(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRH8uL2YKDAk7YZAyfFMJHV0eaxtsgxufp72f4W9gs0JRoaOUwY)
At least an inch higher than the clavicle (feel that on your neck)
Which means the rear bullet had to strike higher than that from behind
It has to hit JFK squarely in the lower neck - which is NOT EVEN CLOSE
To the actual wounds.
Clearly shot in the upper back and not the neck (official
autopsy photos wiki page) The MB would be an OBVIOUS neck shot from behind.
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7FjFmuwn3506wGR5gSzMteLv8gkgb-sc8gIS_aFipVA8T_-Gr)
This wound is obviously too low to support the MBT.
you see the unusual wound shape? Surgical tweezers/clamps have removed
the bullet and left their telltale marks on the wound.
(https://userscontent2.emaze.com/images/46e2eec6-c739-4bcd-a214-c1b4efbd4542/fe22104d67feb69aee06f4450b42fb36.jpg)
That says 5-6 inches BELOW THE COLLAR
A WR diagram
(https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-1087fd7691721af0146484e3c5ad3be1)
ALL THE EVIDENCE STACKED UP HERE BY THE WR
PROVES 5-6 INCHES DOWN FROM THE COLLAR
The WR says the MB did not hit bone in JFK
So he apparently had no spinal column
Because the front "exit" wound is directly in the middle of the throat
and the bullet exited at high velocity
It therefore HAD to smash through the spinal column even If
people try to move the wound about (which they have since 1963)
which would have obviously killed Kennedy instantaneously
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSiLh2DeprE3KaPrxPXYHzNc_O_MngiGtPgnsilqk3fh3nrcT3c)
This picture is my personal favourite - you see no spine
(http://i47.tinypic.com/15x8g46.jpg)
This simple picture totally destroys the Magic Bullet Myth
It is taken by an unassuming photographer at parkland minutes after arrival
Its a clear perfectly round symmetrical bullet impact and not a ricochet
The MB is a practical impossibility and is contrary to much of the governments
own evidence
Just answering "no it isn't" is not helpfulThe evidence is absolutely clear that the bullet went through JFK entering his upper back and exiting throat beneath the left side of his neck tie. The question is: what did it strike afterward?
you ignore the strong evidence and cherry pick the rest
How?
How does the bullet miss the spinal column?
Why is that not evidence of a bullet strike? (does it matter what garage?)
OK the shirt is all "bunched up" what about the autopsy pic's?
Is that all you've got - a pic of his SUIT JACKET?
I did not include the suit jacket evidence
-----------------------------------------------------------
feel about an inch above your collar bone at the front
then move your other hand to the back of your neck an inch
above that
THATS WHERE THE BULLET HAS TO HIT
no where near your back
That is your neck Mr Organ - no doubt
TRY IT
wrongWhy does the downward path of the bullet not affect the path through the body? If it does, what is the downward angle you are using? How do you factor in the position of JFK (ie. was he perfectly vertical or was he leaning? Which direction and how much?
I don't go further because the bullet clearly does not travel further
that is what the evidence shows
feel about an inch above your collar bone at the front
then move your other hand to the back of your neck an inch
above that
THATS WHERE THE BULLET HAS TO HIT
no where near your back
well the FBI officially state 21 degrees down angleWhat right-to-left angle are you using for the bullet path? It depends on the time of the first shot. If the first shot was at z195 or so, the angle was over 13 degrees. Would you think the bullet has to go through the spine if it was travelling right-to-left at a 13 degree angle and exited the throat, .5 cm left of JFK's midline?
the path doesn't matter so much because we have the "exit" wound
as a guide.
It is directly in the middle front of the trachea
meaning If it were at high velocity the bullet MUST pass through
the spinal column and trachea, middle front.
no doubt
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRH8uL2YKDAk7YZAyfFMJHV0eaxtsgxufp72f4W9gs0JRoaOUwY)
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRH8uL2YKDAk7YZAyfFMJHV0eaxtsgxufp72f4W9gs0JRoaOUwY)
At least an inch higher than the clavicle (feel that on your neck)
Which means the rear bullet had to strike higher than that from behind
It has to hit JFK squarely in the lower neck - which is NOT EVEN CLOSE
To the actual wounds.Clearly shot in the upper back and not the neck (official
autopsy photos wiki page) The MB would be an OBVIOUS neck shot from behind.
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7FjFmuwn3506wGR5gSzMteLv8gkgb-sc8gIS_aFipVA8T_-Gr)
This wound is obviously too low to support the MBT.
you see the unusual wound shape? Surgical tweezers/clamps have removed
the bullet and left their telltale marks on the wound.
(https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-1087fd7691721af0146484e3c5ad3be1)
ALL THE EVIDENCE STACKED UP HERE BY THE WR
PROVES 5-6 INCHES DOWN FROM THE COLLAR
The WR says the MB did not hit bone in JFK
So he apparently had no spinal column
Because the front "exit" wound is directly in the middle of the throat
and the bullet exited at high velocity
It therefore HAD to smash through the spinal column even If
people try to move the wound about (which they have since 1963)
which would have obviously killed Kennedy instantaneously
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSiLh2DeprE3KaPrxPXYHzNc_O_MngiGtPgnsilqk3fh3nrcT3c)
This picture is my personal favourite - you see no spine
(http://i47.tinypic.com/15x8g46.jpg)
This simple picture totally destroys the Magic Bullet Myth
It is taken by an unassuming photographer at parkland minutes after arrival
Its a clear perfectly round symmetrical bullet impact and not a ricochet
The MB is a practical impossibility and is contrary to much of the governments
own evidence
buddyJust as I expected: Your inability to answer the simple questions show that you have not actually worked out the trajectory. So why would you expect us to treat your objection to the path through JFK seriously?
This case is a donkey
The bullet has to hit JFK well into his neck
and not his back
I have proven why on this thread
If you dont think so - prove otherwise
stop with the broken record routine
(http://i47.tinypic.com/15x8g46.jpg)You may have a point that the photograph could help disprove the SBT. As far as I know, the FBI did not extract any metal from the windshield frame when gathering and weighing all the bullet fragments. That was a significant fragment and some or all of it may have been embedded deep into the frame. If the fragments exceed the mass of a 6.5 mm bullet, that would disprove the SBT by itself.
This simple picture totally destroys the Magic Bullet Myth
It is taken by an unassuming photographer at parkland minutes after arrival
Its a clear perfectly round symmetrical bullet impact and not a ricochet
By knowing the dimensions of the rear view mirror bracket and scaling the photo, it's possible to find the dimension of the bullet that made the dent in the chrome molding.... I performed this exercise decades ago and found that the bullet was either a .44 or a .45 caliber bullet.... Since a .45 caliber ACP cartridge fires a bullet at subsonic velocity, and that big slow moving bullet has very poor penetrating ability , I suspect that the bullet that made the dent was fired from a .45 caliber weapon.
well, I don't know about all thatThe difference between 5.56 mm and 6.5 mm. is less than a millimetre!! You can see that it is 5.56 and not 6.5 mm just by looking at a photo of a single bullet hole without measurement?
but that bullet looks small
To me it looks like a 5.56 mm
The hole in JFK's shirt is also very small
it all fits
c'mon nuttersAs far as I can tell, Oswald fired all three shots and all three shots struck in the limo. The shot pattern was 1......2...3. The SBT has no evidence to support it but, more to the point, the second shot SBT is disproved by the shot pattern because if the last two were close together (closer than 1 and 2) there is no possible way to have the second shot occur prior to z225 when JFK is obviously reacting to his throat wound.
prove this MB BS
You may have a point that the photograph could help disprove the SBT. As far as I know, the FBI did not extract any metal from the windshield frame when gathering and weighing all the bullet fragments. That was a significant fragment and some or all of it may have been embedded deep into the frame. If the fragments exceed the mass of a 6.5 mm bullet, that would disprove the SBT by itself.
As far as I know, the FBI did not extract any metal from the windshield frame when gathering and weighing all the bullet fragments.The central hole does not appear to be very big. The large dent could result from the smaller projectile impacting the metal frame and spreading the metal apart. A .45 calibre bullet is 11 mm in diameter or about 7/16 of an inch - almost half an inch. I have a feeling that a .45 bullet striking that frame would do much more damage than that.
The damage to the chrome molding was a deep dent....The bullet did not penetrate through the molding. Please explain how it would be possible to "extract any metal from the windshield frame" when the molding covering the frame had not been penetrated???
If you're actually looking for facts....measure the size of the dent by using the sun visor clip as a scale. I'm sure that you'll find that the dent was made by a .45 caliber bullet.
You mean how you've framed the evidence.
I didnt frame anything
evidence is evidence
It stands by itself
and that picture SHOULD dispel this ridiculous MBT forever
firm?
The sitting president disagreed with it (& you)
and 1 commissioner refused to sign off on it
you guys...
are holier than the pope!
lol
is that the very best you can do?
It makes no difference to me whether a sitting President disagreed with it or not. If he disagreed with it then either he was ignorant of the facts surrounding it or he was an idiot.
The Single Bullet Theory remains standing, Firm and unchallengeable.A version of the SBT remains standing. It is firm only if you ignore the evidence against it. And it is certainly challengeable.
A version of the SBT remains standing. It is firm only if you ignore the evidence against it. And it is certainly challengeable.
The current version is not the version that the WC counsel were pushing, as the many references in the evidence to "first shot" being the one that struck JFK attest. John McCloy believed that JBC was struck by the first shot and did not feel it right away. It was not until many years later that the second shot SBT gained acceptance. So much for a "firm" theory.
The evidence against the second shot SBT is abundant: over 20 witnesses said that JFK reacted to the first shot - not by smiling and waving for 3 seconds
which is what the SBT requires.
No one said he continued to smile and wave after the first shot.
There is abundant evidence (from motorcade witnesses, photographers, witnesses along Elm) that the first shot was between z186-202. There is evidence that JFK was visible to Oswald in the SN by z195 and likely visible all the time he was passing under the oak tree.
There is also abundant evidence that the shot pattern was 1.......2...3
so there could only have been one shot by z225 when the President is seen to be reacting. That in itself contradicts the second shot SBT.
As far as being challengeable, I am not sure what you mean. I challenge it. That does not mean that Oswald did not fire all three shots. He most certainly did.
Few among the "20 witnesses" in your paper were actually in a position to see the President smiling. Of those, some (ie: the Chisms, Jean Newman) were "two shot" witnesses who merely recalled the President "slumping" on the shot which occurred before the head shot. That means their "first shot" was the second in most three-shot scenarios.
(http://i66.tinypic.com/348hfle.gif)
Mary Woodward saw the President not react (other than look around) to the first shot and "slump" on the second shot, followed by the head shot.
It's "required" only to meet your arbitrary claim.
But your list of 20 witnesses have few who were in a position to see the President wave clearly and even more who were not positioned to see his face.
(http://i65.tinypic.com/aahtnm.jpg)
No evidence for the car clearing the oak tree by Z195 that you produced. Better-resolution film shows the branches were a considerable hindrance.
Witnesses were more attentive to the shot span--if they were attentive to such a thing at all--only after hearing a second shot. They had no reason to expect a second loud report after hearing the first as many dismissed the first as a "backfire" or "firecracker". The first shot blended more readily into the normal behavior observed in the crowd and the motorcade. Only with the second shot came a wave of awareness and urgency.
Andrew Mason is a defense attorney and apparently will commit any lie, misrepresentation or distortion to "defend" his "client" (pet theory).
The evidence against the second shot SBT is abundant: over 20 witnesses said that JFK reacted to the first shot - not by smiling and waving for 3 seconds which is what the SBT requires.
Explain this obvious bullet strike please
(http://i47.tinypic.com/15x8g46.jpg)
Explain this obvious bullet strike please
(http://i47.tinypic.com/15x8g46.jpg)
Thanks Jerry
But I must disagree
Its a perfectly round symmetrical impact
anyone who uses a rifle can tell right away what that is
yes I believe a ricochet did hit the windshield from the headshot
but not that strike
My recollection tells me that I've taken apart your "over 20 witnesses said that JFK reacted to the first shot" claim before. More than once.Yes. You have rationalized why some of them all made the same mistake of missing the first horrible ear shattering noise and thinking the second shot was the first shot. The problem is that your rationalizations of why they were wrong does not constitute evidence. What you need are witnesses who said that they saw JFK not react to the first shot and continue to smile and wave for 3 seconds afterward. But there are none. So there is only evidence that JFK reacted to the first shot. The WC certainly seemed to accept that evidence.
Few among the "20 witnesses" in your paper were actually in a position to see the President smiling. Of those, some (ie: the Chisms, Jean Newman) were "two shot" witnesses who merely recalled the President "slumping" on the shot which occurred before the head shot. That means their "first shot" was the second in most three-shot scenarios.That is not a very good argument, Jerry. There were dozens of witnesses along the north side of Elm who could see JFK from z160 to z225. Many if not all were looking at the President or Jackie. None of them said that either continued to smile or wave after that first horrible ear-shattering noise.
She also heard the last two shots closer together - so close that the reverberation from the second had not died out before the third shot sounded. That, in itself, says that JFK must have been hit on the first shot. Admittedly, she said her recollection of the events after the first shot were a little "hazy". But there are dozens of others who reported the same thing.
Mary Woodward saw the President not react (other than look around) to the first shot and "slump" on the second shot, followed by the head shot.
It's "required" only to meet your arbitrary claim.It would be arbitrary if not supported by evidence but merely conjecture. Your rationalizations for why the witnesses were all wrong is just that: conjecture. It is certainly not evidence.
But your list of 20 witnesses have few who were in a position to see the President wave clearly and even more who were not positioned to see his face.So what? See above: there were many others who were in a position to see his face - everyone on the north side of Elm St. All or nearly all were looking at the President.
No evidence for the car clearing the oak tree by Z195 that you produced. Better-resolution film shows the branches were a considerable hindrance.Your zframes are wrong. The president was opposite the lamppost at z190. Why not show us how you determined the corresponding zframe for this film. Also - tell us where you found the high resolution frames of the tree. I would like a better copy myself.
Witnesses were more attentive to the shot span--if they were attentive to such a thing at all--only after hearing a second shot. They had no reason to expect a second loud report after hearing the first as many dismissed the first as a "backfire" or "firecracker". The first shot blended more readily into the normal behavior observed in the crowd and the motorcade. Only with the second shot came a wave of awareness and urgency.Your rationalization of why you think they were wrong is not evidence. You need evidence that the witnesses who reported the last two shots closer together were wrong. All the evidence I have found shows that they were right: that the second shot was at z271-272.
Andrew Mason is a defense attorney and apparently will commit any lie, misrepresentation or distortion to "defend" his "client" (pet theory).Why do you think that my "theory" that the witnesses were not hallucinating or collectively mistaken in the same way is any crazier than your "theory" that they were? And why is it a "lie"? You should realize, Jerry, that resort to ad hominems is a sign that you are in the last stage of a losing argument.
That is not a very good argument, Jerry. There were dozens of witnesses along the north side of Elm who could see JFK from z160 to z225. Many if not all were looking at the President or Jackie. None of them said that either continued to smile or wave after that first horrible ear-shattering noise.
| (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lostbullet/z133-z199/z162.jpg)[ | (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lostbullet/z133-z199/z193.jpg) |
The magic bullet theory is ridiculous. It was created by conspiracy screwballs. I reject it entirely.And the difference is....? Either way we are still calling it a THEORY. And it is the stupidest theory I have ever heard of. BTW there is no such word as 'unchallengeable'. You might look up the word-----
The Single Bullet Theory remains standing, Firm and unchallengeable.
A direct strike by a intact bullet traveling at near muzzle velocity would have done much more damage to that chrome piece. Nobody familiar with rifles would think that it was a direct strike from a bullet.
And the difference is....?
So what was that strike then?
The Single Bullet Theory...But it is still just a theory...a could have been. There could have been other shots from other shooters...also a theory. Neither theory was really explored much it seems. CE 399 was worshiped as the one true explanation of everything and so the story ends.
But it is still just a theory...a could have been. There could have been other shots from other shooters...also a theory. Neither theory was really explored much it seems. CE 399 was worshiped as the one true explanation of everything and so the story ends.
The "other shots from other shooters" theory has no support. There's no evidence for it and it doesn't stand up at all under any scrutiny. CE399 wasn't worshiped. It just was. It exists. It is evidence that fits very well with the Single Bullet Theory.
Well, here are some witnesses on the north Elm sidewalk near the Stemmons sign.She was a two shot witness in the sense that she could recall only two shots for sure. She did say to the FBI that she could not be sure that there were not additional shots.
"The motorcade had just passed me when I heard something that
I thought was a firecracker at first, and the President had just
passed me, because after he had just passed, there was a loud report,
it just scared me, and I noticed that the President jumped, he sort
of ducked his head down, and I thought at the time that it probably
scared him too, just like it did me, because he flinched like he jumped.
I saw him put his elbows like this, with his hands on his chest."
-- Jean Newman
Newman is a two-shot witness. She's described the jump-and-duck shot occurring when "the motorcade had just passed" and before the head shot. Her Nov 24th affidavit states: "A car carrying the President and another person had just passed her when she heard a report and saw the President jump. raising his hands to his chest area."
The motorcade (ie: limousine) was still in front of Newman at Z195. Much of the front of the car was pass her position by Z223.As far as I can determine, Jean Newman was the woman to the left of the space and to the right of the man with the black hat (Ernie Brandt) in between the lamppost and the Thornton sign. She was opposite the President at about z197. Newman said that the first shot occurred as the motorcade had just passed her. That puts the first shot in the same place that dozens of others put it. In fact, not a single witness puts the shot anywhere near z160 where you put it and others definitively put it much later (for example: Hughes stopped filming about z187 and said he stopped before it; Betzner said it was after his z186 photo; motorcade witnesses said the VP car had just finished its turn and the VP security car was almost finished its turn - both are still turning at z191).
In a letter written Nov. 22, 1963, June Dishong wrote: "here come the president and his wife?His arm in the air waving?He drops his arm as they go by, possibly 20 feet. Suddenly--a sound. Gun shots? So hard to tell above the clamor of the crowd. The president bent forward into his wife?s lap as his arm slipped off the side of the car."And where do you see that occur before z206? His arm appears to have dropped slightly by z206 from its highest position at z193.
The President drops his right arm as he goes behind the sign, which is after your Z195 shot.
A Z150s first shot would be lost in memory ("So hard to tell above the clamor of the crowd").A "horrible ear-shattering noise" was forgotten within 3 seconds? What on earth are you basing that on? This is not only speculation, it is speculation that is contrary to normal human experience. People observe/hear things and just because they don't understand immediately what caused it doesn't mean it vanishes from their consciousness.
A Z195 shot would have occurred before he lowered his arm and was so near to Dishing, I doubt it would be lost to "the clamor of the crowd". Dishong recalls him reacting after he lowered his arm and when he was near to her. This is more supportive of a shot heard at Z223 than Z195.June Dishong was about 4-5 feet from Jean Newman - a one-person space plus one person between them, which puts the President directly opposite her at about z200.
A pink suit. Pill box hat to match. Black hair just as we had seen them so many times on T.V. - it was beautiful.The source is from a post by Don Roberdeau (http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/1070-june-dishongs-attack-observations-released/) who is pretty reliable.
He drops his arm as they go by - possibly 20 feet. Suddenly - a sound. Gun shots? So hard to tell above the clamor of the crowd.
The President bent forward into his wife?s lap as his arm slipped off the side of the car. Jackey circled him with her arm. Another shot. Panic among the people. Woman with children. Parents pushing them to the ground. No one knows where the shots are coming from.
(page 7)
A cry. The President has been shot.
A third shot. People scatter.
Karen Westbrook said the first shot occurred as the President waved towards them ("She was leaning over the President and pulling her hair out of her eyes as they were waving to us. And that is the image that I remember when the first shot was fired..."). We have to assume it was only the President waving and that Westbrook misinterpreted Jackie doing something with her hair; that's what the Zapruder film suggests as the car approached Westbrook).?? That's your take? He was smiling and waving - hardly looking like he had been shot!! Westbrook was to the immediate left of June Dishong so she was opposite JFK around z198-200.
The President is turned her way and about to wave by Z160 (roughly a quarter-second after a late-Z150s shot). By Z195, Westbrook can't see Mrs. Kennedy and the President isn't looking her way.
"After the first shot was fired I saw the President's hands gradually come up".
Between Z162 and Z193, the President's right hand gradually raises up fairly high ("I thought he was going to hold up his hands and say 'Ah, you got me.'")
CE399 wasn't worshiped. It just was. It exists. It is evidence that fits very well with the Single Bullet Theory.It just was. It exists. ---- So does BS:
we just made the turn when I heard what I thought was a [rifle] shot..I turned to my rightthe rest here... https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh4/html/WC_Vol4_0071a.htm
It just was. It exists. ---- So does BS:
"It is evidence that fits"- [Like 20 lbs of crap in a 5 lb sack]
Real evidence..testimony of a credible witness. Beginning at a line from the previous page....the rest here... https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh4/html/WC_Vol4_0071a.htm
It destroys the SBT. Resistance is futile
The central hole does not appear to be very big. The large dent could result from the smaller projectile impacting the metal frame and spreading the metal apart. A .45 calibre bullet is 11 mm in diameter or about 7/16 of an inch - almost half an inch. I have a feeling that a .45 bullet striking that frame would do much more damage than that.
Here's a question: if there was an elaborate conspiracy, why would the plan be to use a handgun - and then have such a poor shooter miss by so much?
I have a feeling that a .45 bullet striking that frame would do much more damage than that.Can you provide us with the make and model of a rifle that could fire .45 calibre bullets and was made in or prior to 1963?
Mr Mason...You are ill prepared to evaluate and dis cuss the dent in the chrome molding....
A 45 ACP cartridge was designed to STOP a foe or enemy... It was NOT designed to penetrate .....the heavy ( 230 grains) soft lead bullet traveling at subsonic velocity of 850 fps has a walloping 400 ft pounds of energy.
The cartridge was not designed to penetrate Thus it merely dented the steel molding .....
PS.... It was NOT fired from a handgun....
Nobody said anything about a hand gun....
I'm sorry, what? You're going to have to explain to me how Connally's WC testimony destroys the SBT. Because I don't see it. In fact, I see just the opposite.Connally's WC testimony conflicts with a first-shot-SBT. Each of three independent bodies of witness evidence (1. that JFK reacted to the first shot, 2. that the first shot was after z190, and 3. that the last two shots were closer together) conflict with anything other than a first-shot-SBT. So, in that sense, Connally's WC testimony, if correct, would rule out the SBT.
Can you provide us with the make and model of a rifle that could fire .45 calibre bullets and was made in or prior to 1963?
There is also such a word as umpteenth and that's how many magic bullet threads that have been posted on this forum in the past year. Why start another one? It has always managed to be challenged.
I'm glad you asked....The CIA had constructed shoulder fired assassination rifles which were equipped with silencers.Anyone can make stuff like that up. What is your source for the existence of such a rifle? And where can we find one?
They used the 30 caliber carbine and re-barreled it to fire the 45 acp cartridge Thus they had a powerful short rang weapon that made no noise when fired. ( Those who fired the silenced carbine said that the only sound audible was the click of the bolt as it operated. There was a good write up on this carbine in a gun magazine many years ago....
Connally's WC testimony conflicts with a first-shot-SBT.
"the first shot didn't hit me"
"the second shot DID hit me"
It's clear as day
I agree. His testimony supports a second shot SBT. Thumb1:Not exactly. It does not destroy a second shot SBT but it doesn't exactly support it. He said that when he turned around to see if JFK was ok he was unable to see him. That suggests that JFK was not where he had been on previous occasions when JBC had turned around to speak with JFK. It is difficult to understand why he could not have turned around and seen JFK before z193 because JFK is quite far to the right with his right elbow on the top of the right side of the car. JBC had made that turn easily to chat with the President during the trip through Dallas. More to the point, there is no attempt to even look at JFK prior to about z250.
She was a two shot witness in the sense that she could recall only two shots for sure. She did say to the FBI that she could not be sure that there were not additional shots.
In any event, she is still a "JFK reacted to the first shot" witness.
Your speculation that the first shot did not register with her is not evidence. Your premise that someone can hear an ear-shattering noise and then another a few seconds later and forget that they heard the first one is, on its face, a bit absurd. You would need some empirical evidence that this can and does occur often in humans.
As far as I can determine, Jean Newman was the woman to the left of the space and to the right of the man with the black hat (Ernie Brandt) in between the lamppost and the Thornton sign. She was opposite the President at about z197. Newman said that the first shot occurred as the motorcade had just passed her. That puts the first shot in the same place that dozens of others put it.
In fact, not a single witness puts the shot anywhere near z160 where you put it and others definitively put it much later (for example: Hughes stopped filming about z187 and said he stopped before it;
Betzner said it was after his z186 photo;
motorcade witnesses said the VP car had just finished its turn and the VP security car was almost finished its turn - both are still turning at z191).
And where do you see that occur before z206? His arm appears to have dropped slightly by z206 from its highest position at z193.
A "horrible ear-shattering noise" was forgotten within 3 seconds? What on earth are you basing that on? This is not only speculation, it is speculation that is contrary to normal human experience. People observe/hear things and just because they don't understand immediately what caused it doesn't mean it vanishes from their consciousness.
June Dishong was about 4-5 feet from Jean Newman - a one-person space plus one person between them, which puts the President directly opposite her at about z200.
She did not give a statement to the FBI but she did write out a vivid description of the events - undated but apparently written shortly after the events. It came to light only after her death in 1998. You have given part of what she said but here is a bit more to provide context:
The source is from a post by Don Roberdeau (http://LINK DELETED: Links To websites which contain materials or links to materials which are unsuitable for viewing by minors is forbidden/topic/1070-june-dishongs-attack-observations-released/) who is pretty reliable.
She was oblique to JFK, as was Dishong and Jean Newman.
?? That's your take? He was smiling and waving - hardly looking like he had been shot!! Westbrook was to the immediate left of June Dishong so she was opposite JFK around z198-200.
| (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lostbullet/z133-z199/z162.jpg) | (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lostbullet/z133-z199/z193.jpg) |
I see just the opposite.You see what you want.
But her "first shot" is still the one before the fatal head shot.How do you figure that? She never mentions the head shot and she admitted she was not sure if there were more than two shots. Maybe she just wasn't counting after the first shot because her mind was focused on what she was seeing rather than counting sounds. Maybe the shot that she did not distinguish as a separate shot was one of the last two that were closer together according to the the vast majority of the witnesses.
It's actually the second shot in most LN three-shot scenarios. She's misplaced the first of the three shots (the one many term the "backfire" or "firecracker") because nothing unusual happened (like a person reacting as if they had been shot) and the crowd behaved as they did before the first shot.It is also the last shot so why could it not be that they did not distinguish between 2 and 3? It is not about "misplacing" shot sounds. It is about not counting them or not distinguishing separate shots.
Meanwhile, your theory requires that "two shot" witnesses fail to register your Z271 second shot. This is after the crowd had (per your theory) been alerted to the President reacting on your Z195 first shot, so they should therefore be immediately concerned about any subsequent shots or happenings in the car.No. It just means that they heard all the shots but were not focused on counting them or recalling a pattern. Or maybe they just recalled shots that had some visual effect. If they were focused on what they saw and did not see any effects from the first of the last two shots, maybe after the fact.
Not exactly. It does not destroy a second shot SBT but it doesn't exactly support it. He said that when he turned around to see if JFK was ok he was unable to see him. That suggests that JFK was not where he had been on previous occasions when JBC had turned around to speak with JFK. It is difficult to understand why he could not have turned around and seen JFK before z193 because JFK is quite far to the right with his right elbow on the top of the right side of the car. JBC had made that turn easily to chat with the President during the trip through Dallas. More to the point, there is no attempt to even look at JFK prior to about z250.
Betzner said he was looking down to wind his camera when he heard the first of two shots he later recalled, the latter one being the head shot. So the winding-the-camera shot he heard could be the shot heard before the head shot. In a three-shot scenario, Betzner has lost track of one of those shots.
(http://i60.tinypic.com/2ih3twy.jpg)
As Betzner goes out of the Zapruder film in Z207, he is still lowering his camera and is not looking down. Assuming he winds his camera shortly thereafter, it is an argument that the shot he heard while winding the camera was the proposed SBT shot at Z223.
What he said was that he never turned around far enough. And we can see in the Zapruder film that he didn't. Dale Myers has Connally turning sharply to the right beginning at Z157 and reaching 48 degrees of right rotation at Z193.He did not say the never turned around far enough. His WC testimony indicates that he turned as far as he could but could not catch the President out of the corner of his eye:
He did not say the never turned around far enough.
After viewing the Zapruder Film J Curry came to the conclusion that Governor John Connally and John F. Kennedy had been hit by separate bullets. He told interviewer Tom Johnson that he was not convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy: "We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did. Nobody's yet been able to put him in the building (Texas School Book Depository) with a gun in his hand."
So we have Jesse Curry
Senator Russell
LBJ and The majority of US citizens polled
All agree that the MBT is BS
The simultaneous reaction of both Kennedy and Connally is unmistakable and undeniable. They were both hit at virtually the same time by the same bullet.
Kennedy's hands are still dropping between those two frames. The bullet has just passed through him but the involuntary reaction has yet to initiate. The bullet and the following blood, flesh and bone have caused Connally's jacket to bulge out.
stuck in the 60's?
you guys that are promoting the MBT
are stuck in the 60's
that sh%t don't fly today
people don't believe it
How do we know Connally was reacting to being hit? Maybe he was just reacting to a round landing within a couple feet of him. If the round did come through the windshield it would have passed within inches of Connally's head.
I find it questionable that after having 4 inches of rib blasted away he would/could twist around to his right as far as he could to see JFK. Secondly he holds his Stetson in his right hand after having his Radius shattered and the tendon to his thumb severed. Then he articulates his wrist downward to fit his hat between him and the door of the limo as he twists around to see JFK. If a round passes through your wrist I doubt you would then bend it like he does.
yes ,you have proven a simultaneous bullet strike
but 1 from the front
and 1 from the rear
The shooters obviously planned to fire exactly when the nose of the car
gets to the stemmons sign
The throat wound is an entry wound (there is ample evidence)
GC say's there was a 1-1.2 second gap between shots
"It sounded like an automatic rifle"
Even a world class sniper like LHO cannot recycle that fast
How do we know Connally was reacting to being hit? Maybe he was just reacting to a round landing within a couple feet of him. If the round did come through the windshield it would have passed within inches of Connally's head.
I find it questionable that after having 4 inches of rib blasted away he would/could twist around to his right as far as he could to see JFK. Secondly he holds his Stetson in his right hand after having his Radius shattered and the tendon to his thumb severed. Then he articulates his wrist downward to fit his hat between him and the door of the limo as he twists around to see JFK. If a round passes through your wrist I doubt you would then bend it like he does.
When or where did Connally ever say that?
Who cares? None of this can be proven especially to YOUR satisfaction. If the MB happened 3 seconds later you would be screaming bloody murder denying it all. But none of it matters.
Let's examine what we do know instead. "The bullet and the following blood, flesh and bone have caused Connally's jacket to bulge out." Then where was the DNA on the MB?
Still waiting...
?the thought immediately passed through my mind that there were either two or three people involved or more in this or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle?
He reiterates
?It was a very brief span of time; oh, I would have to say a matter of seconds. I don't know, 1.0, 1.2 seconds. It was extremely rapid, so much so that again I thought that whoever was firing must be firing with an automatic rifle because of the rapidity of the shots, a very short period of time.? WC Testimony
Your turn to concede bud
YES
automatic rifle twice
Sorry about that my bad I misunderstood - not deliberate
still automatic rifle though
So when he says
"It was extremely rapid, so much so that again I thought that whoever was firing must be firing with an automatic rifle"
Its pretty clear
How do we know Connally was reacting to being hit? Maybe he was just reacting to a round landing within a couple feet of him. If the round did come through the windshield it would have passed within inches of Connally's head.The tendon to his thumb was severed?
I find it questionable that after having 4 inches of rib blasted away he would/could twist around to his right as far as he could to see JFK. Secondly he holds his Stetson in his right hand after having his Radius shattered and the tendon to his thumb severed.
| (https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/texas-governor-john-b-connally-standing-outside-of-the-state-capitol-picture-id50328865) June 22, 1966 | (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Portrait_of_John_Connally%2C_Secretary_of_the_Treasury_-_NARA_-_194732.tif/lossy-page1-319px-Portrait_of_John_Connally%2C_Secretary_of_the_Treasury_-_NARA_-_194732.tif.jpg) August 15, 1971 |
Then he articulates his wrist downward to fit his hat between him and the door of the limo as he twists around to see JFK.
If a round passes through your wrist I doubt you would then bend it like he does.
JBC was reacting to being hit because he was hit. The evidence for that is beyond doubt. No round came through the windshield. JBC was in the process of turning to his left when struck by CE-399. Even after being hit in the wrist JBC hangs on to his hat.The fact they both reacted at the same time may look convincing but it does not prove he was hit as opposed to just reacting to being very close to the shot.
The fact they both reacted at the same time may look convincing but it does not prove he was hit as opposed to just reacting to being very close to the shot.
Connally said he turned to the right because he heard the gunshot on that side and also wanted to look at JFK. Then according to the SBT he was shot BEFORE he started to turn not during it.
You think that they could test DNA back then? ???
None of the blood , flesh, or bone from Connally's torso would be expected to be on the bullet.
"A bullet that is not broken up during penetration usually emerges without detectable amounts of blood or tissue clinging to it. As it penetrates, the bullet is moving so rapidly that its primary effect on tissue is to push it aside, creating a temporary cavity, not pick it up." -- The JFK Myths: A Scientific Investigation of the Kennedy Assassination, by Larry Sturdivan, pg 120
https://www.amazon.com/JFK-Myths-Scientific-Investigation-Assassination/dp/1557788472
By the time that the FBI lab received the bullet, any blood that might have been on it from Connally's shallow thigh wound would have been wiped clean from being in the sheets of Connally's stretcher and the pocket linings of two or three people.
Fair enough. But that does not mean that he could have turned farther and decided not to turn farther. The point is that he was trying to turn to see the President but couldn't catch him in the corner of his eye to see how he was so he decided to turn to the left, which is where it appeared to him he would get a better view of JFK - presumably because JFK had moved to the left. Where do you see that move to the left in the zfilm prior to z225?
Mr. DEVINE. The first shot that you hear which caused you to look to your right, I think you said you didn't get far enough around to see the President, is that accurate?
Mr. CONNALLY. That is correct.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/hscacon.htm
I agree that both are reacting at the same time to a shot. Whether the reactions began at the same time is not possible to tell because we cannot see if JFK began reacting while behind the Stemmons sign. He certainly appears very different when he emerges in z225 than he did in z193. The fact that both are reacting to a shot does not mean that they are reacting to being hit by it. The evidence is pretty strong that there was only one shot to that point. If that is the case, JBC is reacting to the first shot exactly as he said he did- by turning to his right to see the president because he had just heard a rifle shot and thought an assassination was occurring.
The simultaneous reaction of both Kennedy and Connally is unmistakable and undeniable. They were both hit at virtually the same time by the same bullet.
How do we know Connally was reacting to being hit? Maybe he was just reacting to a round landing within a couple feet of him. If the round did come through the windshield it would have passed within inches of Connally's head.Very good question. Connally said he reacted to the shot - the first shot - that he believed struck JFK because he heard it and knew it was a rifle shot. He feared an assassination was unfolding and turned to see the President.
I find it questionable that after having 4 inches of rib blasted away he would/could twist around to his right as far as he could to see JFK. Secondly he holds his Stetson in his right hand after having his Radius shattered and the tendon to his thumb severed. Then he articulates his wrist downward to fit his hat between him and the door of the limo as he twists around to see JFK. If a round passes through your wrist I doubt you would then bend it like he does.
Fair enough. But that does not mean that he could have turned farther and decided not to turn farther. The point is that he was trying to turn to see the President but couldn't catch him in the corner of his eye to see how he was so he decided to turn to the left, which is where it appeared to him he would get a better view of JFK - presumably because JFK had moved to the left. Where do you see that move to the left in the zfilm prior to z225?
I agree that both are reacting at the same time to a shot. Whether the reactions began at the same time is not possible to tell because we cannot see if JFK began reacting while behind the Stemmons sign. He certainly appears very different when he emerges in z225 than he did in z193. The fact that both are reacting to a shot does not mean that they are reacting to being hit by it. The evidence is pretty strong that there was only one shot to that point. If that is the case, JBC is reacting to the first shot exactly as he said he did- by turning to his right to see the president because he had just heard a rifle shot and thought an assassination was occurring.
Why should we presume that JFK had moved to the left at that point? Connally simply had not turned far enough to his right.The problem with that reasoning is that Connally said he was TRYING TO SEE THE PRESIDENT. If I recall correctly, in his initial hospital statement he said the JFK had moved and he could not see him when he turned. There is no way at all that he was trying to see the President prior to disappearing behind the Stemmons sign.
Myers has him reaching a 48 degree right rotation at z193. That just wasn't far enough to see Kennedy. Why Connally stopped there, I don't know.Right. Exactly. The reason is rather obvious: he wasn't trying to see the President. If he was he would have turned around like he did after z230.
(https://i.imgur.com/UZP7ht1.gif)You are still speculating that the lowering of his hand was not part of the reaction in itself. We don't know that.
As Kennedy emerges from behind the sign, the involuntary reaction has yet to show itself. We can see his right hand and arm, that he had been lowering after waving to the crowd, still dropping. He did not begin reacting while behind the Stemmons sign.
The reactions of both Kennedy and Connally begin at the same time. They are in sync.Only if you are correct that JFK was not already reacting behind the sign. Many, many witnesses said he brought his hands down toward his neck/chest in response to the first shot. They could see JFK "behind" the sign.
Anyone can make stuff like that up. What is your source for the existence of such a rifle? And where can we find one?
.45 calibre is awfully big for a rifle - almost 2x the diameter of the 6.5 mm - 4x the cross-sectional area. Stability would be a huge problem unless the bullet length increases substantially. But that increases bullet mass and therefore the amount of energy required, so it needs proportionately more powder. But that is not all. Air resistance increases a the square of the diameter too, which increases the stability forces required. So spin rate has to be even higher to maintain accuracy. But to get a high spin rate it has to traverse the barrel faster. If you shorten the barrel you have to increase the speed even more. So I would be very surprised if anyone made such a rifle because it would have so many problems with accuracy.
Why are you attempting to apply the old axiom...If you can't dazzle em with brilliance.. then try to baffle em with BSI wasn't the one suggesting that there was a .45 calibre rifle in 1963. As far as I can tell, there wasn't such a rifle. More to the point, there is are good reasons why such a rifle would not be made. A .45 calibre bullet would be 5 times heavier than a 6.5 mm bullet. Try to imagine the recoil from that! Even at subsonic speeds, it would have 2-3 times the kick of the MC firing 6.5 mm ammunition. Stability is also a problem, as I mentioned earlier. If you want to inflict damage, it is better to add speed rather than mass. If you want stability, it is better to keep it long and narrow rather than short and fat. Just physics.
Why not do a little honest research and determine the diameter of the dent??
I wasn't the one suggesting that there was a .45 calibre rifle in 1963. As far as I can tell, there wasn't such a rifle. More to the point, there is are good reasons why such a rifle would not be made. A .45 calibre bullet would be 5 times heavier than a 6.5 mm bullet. Try to imagine the recoil from that! Even at subsonic speeds, it would have 2-3 times the kick of the MC firing 6.5 mm ammunition. Stability is also a problem, as I mentioned earlier. If you want to inflict damage, it is better to add speed rather than mass. If you want stability, it is better to keep it long and narrow rather than short and fat. Just physics.
I agree that both are reacting at the same time to a shot. Whether the reactions began at the same time is not possible to tell because we cannot see if JFK began reacting while behind the Stemmons sign. He certainly appears very different when he emerges in z225 than he did in z193. The fact that both are reacting to a shot does not mean that they are reacting to being hit by it. The evidence is pretty strong that there was only one shot to that point. If that is the case, JBC is reacting to the first shot exactly as he said he did- by turning to his right to see the president because he had just heard a rifle shot and thought an assassination was occurring.
| (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z133-z199/z193.jpg) | (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z200-z249/z225.jpg) |
Very good question. Connally said he reacted to the shot - the first shot - that he believed struck JFK because he heard it and knew it was a rifle shot. He feared an assassination was unfolding and turned to see the President.
The evidence is consistent that the first shot struck JFK so what you see after z230 is Connally's turn to see JFK which he said he did before he was hit in the back on the second shot.
| (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z200-z249/z228.jpg) "About the time I turned back where I was facing more or less straight ahead, the way the car was moving, I was hit." | (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z200-z249/z242.jpg) "Then there was a second shot, and it hit John [Connally], and as he recoiled to the right ... he turned away from me." -- Mrs. Connally |
The vast majority of witnesses who recalled a pattern to the shots said the last two were closer together
so Connally was hit many frames later. Greer said he turned around immediately after the second shot. His turns just before z280. That is just after Connally is hit.
| (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lostbullet/z200-z249/z232.jpg) | (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lostbullet/z250-z299/z253.jpg) |
The irony is that with this evidence (first shot hit JFK, first shot was after z190, last two shots were closer together)
there is no need to explain a missed shot for which there is no evidence and there is no need for a second shooter. Oswald could easily have fired all three.
So we both agree he looks very different. In z193 he is smiling and waving and in z225 he has a look of terror. You say it is umbrella man, I say it's a bullet. We'll have to disagree on that.
"Appears very different"? In what way? He's just not smiling and seems to be looking at the Umbrella Man protester. In Z193, Kennedy is engaging with well-wishers; he's pass them and getting a load of Umbrella Man while behind the sign.
Connally thought he was struck in the Z230s; Mrs. Connally the Z220s.Quite true. They were not questioned, however, on the details. For example, JBC was never asked "Where is it that you turn around to look over your right shoulder to see JFK?" and Nellie was never asked "You said you did not look in the back seat after the second shot, but there you are looking in the back seat after z232 when you say you think the second shot occurred".
"About the time I turned back where I was
facing more or less straight ahead, the way
the car was moving, I was hit."
"Then there was a second shot, and it hit
John [Connally], and as he recoiled to the
right ... he turned away from me."
-- Mrs. Connally
You have to allow several frames for the Governor to perceive the pain from a Z223 bullet strike and for Nellie to turn her attention away from the President to witness her husband's back to her.Why? JBC said he felt it immediately. He takes from z224 to z278 to fall back on his wife?
Pretty hard to determine if Greer didn't turn his head earlier because the windshield hides his face. So can't claim the late-Z270 head turn was his first.No. Greer was describing the turn after the second shot as the turn before his last turn which was just before the head shot. We can see both of those turns. The first of those last two turns occurs from about z278-280.
But your first shot at Z195 doesn't work in 3-D (that is, good 3-D). The bullet that left Kennedy's throat can't possibly get pass Connally's left side to strike the left femur.Not according to the actual dimensions of the car, the seats, the jump seat back height, the bullet trajectory from the SN and the positions of the men as seen in the zfilm:
Also Connally would have sensed the bullet strike, but per your theory, he's unaware for over four seconds that he's been struck. He just swats at a fly with his Stetson and, for the first time in the whole motorcade, twists his body so he's largely back-on to his wife.Bullets do not necessarily hurt. JBC said he never felt the thigh wound. He said that he felt the impact but no pain from the back wound. So why would he feel pain from the thigh wound? There was no loss of function of his leg, unlike from his chest wound. It is not uncommon in battle for soldiers to receive extremity wounds and not be aware of it until they or someone else notices blood. Here is the experience of someone who was shot in the leg (http://americanshootingjournal.com/heres-what-it-feels-like-to-get-shot/):
There is a mere 2 1/4 seconds between the head shot and your Z271 shot. But almost five seconds between the head shot and the shot that struck at Z223.Right. Give or take because we don't know exactly when in relation to the exposures the two shots occurred. So between shots captured in z272 and z313 there could be up to 54.7 ms x 42 + 30 ms = 2.33 seconds between them. That seems to fit "rapid succession" and puts the second perceptibly closer to the third than the first, unlike a second shot at z223.
Your theory has two missed shots. Both Z195 and Z271 shots show absolutely no bullet strikes or reactions in the Zapruder film.Not exactly "missed" shots - certainly not like missing the car, the road and everything else which is what the SBT requires. It depends on what he was trying to hit. Both shots were very, very close to the target if JFK's head was the target. In fact, the shot at z271-72 was close enough to JFK's head that his hair flew forward, according to Hickey.
(https://i.imgur.com/UZP7ht1.gif)
As Kennedy emerges from behind the sign, the involuntary reaction has yet to show itself. We can see his right hand and arm, that he had been lowering after waving to the crowd, still dropping. He did not begin reacting while behind the Stemmons sign.
(https://i.imgur.com/uFqBHiv.gif)
The reactions of both Kennedy and Connally begin at the same time. They are in sync.
You are still speculating that the lowering of his hand was not part of the reaction in itself. We don't know that.
I would point out that the WC thought at z225 JFK was reacting to being shot (WR 98):"When President Kennedy again came fully into view in the Zapruder film at frame 225, he seemed to be reacting to his neck wound by raising his hands to his throat. ... According to Shaneyfelt the reaction was ?clearly apparent in 226 and barely apparent in 225.?
The HSCA found that JFK was reacting well before z224 (HSCA Rep. 46):"By Zapruder frame 207, when President Kennedy is seen going behind a sign that obstructed Zapruder's view, he appears to be reacting to a severe external stimulus. This reaction is first indicated in the vicinity of frame 200 of the Zapruder film. The President's right hand freezes in the midst of a waving motion, followed by a rapid leftward movement of his head. (43) There is, therefore, photographic evidence of a shot striking the President by this time."
In the footnote on page 44 of its report, the HSCA noted:"In its report, the committee's photographic Connally reacted to his wounds evidence panel suggested that Governor interval might have been approximately one second after President Kennedy. This interval might have been even less, but a sign obstructing Zapruder's field of view made it impossible to study the Governor immediately after the President first appeared to be reacting to having been shot."
Only if you are correct that JFK was not already reacting behind the sign. Many, many witnesses said he brought his hands down toward his neck/chest in response to the first shot. They could see JFK "behind" the sign.
In any event, what is the significance of them both beginning to react at the same time? That does not mean that both were reacting to being hit by it. JBC said he reacted to the first shot, which Nellie and about 20 others saw that JFK also reacted to.
So we both agree he looks very different. In z193 he is smiling and waving and in z225 he has a look of terror. You say it is umbrella man, I say it's a bullet. We'll have to disagree on that.
Quite true. They were not questioned, however, on the details. For example, JBC was never asked "Where is it that you turn around to look over your right shoulder to see JFK?" and Nellie was never asked "You said you did not look in the back seat after the second shot, but there you are looking in the back seat after z232 when you say you think the second shot occurred".Why? JBC said he felt it immediately.
He takes from z224 to z278 to fall back on his wife?
No. Greer was describing the turn after the second shot as the turn before his last turn which was just before the head shot. We can see both of those turns. The first of those last two turns occurs from about z278-280.
Not according to the actual dimensions of the car, the seats, the jump seat back height, the bullet trajectory from the SN and the positions of the men as seen in the zfilm:(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/limo_z197_First_Shot_2.jpg) (http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/limo_z197_First_Shot_3.jpg)(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/limo_z197_First_Shot_4.jpg)(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/limo_z197_First_Shot_1.jpg)
Bullets do not necessarily hurt. JBC said he never felt the thigh wound. He said that he felt the impact but no pain from the back wound. So why would he feel pain from the thigh wound? There was no loss of function of his leg, unlike from his chest wound. It is not uncommon in battle for soldiers to receive extremity wounds and not be aware of it until they or someone else notices blood.
Here is the experience of someone who was shot in the leg (http://americanshootingjournal.com/heres-what-it-feels-like-to-get-shot/):
- "Felt Like My Leg was Heavy And Wet, But Getting Shot Didn?t Hurt secondhand_organs: ?I took a bullet in the *ss cheek that did some kind of parabolic arc and exited out of the back of my thigh. I didn?t feel the impact, but wondered why my leg felt heavy and wet (I was on a bicycle at the time). Getting shot itself didn?t hurt, but getting treated for it did. "
Right. Give or take because we don't know exactly when in relation to the exposures the two shots occurred. So between shots captured in z272 and z313 there could be up to 54.7 ms x 42 + 30 ms = 2.33 seconds between them. That seems to fit "rapid succession" and puts the second perceptibly closer to the third than the first, unlike a second shot at z223. Not exactly "missed" shots - certainly not like missing the car, the road and everything else which is what the SBT requires.
It depends on what he was trying to hit. Both shots were very, very close to the target if JFK's head was the target. In fact, the shot at z271-72 was close enough to JFK's head that his hair flew forward, according to Hickey.(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/3D_Model_DP_z271.jpg)
Well, OK. When someone simply stops smiling, they automatically display a "look of terror."I am not sure what your point is. JFK in z225 does not look like he simply stopped smiling. Something caused him to assume that pained or startled look. Whatever it was, it happened more than 1/10th of a second (2 frames) earlier because that is the minimum reaction time.
I think if Mrs. Connally is choosing the Z220s for the second shot and the Governor is choosing the Z230s for the shot he felt (ie: the second shot), then what does that tell you about where they felt their actions before that occurred?For the record, they both saw slides of the frames just before they testified to the WC. They both chose the same frames - z229-z234:
So what? Nellie said she noticed that immediately after the second shot, she saw that her husband had recoil so he was back-on to her. She said it was later that she pulled him towards her.He did not describe hanging around for 3 seconds before falling back. Greer said he fell back immediately. He said he turned around immediately after the second shot and saw JBC falling back onto his wife.
Couldn't find that.2 H 118:
Which you mostly got wrong.The point is that the bullet path from the SN at z197 goes to the left side of JBC. He was wounded in only one place on his left side and the wound is consistent with being hit by the butt end of an intact missile (Dr. Gregory). The bullet wound was debrided down to the femur, according to the doctor who operated on it (Dr. Shires) and it was on an ang, along the direction of the femur.
There wasn't a battle going on in Dealey Plaza at the time. And for veteran politicians, there wasn't much about the motorcade to distract them. Jackie recalled that before the shots, she was mostly concerned about her physical comfort, thinking it would be cool under the overpass.You have to look at people who received just a flesh wound - no damage to bones or organs. Besides, the best evidence is from JBC himself. He said he never felt the thigh wound or wrist wound and even the chest wound did not hurt. He felt no pain until he got to Parkland, probably due to a collapsed lung.
Not sensing pain seems rare even on that page you cited.
The SBT now requires the missed shot to not hit the road? You just overplayed your hand, counselor.Well, it vanished without causing any mark in the road. There is really no evidence that it struck the road.
"According to Hickey"? You mean he actually said it was a bullet that made Kennedy's hair move on the second shot?That was the conclusion he drew. 18 H 762:
I am not sure what your point is. JFK in z225 does not look like he simply stopped smiling. Something caused him to assume that pained or startled look. Whatever it was, it happened more than 1/10th of a second (2 frames) earlier because that is the minimum reaction time.
Just a comment: it is interesting that JBC says " It was just after we came out of the sign". Perhaps he was recalling that he was hit just after he passed the sign. JBC passed the Stemmons sign at about z268 or so.
He did not describe hanging around for 3 seconds before falling back. Greer said he fell back immediately. He said he turned around immediately after the second shot and saw JBC falling back onto his wife.2 H 118:
Mr. GREER I knew that after I heard the second one, that is when I looked over my shoulder, and I was conscious that there was something wrong, because that is when I saw Governor Connally. And when I turned around again, to the best of my recollection there was another one, right immediately after.
Mr. GREER. He was-he seemed to be falling a little bit toward Mrs. Connally, to the left. He started to go over a little bit to the left.
Mr. SPECTER. And how far did you catch his movement during the time you were able to observe him?
Mr. GREER. Just a second. He probably hadn?t gotten his shoulder, he hadn?t fell down or anything. He probably was in a Position such as I am now.
Mr. SPECTER. Did he fall to the rear or to the side or how?
Mr. GREER. In my opinion, he fell toward Mrs. Connally which would be to his left or to his side.
These last two turns he described which he described as occurring between the second and third shots. He is turned around looking rearward at z280-291 and z303-317. The turn at z303 begins at z301. So the turn at z280 probably began a similar amount of time before, z278 or so. We can tell he is turned at z280 because we can see his face in z287 turned rearward and if you progress backward, the two light spots on the top of his head remain in the same position until z280 so his head does not turn during those 8 frames.
The point is that the bullet path from the SN at z197 goes to the left side of JBC.
Well, it vanished without causing any mark in the road. There is really no evidence that it struck the road.
That was the conclusion he drew. 18 H 762:
"The first shot of the second two seemed as if it missed because the hair on the right side of his head flew forward and there didn't seem to be any impact against his head. "
It is apparent that he thought, at least in retrospect, that the shots were directed at JFK's head and he concluded from the hair flying up and no appearance of impact that the bullet missed.
"Look of terror" downgraded to "pained or startled look".The descriptors "terror" or "pained" or "startled" are different ways of describing JFK's look in z225. The look is consistent with something unexpected and unpleasant happening to him and inconsistent with him just deciding to stop smiling and waving. The timing also tells you that because the chance of him reacting to something sudden and unpleasant 55 ms. before, but unrelated to, his reaction to being shot seems rather unlikely.
Connally says that in the same breath he's talking about his viewing of the Zapruder frames.I was just pointing out that he may not have realized that there was a significant difference between appearing from behind the sign in the zfilm and actually passing the sign. No one bothered to ask him. This was one of the problems with the WC: there was no counsel taking an opposing position and asking probing questions, such as I have suggested could have been asked.
I think Greer's two turns between Z280 and Z271 are really one.??271?. Did you mean z291? If so, I agree. He remains turned from z280 to z291 because we can see the top of his head remaining in the same position. It is not in that position in z279 and before that we cannot see Greer's head as it is blocked by the windshield frame/sun visor. There is no other turn until z301-303 which lasts to about z317. So the turn at z280-291, which is when JBC falls back onto his wife, is definitely the one before the third shot and the one he described as having been made immediately after the second shot.
Greer just momentarily looks ahead to check his steering. Greer simply didn't remember the brief turn forward, or thought it unimportant. His head is largely hidden by the windshield and rear-view mirror in many of the frames between the Stemmons sign and the Z270s, so he could have looked back earlier than Z280.Yes, he could have looked back earlier but he would not have seen JBC falling back onto his wife then. He described his last two turns in relation to the shots he heard. On the first of those last two turns, he saw JBC falling. That has to be the turn from z280-291. He turned forward beginning about z291 and turned back again from z301-303, less than a second later which is when the third shot occurred.
Kellerman said he turned around to see the President with his hands at his throat. He does a sharp leftward head-turn about Z252-Z290.Kellerman is looking back while JBC is falling back onto his wife. He didn't comment on seeing that either.
Mr. SPECTER. You just indicated that you had turned to the left.
Had you turned to the left after hearing his voice?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes; certainly.
Mr. SPECTER. And what did you see? You have described what
you saw in terms of position of his hands.
Mr. KELLERMAN. That was it.
Kellerman did not indicate there was a shot fired while he was looking backwards.
"Computer says: No."You did a 3D model to prove this? My computer says your computer hasn't done its homework. Anyone looking at your supposed 3D view will see that the trajectory through JFK is left to right, not right to left:
I think Hickey is probably talking about the headshot ("hair flew forward"). Could have heard the impact on the head and the sound of the rifle report a split-second later as two shots ("there seemed to be practically no time element between them"). Kennedy's head went backwards and to the left, sort of in the direction of Hickey, so he would have perceived less of the head snap and more of the hair (scalp) flying away. Hearing the rifle report, he then sees the President's much-larger overall movements and thinks it's a reaction to a bullet strike.Hickey would have disagreed with you. He said he saw it and he was not looking forward until after z256.
Hickey couldn't see the little hair flutter in the Z270s
Myers match to ZapruderThe following is evident from Myers supposed reconstruction.
-David Emerling
@AndrewThere was no space between JFK's hands in z224 either. If the shot passed through him during frame z224, how do you suppose it missed his hands, wrists and forearms? Someone should at least be able to demonstrate the trajectory from his neck to JBC's right armpit that misses his arms/hands. So far as I can tell, no second-shot SBT proponent has done this.
The bullet has already passed through by the time the hands start to rise
Unless you believe that JFK's hands were faster than a speeding bullet
There was no space between JFK's hands in z224 either. If the shot passed through him during frame z224, how do you suppose it missed his hands, wrists and forearms? Someone should at least be able to demonstrate the trajectory from his neck to JBC's right armpit that misses his arms/hands. So far as I can tell, no second-shot SBT proponent has done this.
I didn't pass through him at Z224. It passed through a frame or two before that.
quote author=Martin Hinrichs
"What we see here is in my eyes clearly the impact-moment of the shot which hits Kennedy in his back."
(http://www.jfkennedy.it/Immagini/Leprovedelcomplotto/nelfilmdiZapruder/backhit.gif)
(http://www.jfkennedy.it/Immagini/Leprovedelcomplotto/nelfilmdiZapruder/Z229-235.gif)
"Credit Giuseppe Sabatino"
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=622&relPageId=5 (http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=622&relPageId=5)
ARRB MD 41 - White House Transcript of Dallas Press Conference
-snip-
Q. Where was the entrance wound?
Dr.Perry: There was an entrance wound in the neck, in regards the one on the
head, I cannot say.
Q. Which way was the bullet coming on the neck wound? At him?
Dr.Perry: It appeared to be coming at him.
-snip-
Q. Doctor, describe the entrance wound. You think from the front in the throat?
Dr.Perry: The wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat; yes,
that is correct.
-snip-
http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/31st_Issue/vs_wounds.html (http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/31st_Issue/vs_wounds.html)
Mr. Specter. What would be the considerations which, in your mind, would make it, as you characterized it, unlikely?
Dr. Baxter. It would be unlikely because the damage that the bullet would create would be--first its speed would create
a shock wave which would damage a larger number of tissues, as in its path, it would tend to strike, or usually would strike,
tissues of greater density than this particular missile did and would then begin to tumble and would create larger jagged--the
further it went, the more jagged would be the damage that it created; so that ordinarily there would have been a rather large
wound of exit. (VI, H-42)
"Mr. Specter had even more severe problems with Dr. Ronald Coy Jones of Parkland Hospital, whom he asked about the neck wounds:"
Mr. Specter. In this report, Dr. Jones, you state the following, "Previously described severe skull and brain injury was noted
as well as a small hole in the anterior midline of the neck thought to be a bullet entrance wound." What led you to the thought
that it was a bullet entrance wound, sir?
Dr. Jones. The hole was very small and relatively clean cut, as you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting
from a patient. If this were an exit wound, you would think that it exited at a very low velocity to produce no more damage than
this had done, and if this were a missile of high velocity, you would expect more of an explosive type of exit wound, with more
tissue destruction than this appeared to have on superficial examination. (VI, H-55)
"Even Mr. Specter could not find in this account much opportunity for turning this neck wound into an exit wound. So, in good prosecutor
-like fashion, he prodded for the thin slant of Commission daylight in Dr. Jones's otherwise dark view of the Commission's suggestions:"
Mr. Specter. Would it be consistent, then, with an exit wound, but of low velocity, as you put it?
Dr. Jones. Yes, of very low velocity to the point that you might think that this bullet barely made it through the soft tissues and
just enough to drop out of the skin on the opposite side. (VI, H-55)
Phil Willis put a time stamp on the first shot by clicking the shutter on his camera when the sound
of that shot startled him. About Z-205
Mr. WILLIS. No, sir; I took that picture just seconds before the first shot was fired, to get back close up. Then I started down the street, and the regular weekly edition of Life magazine came out and shows me in about three different pictures going down the street. Then my next shot was taken at the very--in fact, the shot caused me to squeeze the camera shutter, and I got a picture of the President as he was hit with the first shot. So instantaneous, in fact, that the crowd hadn't had time to react.
A shot at Z-223 would require a second gunman.
The alleged murder weapon couldn't be fired fast enough to be responsible for both shots.
18.5 frames from the Z film took 1 second.
The fastest time to physically fire and rechamber another bullet with the Carcano was 2 1/2 seconds.
That equals about 46 frames of the Z-film.
Z-205 to Z-223 = 18 frames = second gunman = conspiracy.
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/willis%205%20arrow.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/willis%205_1.jpg)
There was no space between JFK's hands in z224 either. If the shot passed through him during frame z224, how do you suppose it missed his hands, wrists and forearms? Someone should at least be able to demonstrate the trajectory from his neck to JBC's right armpit that misses his arms/hands. So far as I can tell, no second-shot SBT proponent has done this.
BS
Hinrichs always cheats the Zfilm; he starts the video way too late
Tell us how Kennedy would already have his hands up at impact
Pain is what caused his hands to rise in the first place
The bullet had already passed through before he could react
The missile was supersonic, FFS.
Get real
Mr. WILLIS. No, sir; except this one thing might be worthy of mention. When I took slide No. 4, the President was smiling and waving and looking straight ahead, and Mrs. Kennedy was likewise smiling and facing more to my side of the street. When the first shot was fired, her head seemed to just snap in that direction,
That head snap of Mrs Kennedy's happened in the Z170s.
Mr. SPECTER - Based on your observations of the neck wound alone, do you have a sufficient basis to form an opinion as to whether it was an entrance wound or an exit wound.
Dr. PERRY - No, sir. I was unable to determine that since I did not ascertain the exact trajectory of the missile. The operative procedure which I performed was restricted to securing an adequate airway and insuring there was no injury to the carotid artery or jugular vein at that level and at that point I made the procedure.
Mr. SPECTER - Based on the appearance of the neck wound alone, could it have been either an entrance or an exit wound?
Dr. PERRY - It could have been either.
Mr. SPECTER - Permit me to supply some additional facts, Dr. Perry, which I shall ask you to assume as being true for purposes of having you express an opinion.
Assume first of all that the President was struck by a 6.5 mm. copper-jacketed bullet fired from a gun having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second, with the weapon being approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President, with the bullet striking him at an angle of declination of approximately 45 degrees, striking the President on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula, being 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, passing through the President's body striking no bones, traversing the neck and sliding between the large muscles in the posterior portion of the President's body through a fascia channel without violating the pleural cavity but bruising the apex of the right pleural cavity, and bruising the most apical portion of the right lung inflicting a hematoma to the right side of the larynx, which you have just described, and striking the trachea causing the injury which you described, and then exiting from the hole that you have described in the midline of the neck.
Now, assuming those facts to be true, would the hole which you observed in the neck of the President be consistent with an exit wound under those circumstances?
Dr. PERRY - Certainly would be consistent with an exit wound.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, assuming one additional fact that there was no bullet found in the body of the President, and assuming the facts which I have just set forth to be true, do you have an opinion as to whether the wound which you observed in the President's neck was an entrance or an exit wound?
Dr. PERRY - A full jacketed bullet without deformation passing through skin would leave a similar wound for an exit and entrance wound and with the facts which you have made available and with these assumptions, I believe that it was an exit wound.
Dr Baxter: We could not determine, or did not determine at that time whether this represented an entry or an exit wound. Judging from the caliber of the rifle that we later found or become acquainted with, this would more resemble a wound of entry. However, due to the density of the tissues of the neck and depending upon what a bullet of such caliber would pass through, the tissues that it would pass through on the way to the neck, I think that the wound could well represent either exit or entry wound.
Mr. Specter: Assuming some factors in addition to those which you personally observed, Dr. Baxter, what would your opinion be if these additional facts were present: First, the President had a bullet wound of entry on the right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the Scapula with the wound measuring 7 by 4 mm. in oval shape, being 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process--assume this is the set of facts, that the wound Just described was caused by a 6.5 mm bullet shot from approximately 160 to 250 feet away from the President, from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second, assuming as a third factor that the bullet passed through the President's body, going in between the strap muscles of the shoulder without violating the pleura space and exited at a point in the midline of the neck, would the hole which you saw on the President's throat be consistent with an exit point, assuming the factors which I have Just given to you?
Dr. Baxter: Although it would be unusual for a high velocity missile of this type to cause a wound as you have described, the passage through tissue planes of this density could have well resulted in the sequence which you outline; namely, that the anterior wound does represent a wound of exit.
Mr. Specter: What would be the considerations which, in your mind, would make it, as you characterized it, unlikely?
Dr. Baxter : It would be unlikely because the damage that the bullet would create would be---first its speed would create a shock wave which would damage a larger number of tissues, as in its path, it would tend to strike, or usually would strike, tissues of greater density than this particular missile did and would then begin to tumble and would create larger jagged--the further it went, the more jagged would be the damage that it created; so that ordinarily there would have been a rather large wound of exit.
Mr. Specter: But relating the situation as I hypothesized it for you?
Dr. Baxter: Then it is perfectly understandable that this wound of exit was not of any greater magnitude than it was.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your experience, Doctor, if any, in the treatment of bullet wounds?
Dr. JONES - During our residency here we have approximately 1 complete year out of the 4 years on the trauma service here, and this is in addition to the 2 months that we spend every other day and every other night in the emergency room during our first year, so that we see a tremendous number of bullet wounds here in that length of time, sometimes as many as four and five a night.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had any formal training in bullet wounds?
Dr. JONES - No.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had occasion to observe a bullet wound which was inflicted by a missile at approximate size of a 6.5 ram. bullet which passed through the body of a person and exited from a neck without striking anything but soft tissue from the back through the neck, where the missile came from a weapon of the muzzle velocity of 2,000 feet per second, and the victim was in the vicinity of 160 to 250 feet from the weapon?
Dr. JONES - No; I have not seen a missile of this velocity exit in the anterior portion of the neck. I have seen it in other places of the body, but not in the neck.
His hands went up when he was hit in the front of his throat by the first shot Willis recorded at Z-205.
The frames Hinrich referenced are Z-228 to Z-235
Obviously, if the sound of the shot at Z-205 caused him to click the shutter on his camera, he is
mistaken about Mrs. Kennedy's head snap.
I'll take the first day quotes and impressions over media and government tainted WC testimony.
His hands going up were an involuntary reaction. If he's hit at Z205 , then it took over a second for that reaction to begin. Try presenting that theory to a medical professional.
Also, you have two bullets entering Kennedy's neck. What happened to them?
I'll take statements made under oath over first day impressions that are known to be incorrect.
His hands going up were an involuntary reaction. If he's hit at Z205 , then it took over a second for that reaction to begin. Try presenting that theory to a medical professional.
Also, you have two bullets entering Kennedy's neck. What happened to them?
JFK swallowed them
Obviously, if Mrs Kennedy snapped her head to the right at the sound of the first shot, he is mistaken about when he clicked the shutter on his camera.
He was hit in the front of his throat by the first shot Willis recorded at Z-205.
That started the movement of his hands.
The frames Hinrich referenced are Z-228 to Z-235.
Where did the bullet wind up...Yes; and where did the bullet come from? There's no hole in the windshield so it didn't go through there. Where did the sniper/shooter fire from? What location? Did the shot go over the windshield and then through his throat and then disappeared? If it went over the windshield then the shooter was located above JFK?
Where did the bullet wind up...
Yes; and where did the bullet come from? There's no hole in the windshield so it didn't go through there. Where did the sniper/shooter fire from? What location? Did the shot go over the windshield and then through his throat and then disappeared? If it went over the windshield then the shooter was located above JFK?
So a bullet went into his back and disappeared and another went into his throat and disappeared? And these shooters were, again where?
Whenever the conspiracists come up with alternative explanations they fall completely apart. At least I'm not convinced of them and I'm such an easygoing fellow.
The photo corresponds to about Z-205 not the Z-170's.
You been drinking?
I didn't pass through him at Z224. It passed through a frame or two before that.So I take it that you do not subscribe to the so called "lapel flip" or "lapel bulge" theory that says that the SBT shot occurred at z224....
Yes; and where did the bullet come from? There's no hole in the windshield so it didn't go through there. Where did the sniper/shooter fire from? What location? Did the shot go over the windshield and then through his throat and then disappeared? If it went over the windshield then the shooter was located above JFK?
So a bullet went into his back and disappeared and another went into his throat and disappeared? And these shooters were, again where?
Whenever the conspiracists come up with alternative explanations they fall completely apart. At least I'm not convinced of them and I'm such an easygoing fellow.
So I take it that you do not subscribe to the so called "lapel flip" or "lapel bulge" theory that says that the SBT shot occurred at z224....
Connally held on to his Stetson all the way to Parkland.Apparently, Snickers was along for the ride ::)
In an interview in 1966, Parkland Hospital witness O.P. Wright told author Thompson that the bullet he handled on 11/22/63 did not look like C.E. # 399.....What we are left with is the FBI having reported a solid chain of possession for #399 to the Warren Commission. But the links in the FBI?s chain appear to be anything but solid. Bardwell Odum, one of the key links, says he was never in the chain at all and the FBI?s own, suppressed records tend to back him up.https://www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/EvenMoreMagical/EvenMoreMagical.htm
So you can't tell us where the your imaginary frontal bullet ended up. Got it.
And how about naming that particular shooter, and show us where he shot from.
Connally held on to his Stetson all the way to Parkland.
Source?
"show us where he shot from."
From the picket fence. Exactly where the HSCA said a shot came from. When the first shot caused Willis to click the shutter on his camera
and create the photo below there was an unobstructed line of sight, bullet path, to the front of JFK's throat. No windshield in the way.
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/willis%205%20arrow.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/willis%205_1.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/cartoon-library-section2.png)
A case could be for libel made against you for changing the intent of the cartoonist and defacing his work. I'm in the art business myself. Better remove it.It has nothing to do with libel. Libel is publishing something that is defamatory. Changing someone's cartoon caption is a copyright issue. But in this case, Gary's change is really just fair comment on the message that the cartoonist was making. So he doesn't have to remove it (just in case you were serious!).
A case could be for libel made against you for changing the intent of the cartoonist and defacing his work. I'm in the art business myself. Better remove it.
I think you mean copyright infringement and that's only if he tried to profit from it. Otherwise, nothing libelous against the artist there, however, it should be fixed...
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/WCR.png)
So sue me. ;Do
You'd be misreprenting my conclusions in this assassination.Would be what? Misinterpreting ...misrepresenting.. mis-parenting? Oh well, your conclusions are wrong and case dismissed.
Would be what? Misinterpreting ...misrepresenting.. mis-parenting? Oh well, your conclusions are wrong and case dismissed.
Ah... yet another CT typo-hunter.
Strictly schoolyard mentality, you lot.
And since you've finally dismissed the case, can we now expect you to reveal the person(s), other than the shooter, who knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day?
Thanks so much, in advance...
All the conspirators, of course. How many people were you looking for?Don't bother any more. The response will always be...'Proof'?...'Cite'?...'Evidence'?
http://jfkassassination.net/nellie.txt
I said "all the way", when I should have said "on the way". Either way, Connally was still holding onto the hat after he had been hit.
Is that the same Nellie who said that different bullets hit Kennedy and Connally?
I think so.
So Nellie was correct except when she wasn't?
That is correct.
A true Lone nutter response. She's only right when she agrees with my beliefs.