with Harold Norman’s 3 shots in about 4 secs by his boom click click demonstrations and his recollection that JFK slumped after the 1st shot and that only AFTER that slump did Norman hear the next 2 shots in only about 2-3 secs.
The simple resolution would be that the TSBD shooter used a semi auto rifle, and that Norman heard just the shells being “ejected” and hitting the floor. However, Norman in his WC testimony after pointed out his original “ejected” statement goes on to agree with the leading questions if he meant he was describing the operation of the bolt.
Will Fritz picked up the shells at the SN that Luke Mooney had seen on the floor , but unfortunately BEFORE they were photographed laying on the floor. So that introduces some doubt if those really were MC shells.
However, this leads off into the rabbit hole of conspiracy and suspicions of Fritz and many others willing to participate in a post event cover up, and how or why was the MC rifle placed on the 6th floor if the shooter was using a semi auto.
So I am leaning that the TSBD shooter was using the MC rifle and he fired Z224 as the first shot, took his time 4.8 secs later and shot the 2nd shot at Z313. Then he must have seen he had scored a hit at Z313 and he just rapidly fired the 3rd shot in 2 secs that went and struck the curb near Tague (and then into the sewer?) This at least fits the 1….2..3 pattern and all 3 shots in about 6.8 secs which might be “close enough?
Do you think witnesses can see bullets in flight? I guess that's no nuttier than some of the other goofy things you have convinced yourself of.No. But they can see how a person is facing when they hear a shot.
(https://i.postimg.cc/vTyZTRqv/JBCtienoflip.gif)We cannot see him behind the sign but when he emerges at z224-225 we can see that he is already reacting:
You said the reaction was at Z224. What reaction do you see in Z224. At Z225, JFK's right arm is still moving downward from where it was at Z225.
David Von Pein has pointed out that JFK's facial expression seems to be a reaction to being shot and he might be right but the frame when enlarged is too blurry to say conclusively. In any event, there is no visible reaction at Z224 which is what you claimed.
Tell me where JBC said he reacted to the first shot by flipping his arm upward,Well, he never said he did that in relation to the second shot either.
doubling overWhere do you see him doubling over before z278?
and twisting to his right.2 H 132-133:
I have never said that he reacted to being shot in the thigh. He said he never felt it. It is not uncommon for people not to feel bullets, especially in the extremities.
You think JBC's reaction to being shot in the thigh is to calmly turn to his right to see JFK.
You continue to treat witness accounts as if they are established facts. There is no conclusive evidence as to when Tague was hit. It could have been a first shot ricochet or a fragment from the headshot. We can say with certainty that it did not come from CE399 which is the bullet from the second shot.In fact, the fragment that struck Tague had to have a slow enough average speed over the 280 feet from the car at z271 to Tague in order to have enough time to drop to the pavement. On a 3 degree decline after clearing the top of the windshield it would have had to have dropped almost 15 feet to strike the road near Tague. That would take almost a full second. So it would have to be travelling an average of 280 ft/sec.
You expect us to believe the second shot struck JBC's wrist, ricocheted up over the front seat, over the windshield, and flew all the way down to where Tague was standing and somehow still had enough velocity to strike the curb in front of Tague and cause his facial wound. Should we label this MMFT (Mason's Magic Fragment Theory)?
You also seem to have an arithmetic problem. If the bullet from the second shot hit Tague and the headshot was the third shot, how did the CE399 and up at Parkland. You have also tried to tell us the first bullet imbedded in the upholstery after exiting JFK's throat and striking JBC's thigh and went undetected aby the SS and FBI. That's four shots. OMG!!! After 62 years you have uncovered empirical evidence of a fourth shot, a second shooter, and a conspiracy. WTG!!That was Zeon's suggestion about the bullet striking the upholstery and there was a close inspection of the car and no such hole was found. There is not enough evidence for us to determine how it ended up where it did. But there are several ways in which it could have happened. After passing though JFK, tumbling over the ensuing 4 feet of air and then, while spinning, striking the thigh butt-first on an angle plowing through leg muscle until reaching the femur depositing the lead fragment in the femur it may have bounced back. It may have come out of the wound or it may have stayed in the wound. Or it may have kept going and struck something in the car that caused it to bounce back without causing damage. It may have bounced up and back off the thigh and ended up on JBC's lap or in the back seat or on JFK. The person who found it was of the view that it came not from Connally's stretcher but from stretcher B that was already in the hallway and had some bloody sheets on it.
No. But they can see how a person is facing when they hear a shot.
We cannot see him behind the sign but when he emerges at z224-225 we can see that he is already reacting:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ncdg36jz/JFK-reaction-224-to-225.gif)
Since we cannot see him behind the sign we don't know when that reaction began. It looks to me like it may have started after z193:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z5NtDybb/JFK-Jackie-turns-z187-to-z207.gif)
Well, he never said he did that in relation to the second shot either.
Where do you see him doubling over before z278?2 H 132-133:
I have never said that he reacted to being shot in the thigh. He said he never felt it. It is not uncommon for people not to feel bullets, especially in the extremities.
- "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 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'
In fact, the fragment that struck Tague had to have a slow enough average speed over the 280 feet from the car at z271 to Tague in order to have enough time to drop to the pavement. On a 3 degree decline after clearing the top of the windshield it would have had to have dropped almost 15 feet to strike the road near Tague. That would take almost a full second. So it would have to be travelling an average of 280 ft/sec.
That was Zeon's suggestion about the bullet striking the upholstery and there was a close inspection of the car and no such hole was found. There is not enough evidence for us to determine how it ended up where it did. But there are several ways in which it could have happened. After passing though JFK, tumbling over the ensuing 4 feet of air and then, while spinning, striking the thigh butt-first on an angle plowing through leg muscle until reaching the femur depositing the lead fragment in the femur it may have bounced back. It may have come out of the wound or it may have stayed in the wound. Or it may have kept going and struck something in the car that caused it to bounce back without causing damage. It may have bounced up and back off the thigh and ended up on JBC's lap or in the back seat or on JFK. The person who found it was of the view that it came not from Connally's stretcher but from stretcher B that was already in the hallway and had some bloody sheets on it.
The Z film is surely the perfect metaphor for all of the JFKA: A pretty clear MOVIE of the event has spawned at least 75 different claims as to what it shows, including claims that it's been altered or is a complete fake.
It reminds me of a joke I posted here before: A CTer dies and goes to heaven. Upon encountering Jesus, he pleads: "Look, I spent my whole life on the JFKA. I gotta know, WHO DID IT?" Jesus: "Oswald, and he acted alone." The CTer walks away muttering, "Wow, the conspiracy goes even higher than I thought." Ba-da-boom, ba-da-bing.
Do you honestly believe anyone took note of which way JBC was facing when they heard the first shot. In fact, I doubt there were many if any spectators looking at JBC. Their attention would have been focused on Jack and Jackie. They were the ones the spectators came to see.I agree. But JBC received his torso wound on the second shot. Gayle Newman said he was turned sideways when the second shot sounded and he just lay back on the seat. Nellie told Dr. Shires that he was turned around to his right when the second shot struck him. Dave Powers said JFK moved left after the first and JBC disappeared after the second.
Now you are just imagining things. JFK shows no reaction from Z193 until he goes behind the sign. When he reemerges, his right hand is still going down. It doesn't start up until Z226, the same frame JBC's right arm flips upward. And you want to chalk that up to coincidence.I have never suggested it is a coincidence. They are both reacting to the first shot: JFK by realizing he can’t breathe and JBC realizing JFK was being assassinated.
YES HE DID!Opening one’s eyes to reading what people said is a good thing too.
Open your damn eyes!
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z247.jpg
It is preposterous to think JBC is not reacting to the shot that hit him less than a second and a half earlier. Anybody who denies that cannot be taken seriously and you sure as hell are not and never will be as long as you continue to peddle this nonsense.
Did you just make that up? Never mind. I already know the answer to that. The reason JBC didn't feel the thigh wound was sensory overload. He didn't even know his wrist had been shattered because the chest wound overloaded his nervous system and it was the only thing he remembered feeling.That may be true. But it also may be true that he did not feel the thigh wound because it didn’t generate any sensation of pain. When local injuries occur quickly and obliterate nerve endings there may be nothing to send sensory signals to the brain.
You theories get even more preposterous the hard you try to saved your turkey of a scenario. Just to get over the front seat and Kellerman the bullet would have to have deflected upward at a very steep angle. It's hard to believe that a bullet striking JBC's wrist would cause that much change in direction but even if it did, it would now be flying in a parabolic arc. If my chance it came down and hit the curb in front of Tague, it's primary force would be gravity, not momentum and it would not have cause the chip in the pavement that apparently caused Tague's superficial face wound.Why would a projectile’s impact be due to the forces acting on it before impact? The impact force is entirely due to velocity and mass of the projectile. In this case it may be that the fragment struck the road surface and deflected up striking the curb on an upward trajectory and deflected to Tague’s cheek.
I agree. But JBC received his torso wound on the second shot.
Gayle Newman said he was turned sideways when the second shot sounded and he just lay back on the seat.
Nellie told Dr. Shires that he was turned around to his right when the second shot struck him.
Dave Powers said JFK moved left after the first and JBC disappeared after the second.
I have never suggested it is a coincidence. They are both reacting to the first shot: JFK by realizing he can’t breathe and JBC realizing JFK was being assassinated.
Opening one’s eyes to reading what people said is a good thing too.
Nellie was pretty clear that he said “oh, no, no” before the second shot. And she is looking at JFK after that. She said she never looked back after the second shot.
That may be true. But it also may be true that he did not feel the thigh wound because it didn’t generate any sensation of pain. When local injuries occur quickly and obliterate nerve endings there may be nothing to send sensory signals to the brain.
Why would a projectile’s impact be due to the forces acting on it before impact? The impact force is entirely due to velocity and mass of the projectile. In this case it may be that the fragment struck the road surface and deflected up striking the curb on an upward trajectory and deflected to Tague’s cheek.
Yes he did when he was starting to turn back to the front and his shoulders were turned only slightly to the right at or about Z222.I was responding to your comment about the first shot. It is understandable that no one was focused on JBC as they would be focused on JFK. That may be why there are at least 22 witnesses who recalled how JFK reacted to it. (One might wonder how they could all be so wrong -all in the same way - in recalling his reaction to it).
You just acknowledged that the spectators would have been focused on the Kennedys so how the hell would Gayle Newman know how JBC was turned when the shot struck him, especially since you believe JFK was hit and was reacting to the first shot.
I don't give a rat's ass what Nellie had to say.No. But I do consider them. I look to see how their recollections fit with what others recalled. If there are significant similarities I look to see if they are independent and I see how they fit with the rest of the evidence. Unlike some, I don’t reject them because they don’t fit with what I have already concluded happened.
Yes, that is how Powers remembered it but that doesn't establish how it actually happened. You continue to treat these witnesses as if their recollections are gospel.
Now you are really stretching. I take Ozempic every week and I feel it when I stick the needle into my thigh. It isn't a terrible pain, but it isn't pleasant either.A needle doesn’t destroy nerve endings. All I can say is that very often people do not feel bullets. I posted an example (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V94pR6vrFaL8P_1taiJq2V13XKw7VOxC/view?usp=drivesdk) earlier. Google it yourself: “ do people always feel bullets when shot?”
We're supposed to believe that a JBC did not feel a puncture wound almost two inches deep into his thigh if he was not consumed by the overwhelming sensation of having a bullet traverse his chest a millisecond earlier.I just go by what he said. He said he never felt any pain until he tried to get out of the car at Parklabd.
More stretching by you. For the projectile to cause the chip on a concrete surface it would have to be traveling with a good deal of velocity.It didn’t chip the concrete.There was just a smear that was analysed and contained lead and antimony. No concrete was missing. Shaneyfelt Ex. 26: (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0249a.htm)
Under your scenario the bullet would have reached the apex of an arc and would coming down mainly by the force of gravity with most of the forward momentum expended. It makes no sense.I would agree that makes no sense. But 300 fps is not exactly slow. It is about 200 mph.
I was responding to your comment about the first shot. It is understandable that no one was focused on JBC as they would be focused on JFK. That may be why there are at least 22 witnesses who recalled how JFK reacted to it. (One might wonder how they could all be so wrong -all in the same way - in recalling his reaction to it).
But for the second shot a few people were watching JBC. Nellie turned to look at her husband at the time of the second shot. She said he recoiled and she reached out and pulled him down onto her. Gayle Newman said the second shot occurred as the car was passing right in front of her. You can see them standing down by the lamp post in Willis 5:
(https://i.postimg.cc/T2VmQtQ4/IMG-2765.jpg)
So Gayle Newman just reported what she saw when the second shot sounded: JBC was turned sideways and lay back on his seat. Dave Powers recalled that JFK moved to the left after the first shot so he was able to see JBC. He said that when the second shot sounded JBC just disappeared.
No. But I do consider them. I look to see how their recollections fit with what others recalled. If there are significant similarities I look to see if they are independent and I see how they fit with the rest of the evidence. Unlike some, I don’t reject them because they don’t fit with what I have already concluded happened.
A needle doesn’t destroy nerve endings. All I can say is that very often people do not feel bullets. I posted an example (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V94pR6vrFaL8P_1taiJq2V13XKw7VOxC/view?usp=drivesdk) earlier. Google it yourself: “ do people always feel bullets when shot?”
I just go by what he said. He said he never felt any pain until he tried to get out of the car at Parklabd.
It didn’t chip the concrete.There was just a smear that was analysed and contained lead and antimony. No concrete was missing. Shaneyfelt Ex. 26: (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0249a.htm)
(https://i.postimg.cc/ryZJ5npP/IMG-2766.jpg)
I would agree that makes no sense. But 300 fps is not exactly slow. It is about 200 mph.
The obvious answer is that Connally's wrist was hit after Z272. By that time, being in shock and intense pain from the Z236 hit, Connally would not have even noticed the hit on his wrist.
It has always been self-evident that JFK and Connally were hit by separate bullets before Z313. JFK begins to react to his first wound around Z200, and Jackie starts to notice and react to JFK's reaction starting in Z202. By Z224, Jackie is staring intently at JFK, and JFK is clearly starting to bring his left hand up toward this throat, so obviously he was hit long before Z224.
Another bullet hits JFK just after he emerges from behind the freeway sign because his torso is visibly jolted sharply forward, and the position of his hands and elbows--particularly his elbows--changes dramatically, as they are flung upward and forward. The force and speed of these movements are quite startling when one compares Z226, where they are first discernible, to frame 232 just 1/3-second later.
Although the WC, and to a great extent the HSCA, ignored these movements, they are among the most dramatic and visible wounding events in the entire Zapruder film. WC apologists ignore this reaction because they realize it destroys the single-bullet theory in one fell swoop.
You keep saying things that don't make sense. If everybody was focused on the Kennedys before the shots and the first shot struck JFK as you believe, why would anyone shift their focus to JBC after seeing JFK reacting to being shot. What kind of sense does that make.Evidence is what it is - even if you are unable to think of a reason that JBC would have been in Gayle Newman’s field of view at the time of the second shot.
Evidence is what it is - even if you are unable to think of a reason that JBC would have been in Gayle Newman’s field of view at the time of the second shot.
Maybe it was because, as she said, the second shot happened when the car was right in front of her.
I don't care where the limo was. There would be no way Gayle Newman would be focused on JBC if JFK had been hit and JBC had not. The only reason for her to shift her attention to JBC would be if JBC was also reacting to having been shot.Why do you think she would not have been able to see both JBC and JFK at the same time?. Not everyone suffers as you might from tunnel vision, John.
Why do you think she would not have been able to see both JBC and JFK at the same time?. Not everyone suffers might from tunnel vision, John.
It has to do with what she would have been focusing on. You think she would have been more focused on which way JBC's shoulders were turned than on the POTUS raising his arms in front of him in reaction to having been shot through the through the throat.Your comments would be better if you read what I wrote first. I am talking about the second shot occurring when the car was passing in front of Gayle Newman down by the lamp post. JFK was not moving at that time. He had already reacted and she observed him react. In her statement made to the Dallas Sheriff a few hours after the events, she said (22 H 842): (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0118b.jpg)
It's just another in a long list of goofy things you believe. Let's just list them.Except that this corresponds to the last turn to the right that JFK made which Mary Woodward observed. She said that after she shouted to the President to get his attention and he turned and smiled and waved at her group and that they were the last people JFK ever acknowledged because as the car passed by there was the first "horrible ear-shattering noise". So, you can ignore that and speculate that JBC was turning in response to a shot. But that is not the evidence.
At Z164, JBC starts to rotate to his right to look over his right shoulder in reaction to a gunshot that wouldn't be fired until on second later.
At Z193, Oswald fires a shot through the tree between him and JFK even though he only needed to wait one more second to have a clear shot.Again, you don't seem to read very well. Or perhaps it is just a comprehension thing. I have shown repeatedly that JFK was clear of the tree as seen in the Secret Service film when he was just past the lamp post (z190) but before passing the Thornton sign (z200). I put it closer to the lamp post - about z193.
JFK is shot in the back and the bullet exits from his throat. Even though JBC is sitting a half a body width to the left of JFK, the bullet miraculously misses to the left of JBC's torso and strikes JBC in his left thigh which for some strange reason is splayed way out to his left even though he is rotating to his right.Sigh. You really don't read anything I write, do you? I have NEVER suggested that JBC reacted to his thigh wound. He reacted to hearing the first shot and realizing an assassination was unfolding.
The bullet that exited JFK's throat without hitting any bone only has enough velocity to penetrate only an inch or two into JBC's thigh, even though a 6.5mm Carcano bullet is capable of penetrating 3 feet of pine wood.
Despite JFK having been shot through the throat and JBC having been shot in the thigh, JFK continues to calmly wave to the spectators to the right of Elm St. and JBC just as calmly continues with the rotation he began one second before he was shot.
33 frames after both men have been, both men finally react to being shot at exactly the same time when JFK raises both his arms up in front of his throat and JBC flips his right arm upward, a rather strange way to react to being shot in the thigh.
After flipping his right arm upward in reaction to being shot in the thigh, JBC twists and dips dramatically to his right in reaction to his thigh wound.
JBC continues his reaction to his thigh wound by turning his shoulders about 90 degrees so they are parallel to the side of the car and his head turns 180 degrees to the rear so that he is facing both JFK and the shooter.Just as he said - he turned to look at JFK because he was worried that JFK was being assassinated.
Your comments would be better if you read what I wrote first. I am talking about the second shot occurring when the car was passing in front of Gayle Newman down by the lamp post. JFK was not moving at that time. He had already reacted and she observed him react. In her statement made to the Dallas Sheriff a few hours after the events, she said (22 H 842): (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0118b.jpg)
"President Kennedy kind of jumped like he was startled and covered his head with his hands and then raised up. After I heard the first shot, another shot sounded and Governor Connally kind of grabbed his chest and lay back on the seat of the car."
Not surprisingly, it is very similar to what she said in her WFAA-TV interview by Jay Watson about 20 minutes after the events in which she said that JBC was turned to his side at the time of the second shot.
Except that this corresponds to the last turn to the right that JFK made which Mary Woodward observed. She said that after she shouted to the President to get his attention and he turned and smiled and waved at her group and that they were the last people JFK ever acknowledged because as the car passed by there was the first "horrible ear-shattering noise". So, you can ignore that and speculate that JBC was turning in response to a shot. But that is not the evidence.
Again, you don't seem to read very well. Or perhaps it is just a comprehension thing. I have shown repeatedly that JFK was clear of the tree as seen in the Secret Service film when he was just past the lamp post (z190) but before passing the Thornton sign (z200). I put it closer to the lamp post - about z193.
Sigh. You really don't read anything I write, do you? I have NEVER suggested that JBC reacted to his thigh wound. He reacted to hearing the first shot and realizing an assassination was unfolding.
Just as he said - he turned to look at JFK because he was worried that JFK was being assassinated.
You finally got one thing right. I don't understand anything you write. None of it makes the least bit of sense. Do you ever stop to wonder why you're the only one who believes the JFKA happened that way?Your notion of what makes sense is rather selective. How does a first shot that misses the entire car make sense? How does it make sense that there was a missed first shot that not a single person noticed while at least 22 said didn’t miss? How does it make sense that the vast majority of witnesses recalled the last two being closer together and in rapid succession, yet supposedly, in reality, they were about equally spaced 5 seconds apart?
I’ve looked at some more of the Z-film frame by frame using the Costella edit which includes the area between the sprockets, and I’ve discovered that at Z212 2 SS agents beside and across from Clint Hill are still visible and they are looking forward.
Up to Z230, the SS agent behind Clint Hill is visible and at Z230 this agent is still looking forward.
The Willis girl has stopped and looks back by Z205 but 2 SS agents at Z212 haven’t turned their heads back and up to Z230, the SS agent next to Clint Hill had not turned his head back to look at TSBD.
Should there not have been some Clint Hill reaction from Z190-Z230 even if he was tasked with keeping his eyes focused on JFK?
So it seems to be a discrepancy in reaction time by the SS agents up to at least Z230 versus the more immediate reaction of the Willis girl stopping running by Z200.
Plausible reasons for this apparent discrepancy of reaction times between the SS agents and the Willis girl?
1. The SS agents were hung over from the Thursday night party and their nervous systems and senses were depressed?
2. The SS agents were desensitized by having heard occasional random motorcycle backfires occurring over the duration of the limo trip from the point of origin to entering Dealey plaza?
3. The Willis girl was reacting to something else other than a gunshot such as a motorcycle backfire?
I’ve looked at some more of the Z-film frame by frame using the Costella edit which includes the area between the sprockets, and I’ve discovered that at Z212 2 SS agents beside and across from Clint Hill are still visible and they are looking forward.You cannot see the agents on the right running board (i.e. across from Clint Hill) in z212. Those agents are Jack Ready (right front) and Paul Landis (right rear). The last frame in which they are visible is z207. Ready said that he turned to his right upon hearing the first shot. In order to do that he had to remove his right hand from the front hand-hold. He did that between z198 and z200 and turned to his right:
Up to Z230, the SS agent behind Clint Hill is visible and at Z230 this agent is still looking forward.That is SA McIntyre and he is looking much more to the left at z230 than he was in z193. In fact he is looking left before z206.
Should there not have been some Clint Hill reaction from Z190-Z230 even if he was tasked with keeping his eyes focused on JFK?He was watching events happening in the car. He may have been thinking about whether he could make it to the President's car if he jumped off.
So it seems to be a discrepancy in reaction time by the SS agents up to at least Z230 versus the more immediate reaction of the Willis girl stopping running by Z200.Rosemary Willis said she turned to look back at the TSBD and saw pigeons flying from the roof. She turns suddenly from z202-206:
Rosemary Willis did not suddenly turn to the TSBD. She had been running alongside the limo when she heard the shot. It took her almost two seconds to come to a stop and when she did, she turned back to look at the TSBD and saw the same pigeons flying off the roof that Marrion Baker had seen. There was nothing sudden about her turn.She stops moving her feet at z199. Perhaps you can direct me to the evidence that the pigeons waited 3 seconds after the first shot to suddenly flee from the roof.
She stops moving her feet at z199. Perhaps you can direct me to the evidence that the pigeons waited 3 seconds after the first shot to suddenly flee from the roof.
Your reading comprehension seems to be as bad as your ability to properly weigh evidence. Who said the pigeons waited 3 seconds after the shot to fly off the roof. She turned in time to see the birds in flight. It's unlikely Marrion Baker saw the pigeons takeoff either unless he was looking at the roof when the shot was fired. Why would he have done that? He likely heard the shot, looked up and saw the pigeons in flight.If the shot was just before z150 as you suggest, the pigeons were long gone by z202 when she turned her head. Pigeons are remarkably fast and quick to take flight. See:
Rosemary Willis stopping at Z199 fits perfectly with her looking back to the TSBD a few frames later. I can't imagine that should would look back while she was still moving forward.
If the shot was just before z150 as you suggest, the pigeons were long gone by z202 when she turned her head. Pigeons are remarkably fast and quick to take flight. See:
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/TcgqnqYbIpk
The elapsed time from the shot until Rosemary looked back was less than 3 seconds. I don't think the pigeons would have vanished in that amount of time.Fightened pigeons move fast and hit 60 mph easily. The time from z148 to z202 is 2.95 sec. Even at 30 mph (44 feet/sec) they would be well over 100 feet away from the TSBD when she turned.
Fightened pigeons move fast and hit 60 mph easily. The time from z148 to z202 is 2.95 sec. Even at 30 mph (44 feet/sec) they would be well over 100 feet away from the TSBD when she turned.
So now you're an ornithologist. So tell me, Professor. How long does it take a pigeon to accelerate from 0 to 30 mph?
So now you're an ornithologist. So tell me, Professor. How long does it take a pigeon to accelerate from 0 to 30 mph?I am going to go out on a limb with the pigeon acceleration time and say less than a second.
I am going to go out on a limb with the pigeon acceleration time and say less than a second.
It's just science: My reasoning is as follows: 1. The Tesla motor co. is named after Nikolai Tesla. 2. Tesla loved pigeons. In fact, he is quoted as saying he loved pigeons "the way a man loves a woman". 3. It follows that Musk would not have made his fastest car much faster than a pigeon - that would not honour the memory of the namesake of his company. 4. So a pigeon acceleration time is at least equal to the fastest Tesla car, the Model S Plaid, which has a 0-60 mph acceleration of just under 2 seconds. 5. Assuming the acceleration is constant (it is actually quicker from the start), this would put 0-30 in just under a second. QED.
I didn't think your reasoning could get any nuttier. You surprised me.You may want to view a slow motion video of pigeons taking off from an elevated perch (https://www.gettyimages.ie/detail/video/pigeons-fly-up-from-the-roof-frightened-by-the-noise-stock-footage/1488529479). From a roof, they jump up and fly forward. From the ground, it is not so easy to fly forward because they tend to run into things - like predators and, ironically, Tesla cars. So they have to fly up first. And, by the way John, you might want to work on developing your ability to recognize a joke.
Your claim ignores one important factor. When pigeons take off, their first move is usually to gain elevation. They usually do this for a couple seconds before acceleratign horizontally. There's no reason to believe the pigeons would be out of Rosemary Willis' field of vision by the time she looked up.
You may want to view a slow motion video of pigeons taking off from an elevated perch (https://www.gettyimages.ie/detail/video/pigeons-fly-up-from-the-roof-frightened-by-the-noise-stock-footage/1488529479). From a roof, they jump up and fly forward. From the ground, it is not so easy to fly forward because they tend to run into things - like predators and, ironically, Tesla cars. So they have to fly up first. And, by the way John, you might want to work on developing your ability to recognize a joke.
Everything you write is a joke.Hence my suggestion that you should work on recognizing a joke.
Hence my suggestion that you should work on recognizing a joke.