Connally's lapel flip at Z224.
The exiting slug missed the lapel by a mile. And in any case it was at Z218 plus or minus a frame or two.
What caused the lapel to flip?
Did the slug exit a bit side-on? In which case it shook the whole coat. And that shaking caused the lapel to stand up at Z218 -- which Zapruder didnt show koz it woz black on black. And then a gust flipped the lapel further so that Zapruder did show it.
What have i missed?
I'm confused by your over analyzing. I think the lapel flips up for just one frame at z224 as part of the sbt.I am ok with the the sbt (the magic bullet).
I am ok with the the sbt (the magic bullet).
I think that what u are saying is that the magic bullet is at Z224.
That duznt work!!!!
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-94Smfj5-wQ4/UolSwlgbXNI/AAAAAAAAw1w/2t04L3GlQPY/s535/110.+Z223-Z224+Toggling+Clip.gif)
(https://www.jfk-online.com/225-226-Full.gif)
JohnM
The bullet most like struck JFK and Connally at z222.I found that the jiggles/blurring do not tell us whether Z218 (my estimate) or Z222 (your estimate) are the magic bullet.
The bullet does not have to strike the lapel to move the lapel. Put on a man’s dress coat or sports coat, make a strong ‘tap’ (pushing outward) one side of the coat, several inches below the lapel, and the whole side of the coat will bulge forward, including the lapel. If the tap is strong enough, I imagine the lapel could ‘flip’.
As an aside, I’m not certain the lapel ‘flipped’ upward. The detail in the Zapruder film is not strong enough to say, in my layman’s opinion. But surely the coat moved suddenly, as can most clearly be seen in frame z224.
Support for the hit at z222, and not a later hit on Connally in the z230’s, is:
* The sudden ‘blurring’ of the “Soon to be hit” Connally at z223, not seen in the unwounded occupants of the limousine, only him, as if he was suddenly wounded.
* The sudden movement of the “Soon to be hit” right side of Connally’s coat, reaching a maximum at z224.
* The sudden jerking up of JFK elbows upwards starting at z226, a pose we would hold, more or less, until the head shot at z312.
* The sudden jerking up of Connally’s “Soon to be hit” right wrist, also starting at z226, causing his right hand to suddenly rise 6 inches in the next few frames.
* The sudden movement of the camera at z227-z228, causing blurring of the whole frame, 5 to 6 frames after z222, and similar to the similar camera movement at z318, 6 frames after z312.
The support for a shot at z222 is overwhelming. There are too many coincidences if this theory is false.
How can anyone not see this is the moment both men are shot through?JFK is not vizible at Z222. JFK has already reacted by lifting his hand at Z223.
Connally's lapel flip at Z224.You missed reading all the evidence. If you had, you would have realized that JFK is reacting to being struck on the first shot. And JBC is reacting to it as well. If JBC has been struck it was not in the right armpit.JBC said he reacted to the first shot by turning around to check on JFK, which is what he does beginning a few frames later.
The exiting slug missed the lapel by a mile. And in any case it was at Z218 plus or minus a frame or two.
What caused the lapel to flip?
Did the slug exit a bit side-on? In which case it shook the whole coat. And that shaking caused the lapel to stand up at Z218 -- which Zapruder didnt show koz it woz black on black. And then a gust flipped the lapel further so that Zapruder did show it.
What have i missed?
You missed reading all the evidence. If you had, you would have realized that JFK is reacting to being struck on the first shot. And JBC is reacting to it as well. If JBC has been struck it was not in the right armpit.JBC said he reacted to the first shot by turning around to check on JFK, which is what he does beginning a few frames later.The lapel flip was cleared up in reply#7 as per below. Tests showed that the lapel could flip even tho the slug missed the actual lapel. And the flip/tests suggested a hit at Z222, but i still prefer my Z218. Anyhow, this was Oswalds shot-2, the magic bullet. Oswald's shot-1 ricocheted off the signal arm & the slug put a hole in the floor of the limo. And Oswald didnt fire a shot-3.
The zfilm does not have enough resolution for anyone to see what is happening with the jacket, but it does not look at all like a lapel flip to me. In z224 the jacket looks very much like it did in z222.
You missed reading all the evidence. If you had, you would have realized that JFK is reacting to being struck on the first shot. And JBC is reacting to it as well. If JBC has been struck it was not in the right armpit.JBC said he reacted to the first shot by turning around to check on JFK, which is what he does beginning a few frames later.
The zfilm does not have enough resolution for anyone to see what is happening with the jacket, but it does not look at all like a lapel flip to me. In z224 the jacket looks very much like it did in z222.
A close up of the movement of the jacket.It is not a matter of "logic". It is a matter of evidence. The evidence is that JFK and JBC are reacting at the same time although it does appear that JFK began reacting before he appears from behind the sign. But the evidence is also that JFK reacted to being hit on the first shot while JBC reacted to hearing it and fearing an assassination was unfolding. The evidence also is that the last two shots were close together with the second shot sounding after the mid point between 1 and 3.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Kv5xdwTQ/lapel-close-gif.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Considering the unbelievably short space of time these two frames represent (55 milliseconds - almost twice as quick as the blink of an eye) it is a really significant movement.
The unbelievably rapid movement of the jacket is caused by a bullet passing through JBC's torso and exiting his chest.
We know for a fact the bullet passed through the right side of the jacket, the same side of the jacket being 'blown out' in the frames above.
Wind would not cause such a rapid movement and we can see in the bottom right hand corner of the frames below the flag on the front of the limo is limp, demonstrating there was no significant wind blowing on that side of the limo at that moment.
The only logical explanation of the jacket's rapid movement is the gunshot that passes through both men.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-94Smfj5-wQ4/UolSwlgbXNI/AAAAAAAAw1w/2t04L3GlQPY/s535/110.+Z223-Z224+Toggling+Clip.gif)
It is not a matter of "logic". It is a matter of evidence. The evidence is that JFK and JBC are reacting at the same time although it does appear that JFK began reacting before he appears from behind the sign. But the evidence is also that JFK reacted to being hit on the first shot while JBC reacted to hearing it and fearing an assassination was unfolding. The evidence also is that the last two shots were close together with the second shot sounding after the mid point between 1 and 3.
As far as the supposed lapel flip is concerned, how do you explain the similar appearance of the jacket in z222 and z224? On what basis can you eliminate movement of the right arm across his front as the cause of the jacket movement? His right arm is certainly moving there.
"It is not a matter of "logic". It is a matter of evidence."It is a matter of looking at all the evidence. Logic is based on premises. Premises have to be based on ALL the evidence. Not just one piece of evidence and someone's interpretation of it that does not fit the rest of the evidence. That is all I am saying. Your premises do not fit the evidence.
I like the way you've separated "logic" and "evidence", it is something represented in a lot of your arguments.
Because you will not relinquish your debunked shot at z271 you cannot have a shot passing through JBC at this point. The movement of his jacket is unbelievably rapid and significant. The radical difference between the two jacket positions occurs in 55 milliseconds - this is the point - any explanation must take into account the profound rapidity of the jacket which is why 'the wind' explanation fails.The arm most certainly is moving. From z222 to z223 it drops to the right and then moves continuously across his body. From z222 to z223, the amount of jacket covering the shirt decreases, from z223 to z224 it increases. At z222 we see the hand, at z223 it disappears below the top of the door, in z224 we still don't see it, in z225 we see the hand again and in z226 we can see the hat (blurry but confirmed as the hat in z230):
So how can you explain this movement:
"On what basis can you eliminate movement of the right arm across his front as the cause of the jacket movement? His right arm is certainly moving there."
JBC's right arm is not moving across his front at this moment, that is something you've invented in a desperate attempt to explain the incredibly rapid movement of JBC's jacket.
The frame below is z223:
It is a matter of looking at all the evidence. Logic is based on premises. Premises have to be based on ALL the evidence. Not just one piece of evidence and someone's interpretation of it that does not fit the rest of the evidence. That is all I am saying. Your premises do not fit the evidence.
The arm most certainly is moving. From z222 to z223 it drops to the right and then moves continuously across his body. From z222 to z223, the amount of jacket covering the shirt decreases, from z223 to z224 it increases. At z222 we see the hand, at z223 it disappears below the top of the door, in z224 we still don't see it, in z225 we see the hand again and in z226 we can see the hat (blurry but confirmed as the hat in z230):
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/Jacket_movement_z222_z231.gif)
If a bullet made the jacket move from z223 to z224, how do you explain the change from z222 to z223?
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/Jacket_movement_z222_z223.gif)
It appears that the jacket lapel is covering more of his shirt in z222 than in z223 and this appears to occur at the same time as his right hand drops from view. So if the jacket can move from covering the shirt to exposing the shirt in one frame due to the movement of the hand, logic would tell you that that it could do the reverse in one frame due to the movement of the hand.
The usual unbelievable nonsense.It is not difficult. The arm moves down from z222 to z223. From z223 to z225 it moves across his body. We can't see it in z224 but we can infer that it must be moving across his front because we can see this movement in the succeeding frames. All I am saying is that the movement of the jacket is perfectly consistent with the arm moving across his front before z224. It is not difficult.
You are saying the movement of JBC's jacket in z224 is caused by JBC's arm moving across the front of his body.
I point out that his arm isn't moving across the front of him at this moment.
You disagree and, as usual, completely contradict yourself to try and win a point:
" At z222 we see the hand, at z223 it disappears below the top of the door, in z224 we still don't see it,"
So, as you correctly point out, JBC's hand disappears below the top of the door from z222 to z223. This happens in 55 milliseconds (half the blink of an eye), and is the moment JBC's wrist is hit by the bullet.
You then go on to state that his hand is still below the top of the door in z224, the same frame as the so-called 'lapel flip'.
In on breath you say the 'lapel flip' is caused by his arm is moving across his front at this point then in the next you state his hand is still below the top of the door at this point!!
You will literally say anything to keep your debunked theory alive in your mind.Well, I could make the same comment about your approach, perhaps - saying anything to keep the z224 bullet theory alive. But I won't.
The 'lapel flip' cannot be caused by his hand moving across his front as his hand is still below the top of the door at this point.His hand can't be moving just because we can't see it? And you think I am being unreasonable?
So what causes it if not the fragments of bone and tissue debris blowing out of the exit wound in his chest?The fragments of bone and tissue blowing out of the exit wound? What evidence is there of that? I am not aware of any bone fragments from the rib going anywhere except into the lower lobe of the right lung.
I have been looking at the Groden copy and it is clearer for viewing the lapel. In frame 222 the lapel looks like it has already flipped over most of the way, but in 223 it is back to normal. Then in 224 it is flipped again. Is it possible that the lapel is flipping due to Connally's wrist or hat rubbing against the lapel?Exactly my point.
In frame 222 we see his right sleeve cuff coming up into view. Then in 223 the arm drops back down below the door and the lapel returns to normal for one frame. (The glint of sunlight off his right shirt cuff is barley visible just above the door near the bottom of the lapel.)
His wrist is higher in 222 with lapel partially flipped.
his wrist drops in 223 and the lapel is not flipped.
His wrist rises back up in 224 and the lapel is flipped again. The right cuff is identifiable in frames 229/230, if you flip back and forth you see the cuff move down with his hat.)
In frame 238 thru 239 it looks like his other lapel has flipped over. This happens as he drags his right arm and hat back to the right which may be catching the left lapel and flipping it over. Or maybe his left arm is dragging across his lapel as he tries to turn to the right. The left arm naturally drags across the chest if you try and twist your torso to the right in a seated position.
In 238 and 239 the left lapel looks like it is flipped. Regardless of whether it is flipped or it is an anomaly due to lighting or something. how do we know the right lapel flip in 224 is due to a bullet if we see the same phenomena in frame 238 and 239?
I have been looking at the Groden copy and it is clearer for viewing the lapel. In frame 222 the lapel looks like it has already flipped over most of the way, but in 223 it is back to normal. Then in 224 it is flipped again. Is it possible that the lapel is flipping due to Connally's wrist or hat rubbing against the lapel?
In frame 222 we see his right sleeve cuff coming up into view. Then in 223 the arm drops back down below the door and the lapel returns to normal for one frame. (The glint of sunlight off his right shirt cuff is barley visible just above the door near the bottom of the lapel.)
His wrist is higher in 222 with lapel partially flipped.
his wrist drops in 223 and the lapel is not flipped.
His wrist rises back up in 224 and the lapel is flipped again. The right cuff is identifiable in frames 229/230, if you flip back and forth you see the cuff move down with his hat.)
In frame 238 thru 239 it looks like his other lapel has flipped over. This happens as he drags his right arm and hat back to the right which may be catching the left lapel and flipping it over. Or maybe his left arm is dragging across his lapel as he tries to turn to the right. The left arm naturally drags across the chest if you try and twist your torso to the right in a seated position.
In 238 and 239 the left lapel looks like it is flipped. Regardless of whether it is flipped or it is an anomaly due to lighting or something. how do we know the right lapel flip in 224 is due to a bullet if we see the same phenomena in frame 238 and 239?
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpKPTxdD/zapruder-sbf.gif)
JohnM
There is no point saying this to those who have already made their mind up over this issue... but for those who haven't...I can see that JFK is reacting to being shot through the neck. I can see that JBC is also reacting. But I can't tell for sure that JBC has been shot. The reason I can't tell is:
Look at the above Z-Film clip, in the very first frame notice how composed JBC looks, then look at how both men are suddenly flailing around.
Ask yourself this - does it look as though both men been shot through at the same time or not?
LATER EDIT:Saying something is clear does not make it so. It is anything but clear that JBC's arm is not moving. It doesn't have to be visible to Zapruder!! What kind of an analysis is that based on? I could just as easily say the forearm/wrist is not aligned with the exit wound from the chest because we can't see it.
On the issue of JBC's arm movement causing the so-called 'lapel flip'.
It is clear from the clip above that his arm does not come up again until after the 'lapel flip', negating any notion that this arm movement is the cause of the 'lapel flip' (the 'lapel flip' is actually the whole right side of JBC's jacket being blown out as a result of the shot passing through him. It is this blowing out of the right hand side of the jacket that causes the lapel flip)
I can see that JFK is reacting to being shot through the neck. I can see that JBC is also reacting. But I can't tell for sure that JBC has been shot. The reason I can't tell is:
1. the evidence says that this was the first shot
2. JBC said he was not hit in the back on the first shot.
3. Nellie said JBC was not hit in the back on the first shot but JFK was.
4. JBC said he reacted immediately to the first shot by doing exactly what we see him doing after z223: turning around to try to look at JFK. Nowhere else do we see any attempt whatsoever to look at JFK, let alone when he is showing concern over hearing a rifle shot.
5. JBC said he was hit in the back on the second shot.
6. The evidence is overwhelming that the second shot was followed in close succession by the third shot that struck JFK in the head. Greer, Altgens, Gayle Newman, Powers, Hickey all corroborate this. So the second shot striking JBC in the back occurred after the midpoint between the first and third, which is some time after z256.
Now you say I am stuck on a "theory" because I am unable to see reason? That's the reason. I am just following the evidence. Your "you see he is hit in the back at z224" is not reason. It is a complete and abject failure to follow the evidence.
Saying something is clear does not make it so.I agree. But if something is clear then it's clear.
It is anything but clear that JBC's arm is not moving.
It doesn't have to be visible to Zapruder!! What kind of an analysis is that based on? I could just as easily say the forearm/wrist is not aligned with the exit wound from the chest because we can't see it.
The forearm/hand/wrist moved down from z222 to z223 and the jacket moved (the jacket may simply have opened if he took his arm off of it, so we cannot tell that the jacket moved because it was dragged by the arm). From z223 to z224 the jacket moved back similar to a position it was in in z222. From z224 we can see the forearm was moving. What we can't see is whether the forearm was moving before z224.
Now you agree that the forearm was moving from z222 to z223 and from z224 to z231, but you can tell it was stopped from z223 to z224? How on earth can you determine that from the zfilm when you cannot see the forearm at all between z223 and z224? And you are supposedly the "reasonable" one and I am not!!
The Zapruder footage is, by far, the best, strongest evidence we have of what happened at this moment. I put the Z-Film before witness statements. You do not. As you have so amply demonstrated time after time, if witness statements are contradicted by what we see in the Z-Film you go with the witness statements. I do not.They are not contradicted by the zfilm. They are contradicted by what you think is happening in the zfilm. There is a big difference.
I agree. But if something is clear then it's clear.It is far from clear. We cannot see any definitive, unequivocal evidence that JBC is hit in the torso there. It is just not there. And the evidence says it is not there.
And here we have the craziness.I have obviously misunderstood your position. So if the arm is in constant motion from z222, why can the arm not be moving across his front prior to z224? Just because YOU cannot see that it is moving across his front? All we can tell is that the wrist dropped below the car door from Zapruder's point of view from z222 to z223 and that it was moving across his body from right to left from z224 to z231. You conclude from that that the arm was not moving across his body from right to left before z224!! You can see that?
Who said JBC's arm isn't moving? Are you implying I've said that?
Provide the quote please.
JBC's arm is in constant motion during the clip.
Wow!Your "logic" escapes me. You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left! Yet we see it moving from right to left in z224-231. Why does the motion have to be seen by Zapruder in order for it to occur? Why can it not be moving when we cannot see it? Simple question....
For anyone interested there is a detailed analysis of these frames in "The First Shot" thread.
As far as Andrew's rant is concerned -
In z222 (not shown in the clip below) the white cuff of JBC's sleeve can be seen just above the top of the door.
In z223 (the first frame of the clip below) the cuff has disappeared below the top of the door frame - this is the bullet strike.
In z224, JBC's forearm is still below the top of the door.
And this is the problem Andrew is struggling with because it is in this same frame that the 'lapel flip' occurs, while JBC's forearm is still below the top of the door..
As the clip rolls on we see JBC's hand and forearm emerge from beneath the top of the door.
The problem for Andrew's latest doomed theory is that he imagines the 'lapel flip' is caused by JBC's arm moving across the front of his jacket. As can be seen in the clip below, the 'lapel flip' occurs before JBC's hand emerges from beneath the top of the door frame.
That is to say, it occurs before JBC's hand has moved across his jacket.
Your "logic" escapes me. You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left! Yet we see it moving from right to left in z224-231. Why does the motion have to be seen by Zapruder in order for it to occur? Why can it not be moving when we cannot see it? Simple question....
Nobody, at any point has disputed whether JBC's hand is moving left to right.I don't understand the difference between you saying: "We can see that the lapel flip occurs while his hand is still down below the top of the door frame. When his hand comes into view and moves across the front of his jacket the lapel flip has already occurred."
It hasn't been brought up at any time.
You've introduced it, as you often do, to argue a point that never existed.
"You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!"
That's an untruth (I know I've got to be careful using the word 'lie' with you).
Nowhere have I said anything even remotely like that.
"Why does the motion have to be seen by Zapruder in order for it to occur?"
Do you have any idea how crazy you're coming across? In the post you are responding to I've said his hand was in constant motion. Can't you remember? It was the post you were responding to.
"Why can it not be moving when we cannot see it?"
WTF are you talking about? Even for you this off the charts.
It has been your contention that the 'lapel flip' is caused by JBC's hand moving across the front of his jacket.
We can see the front of his jacket in the Z-Film.
We can see that the lapel flip occurs while his hand is still down below the top of the door frame.
When his hand comes into view and moves across the front of his jacket the lapel flip has already occurred.
WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
HONESTLY, WHAT IS IT YOU ARE STRUGGLING WITH?
I don't understand the difference between you saying: "We can see that the lapel flip occurs while his hand is still down below the top of the door frame. When his hand comes into view and moves across the front of his jacket the lapel flip has already occurred."
AND me saying: "You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!"
Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224).
If so, how is that ruled out as a possible cause of the jacket movement?
If not, how can you tell it is not moving across the front of his jacket? Just because we can't see it?
"Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224)."
:D :D :D Quality
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpKPTxdD/zapruder-sbf.gif)
Look closely at JBC's arm movement and tell me what you really see.
A lot of SBF critics had already made up there minds up decades ago when they only had poor copies of Zapruder's hand held film footage to analyse and when really clear stabilized footage of the same event comes along where the precise movements of all the Limo occupants can be closely studied, well, the critics don't want to admit wasting so much time endorsing their long held beliefs and essentially force themselves stay the course. Personally I can't imagine how anyone looking at the stabilized Zapruder footage can't see Connally's violent simultaneous reaction and can come to any other conclusion other than both men being hit at the same time?
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpKPTxdD/zapruder-sbf.gif)
JohnM
"Personally I can't imagine how anyone looking at the stabilized Zapruder footage can't see Connally's violent simultaneous reaction and can come to any other conclusion other than both men being hit at the same time?"
Same here John.
When I first came to this subject (just over a year ago) and started to study the Z-Film, the simultaneous reactions of both men were so obvious I was shocked to find out how many people questioned it.
It took me quite a while to realise what you're pointing out - if somebody has already made up their mind they refuse to see what's right in front of them. The 'debate' I'm having with Andrew is a classic example of it. On the plus side, the interaction with Andrew (particularly on "The First Shot" thread) has forced me to question every detail about this aspect of the assassination and test any theory I'm putting forward.
I believe Mason is an actual Lawyer but even after debating him many times re the SBF he never let on and I only found out about his legal background much later, in other words he didn't force down my throat that he's a Lawyer and he's knows better yada yada yada and let his presentation stand on it's own, so for that alone he deserves much kudos. In the past I have debated a few "Lawyers" and when backed into a corner out comes the classic "Get out of Jail free card" but their lack of knowledge about all things legal is a dead giveaway. Thankfully we haven't seen one for a while but Roger Collins does come to mind, what a goose.
JohnM
Jerry had mentioned it and it is apparent in some of the tactics he uses in debate.
But he's in a position I hope never to be in, where you invest so much time in a particular theory that you can't let it go.
I've had complete 180 degree turns on a couple of the big issues involving this case because the arguments/evidence left me no choice. It's something I believe I will always be prepared to do.
I've mentioned the importance of a narrative in recent posts and as a CTer by default I'm satisfied with my understanding of the basics but now I've got to come up with "the big picture", the big Conspiracy. It's the only way I can construct my own narrative concerning this case.
I feel at this point, it would be easier to be an LNer.
I believe Mason is an actual Lawyer but even after debating him many times re the SBF he never let on and I only found out about his legal background much later, in other words he didn't force down my throat that he's a Lawyer and he's knows better yada yada yada and let his presentation stand on it's own, so for that alone he deserves much kudos. In the past I have debated a few "Lawyers" and when backed into a corner out comes the classic "Get out of Jail free card" but their lack of knowledge about all things legal is a dead giveaway. Thankfully we haven't seen one for a while but Roger Collins does come to mind, what a goose.
JohnM
Like many other LNers who initially only knew the basics, I started out as a CT, and one example I can remember is furiously arguing the back and to the Left motion but as I did more research and started applying real world scientific principles I eventually changed my original emotional response and stuck with more considered forensic analysis.
JohnM
Can you not answer a simple question? Why are you avoiding answering?
"Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224)."
:D :D :D Quality
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpKPTxdD/zapruder-sbf.gif)
Look closely at JBC's arm movement and tell me what you really see.
Can you not answer a simple question? Why are you avoiding answering?
What we see is not the issue. We can't see the arm between z223 and z225.
The issue is whether the jacket movement has no other explanation than a bullet strike. (I am not convinced the a bullet strike is even a possible explanation, but that is a separate matter. I don't want to argue Lattimer's theory). . We seem to agree that arm movement could cause jacket movement. So I am not sure why you think it can be eliminated as a possibility. And you just avoid answering and accuse me of putting words in your mouth.
What was the question?"Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were (or could be) moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224).
Jerry had mentioned it and it is apparent in some of the tactics he uses in debate.I assume that you realize that I can read this. So I feel compelled to respond.
But he's in a position I hope never to be in, where you invest so much time in a particular theory that you can't let it go.
I've had complete 180 degree turns on a couple of the big issues involving this case because the arguments/evidence left me no choice. It's something I believe I will always be prepared to do.
I've mentioned the importance of a narrative in recent posts and as a CTer by default I'm satisfied with my understanding of the basics but now I've got to come up with "the big picture", the big Conspiracy. It's the only way I can construct my own narrative concerning this case.Don't get bogged down in the details of the shots. That will not tell you who was shooting. The evidence is overwhelming that Oswald was involved and there is absolutely no evidence that anyone else was involved. It does not take much to put the dots together and conclude - beyond a reasonable doubt - that Oswald had his finger on the trigger. For me, the shots just absolutely confirm that one person (Oswald) fired all three shots.
I feel at this point, it would be easier to be an LNer.
"Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were (or could be) moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224).
And depending on the answer to that question I had a follow-up question:
If so, how is that ruled out as a possible cause of the jacket movement?
OR
If not, how can you tell it is not moving across the front of his jacket?
I would have thought that a string of laughing emojis might have indicated to you how ridiculous I find this question.Oh, like this statement in Post #27:
No Andrew, I am not agreeing with you that his hand/arm were moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the 'lapel flip' occurred.
No.
It is absolutely clear from my previous posts that I am not agreeing with this.
Once again:Not necessarily downward and, in any case, not completely downward. He could have moved it outward from his torso a bit causing the jacket to just fall open but putting the hand just out of sight but at the same height.
In z222 we see JBC's cuff just above the top of the door frame.
In z223 his cuff (and hand) have moved down below the top of the frame of the door (bullet strike)
His hand is moving downwards in z223.
How can I rule out that his hand isn't moving across the front of his jacket between z223 and z224?Well, first of all, the jacket moved as much from z222 to z223, which would have been between 30 and 80 ms (ie. the maximum time being from the beginning of z222 to the end of exposure of z223, which is 55 ms + exposure time of 25 ms. the minimum time from the end of z222 to the beginning of z223, which is 55 ms. less the 25 ms exposure time, or 30 ms.) How did that happen?
Time and time again I have emphasized the incredibly small amount of time between each frame - 55 milliseconds.
The average time for the human eye to blink is around 100 milliseconds. The time between each frame is almost half this.
Half the time it takes to blink.
To try to prop up your doomed theory you are asking how I can rule out JBC's hand from moving downwards, to moving across the front of his jacket, causing the 'lapel flip', in half the time it takes to blink?Again, how do you know is it impossible? Have you tried it?
To spell it out in a way that even you will understand -
IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE SUCH A MOVEMENT IN SUCH AN INCREDIBLY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME!
How can I rule it out?
Because you are describing a physical impossibility.
Oh, like this statement in Post #27:
"And here we have the craziness.
Who said JBC's arm isn't moving? Are you implying I've said that?
Provide the quote please.
JBC's arm is in constant motion during the clip."
So, so am I correct in inferring that you are saying that his arm is possibly moving but not moving from right to left prior to z224 when the jacket moves?
If so, my question would have been: how can you tell this from the zfilm when you cannot see his hand? But now I see that you are just arguing that an arm cannot move a jacket in 55 ms.
Not necessarily downward and, in any case, not completely downward. He could have moved it outward from his torso a bit causing the jacket to just fall open but putting the hand just out of sight but at the same height.
Well, first of all, the jacket moved as much from z222 to z223, which would have been between 30 and 80 ms (ie. the maximum time being from the beginning of z222 to the end of exposure of z223, which is 55 ms + exposure time of 25 ms. the minimum time from the end of z222 to the beginning of z223, which is 55 ms. less the 25 ms exposure time, or 30 ms.) How did that happen?
Second, if you are saying that a jacket cannot move 2 inches in 55 ms you are saying that a human cannot move their hand/jacket at a speed of 37 inches per second or about 3 feet per second? If so, what are you basing that on?
Again, how do you know is it impossible? Have you tried it?
As usual, you are incorrect.No. Here is how it went:
You said that I said his arm wasn't moving.
Another of your desperate ploys to misrepresent what I was saying.Like a 45 degree angle is downward but not completely downward. I guess that is crazy to you for some reason.
I asked you to provide the quote where I said his arm wasn't moving.
But you couldn't.
Because you'd made it up (an 'untruth')
Again, another one of your desperate ploys.
Provide the quote where I state an arm cannot move a jacket in 55ms
You can't.
Because I've never said that.
Just another of your 'untruths'.
Sad, really.
"Not necessarily downward and, in any case, not completely downward"
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D Quality
I wish you could hear how crazy you sound.
Their "hand/jacket"??I had understood you to say that the observed jacket motion from z223 to z224 could not be caused by the motion of hand or arm. That is 55 ms. That is the issue under discussion.
WTF
Where did I say a jacket couldn't move 2 inches in 55ms?
Oh that's right, I didn't. It's just another of your lies...sorry, I meant "untruths"
Where did I say a human couldn't move their hand jacket ( :D) about 3 feet per second?
Oh, that's right, I didn't.Are you trying to be cute? The question is: on what basis can you say a hand or arm motion could not have caused the jacket to move as seen in the zfilm?
I honestly don't know how fast a hand jacket can move >:(
Yes, and it can't be done.First of all, the time between the end of the exposure of z222 to the end of exposure of z224 is 110 ms. The time between the beginning of the exposure of z222 to the end of exposure of z224 is 135 ms (exposure time being 1/40th of a second or 25 ms.).
Can you do it?
If so, post a video of you moving your hand jacket downward but not completely downward more like outward so it's looks a bit downward and then across the front of your hand jacket in 55 ms.
I don't think it can be done ;D
"The lapel flip was caused by the strong breeze"
I can't wait for Steve Galbraith to come to your defense for that one. :D
"The lapel flip was caused by the strong breeze"Using the Jerry Organ school of reasoning it's clear that Mr. Griffith is wrong because Ben Carson said something about Covid. Also Fox News. And Trump.
I can't wait for Steve Galbraith to come to your defense for that one. :D
The lapel flip was caused by the strong breeze that was blowing in Dealey Plaza during the motorcade. It has nothing to do with Connally's chest exit wound. In fact, the lapel flip is nowhere near Connally's chest exit wound. The bullet that exited Connally's chest created a small hole in Connally's coat, so it was not tumbling or traveling sideways.Me myself i too used to think that a backdraft must have caused the lapel flip – until i heard of the Lattimer tests.
Uh, yeah: Gusts of wind will cause lapels to flip up. You do know that the spot of the lapel flip is nowhere near Connally's chest exit wound, right? And you know that Connally, after studying high-quality enlargements of the Z film, insisted he was certain he was not hit before Z232 and that the impact occurred at around Z234, a split second before his right shoulder is pushed violently downward and forward, right?Oswald's shot-1 was at about pseudo Z113 – it ricocheted offa the overhead signal arm – lead splatter hit JFK on the head – the remnant slug put a hole in the floorpan of the limo.
And if the Z224 lapel flip was caused by a bullet, and if this was the magical SBT hit, pray tell what bullet hit JFK at Z188-190 when, barely half a second later, as even the HSCA's Photographic Evidence Panel (PEP) noted, Kennedy's movements suddenly freeze? Starting a Z200, JFK's right hand abruptly stops in the middle of a waving motion; he starts to move his hands toward his throat; and his head moves rapidly from right to left toward Jackie? Significantly, as the PEP also noted, there is also a strong blur episode at Z189-197.
Oswald's shot-1 was at about pseudo Z113 – it ricocheted offa the overhead signal arm – lead splatter hit JFK on the head – the remnant slug put a hole in the floorpan of the limo.
Oswald's shot-2 was at about Z218 – the magic bullet.
Hickey's shot-1-2-3-4 (an accidental autoburst of his AR15) were at about Z298 to Z313 – wounding Tague -- & putting a dent in the chrome trim above the windshield -- & blowing JFK's head half off -- & cracking the windshield.
There were no other shots in Dealey Plaza.
https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/Lattimer.txt
One of the central assertions of the conspirati is that it would be
impossible for a single bullet to make as many wounds, hit as much
bone, and emerge as unscathed as CE399, the "magic bullet," is alleged
to have done. Harold Weisberg stated this view for the umpteenth time in
a letter to the Washington Post, January 11, 1992:
It [is] a physical impossibility for this magic bullet [CE399]
to have the imagined career indispensable to the lone-assassin
"solution"...there is nothing like this career in science or
mythology.
In "Conspiracy" (pp. 69-70), Anthony Summers repeats the assertion using
dissident pathologist Cyril Wecht for support:
Above all, [Cyril Wecht] refuses to believe that a bullet could
emerge almost intact after causing as much bone damage as was done
to the Governor. To demonstrate this, Wecht points to the condition
of Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition after firing into cotton wadding,
a goat carcass--which sustained a broken rib--and through the wrist
of a corpse. All the test bullets are visibly more damaged than the
bullet alleged to have caused the wounds to the President and the
Governor. Wecht deplores the fact that the Assassinations
Committee did not try to reproduce the "magic bullet" by performing
similar tests and has challenged his colleagues to produce even
*one* bullet that had emerged similarly undamaged.
Wecht's challenge has now been met by Dr. Lattimer. It has been proven
that a single bullet could make all the wounds and break all the bone
and emerge as relatively unscathed as CE399. Therefore, the long-held
assertion of the conspirati must now be completely discarded as evidence
of conspiracy. Lattimer's experiment is described in the following article:
[Excerpted from "Experimental Duplication of the Important Physical
Evidence of the Lapel Bulge of the Jacket Worn by Governor Connally
When Bullet 399 Went Through Him" by John K. Lattimer, M.D., et al,
in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons, May 1994. The
article describes an experiment which supplies the most complete
verification of the Single Bullet Theory yet performed.]
The most important new piece of physical evidence in the
analysis of the shooting of President Kennedy and Governor
Connally has been the reaffirmation of the precise moment when
bullet 399 [the so-called Magic Bullet] passed through the
body of Governor Connally. This is graphically demonstrated
in frame 224 of the Zapruder movie by the sudden forward
bulge of the right lapel of the suit jacket of Governor
Connally. This was clearly demonstrated by enhancement of
the motion picture in the laboratories of Failure Analysis
Inc., by Jeffrey Lotz in 1992.
...
Even running the Zapruder movie at an ordinary "slow motion,"
rate, one does not appreciate the sudden forward "bulge" of
the lapel. It is necessary to run the movie very slowly,
"freezing" each frame for a moment, before the flap of the
lapel and the bulging of the jacket become obvious. Photo
enhancement makes it easier to see, once you know when and
where it occurs. Having established this fact, it then becomes
apparent that the right arms of both men react immediately and
simultaneously to the stimulus of the bullet having passed
through them. The arms of Kennedy start an upward jerk into
Thorburn's reflex position and the right hand of Connally,
containing his big white Stetson hat, begins to snap up into
view as his biceps contract and he jerks his painful forearm
up into the view of Zapruder's camera.
...
REENACTMENT OF THE WOUNDING OF GOVERNOR CONNALLY (FRAME 224). As
with any study of small photographs (movie frames), it is desirable
to try to verify the findings by duplicating the situation as
closely as possible, using the exact same type of rifle,
cartridges, clothing, necks, ribs and radiuses, as at Dallas. In an
attempt to verify and study this phenomenon further, a duplication
of President Kennedy's size 16 neck and of Governor Connally's
chest and jacket were tested to see exactly what would happen. A
size 16 neck simulation was created, using fresh pork muscle, with
the bone removed and the skin still in place. A rack was prepared
to hold a rib cage at a distance of 24 inches from the Kennedy
neck. A white dress shirt and tropical worsted jacket were placed
over the rib cage on a special rack. A necktie was tied in place to
simulate the clothing Governor Connally wore at the time of the
shooting in Dallas. An array of radiuses (arm bones), encased in
simulated forearms, was arranged in front of the right lapel of
Governor Connally and a bullet trap was mounted beyond this array.
Bullets of the Western Cartridge Company 6.5 millimeter ammunition
of the same lots used by Lee Harvey Oswald were fired from a
Carcano carbine exactly like the one used by Oswald. We knew from
our previous experiments [as described in Lattimer's book "Kennedy
and Lincoln"] that our test bullets would almost certainly "tumble"
and would strike our "Governor Connally back" at about the point
where he was actually struck. Our test bullet also struck a rib
(just as in Governor Connally), removing 4.5 centimeters of the rib
and exited in the area that would have been under his right nipple.
The flying fragments of rib, marrow and soft tissue, accompanying
the exiting, tumbling bullet, caused a large ragged hole in the
shirt and the jacket lining and plastered them with fragments of
rib and soft tissue, just as in the Governor's instance. The bullet
exited under the right lapel, still tumbling, making a 3 centimeter
transverse bullet wound in the cloth. It then struck one of the
forearms arrayed in front of the jacket. The bullet was captured in
a bullet trap beyond this point. A videotape of the motion of the
jacket was obtained, along with frames from a rapid-firing 35
millimeter camera. These revealed that the jacket bulged out about
6 inches and then snapped back. The lapel flipped over against the
neck area. The forward motion of the bulging jacket was completed
in 3/30th of a second, whereupon the backward snap began on our
static model. This was completed by 16/30th of a second from the
shot. After this, the jacket and lapel were again back in normal
position. While the rib and soft tissue fragments caused a large
ragged wound in the shirt, just as described in Governor Connally's
shirt, the exit hole of the bullet in the front of the jacket was
elongated to a length of 3 centimeters (almost exactly the length
of the tumbling bullet). The large shirt wound and the bulge of the
jacket were more related to the hail of fragments of rib and soft
tissue. The bullet then struck one of the radiuses mounted in front
of the jacket. The bullet from this experiment was flattened on one
side and bent from hitting the rib and radius while traveling
sideways, just as bullet 399 was flattened and bent for the same
reasons (399 is definitely not "pristine"). Lead extruded from the
rear of our bullet as with bullet 399. The radius was fractured and
tiny fragments of lead were left adherent to the periosteum,
exactly as in Governor Connally. One of the most dependable
features of this Kennedy and Connally mockup was the characteristic
manner in which these Carcano bullets turned sideways (tumbled)
after exiting the neck of Kennedy.
THE BULLET MUST TRAVERSE THE NECK OF JOHN F. KENNEDY FIRST OR NO
JACKET BULGE OCCURS. In an effort to determine what would happen if
the bullet did *not* go through the neck of Kennedy first, but hit
Connally primarily, we fired a bullet through our Connally jacket
and thorax preparation without running it through the model of
Kennedy's neck first, so it did not tumble. The jacket did *not*
bulge out and the lapel did *not* turn over. The shirt collar
flipped briefly. With the bullet going straight ahead, wounds to
the rib, shirt and jacket were punctate and the rib fragments
were not enough to bulge out the front of the jacket. This made
it seem even more likely that bullet 399 had gone through the
neck of President Kennedy first, turned sideways and caused the
very obvious jacket and lapel distortions, which we have
recorded herein and which occur in frame 224. If the bullet did
*not* go through the neck of Kennedy first, the jacket bulge and
lapel flap did *not* occur.
SUMMARY
By duplicating the wound to the neck of President Kennedy, which
caused bullet 399 to turn sideways, and having it *then* hit a
Connally-type rib cage with shirt and jacket, we reproduced the
right-sided bulge of the jacket worn by Connally, with lapel
eversion, which is so significant in frame 224. The extensive
damage to his shirtfront was from the hail of rib fragments and
soft tissue, exactly as described with his own shirt. Our tumbling
bullet then went on to fracture a radius and be recovered intact
except that it was somewhat flattened and bent and had lead
extruded from the rear, as did bullet 399. Fragments of this lead
were scraped off on the ragged bone-ends of some of our fractured
radiuses, just as with Governor Connally's radius. It is believed
that this duplication of the jacket and lapel bulge of Governor
Connally, which occurred dependably, when we reproduced the
circumstances at Dallas, confirmed this very important detail in
this technical demonstration of the findings in the shooting of
President Kennedy and Governor Connally.
The bulge and the lapel eversion of the jacket worn by Governor
Connally, starting in Zapruder frame 224, does indeed establish,
beyond any shadow of a doubt, the exact moment when bullet 399 went
through him. The right arms of both men were seen to react
simultaneously, immediately thereafter. It also permits us to
establish that there was plenty of time (three and one-half
seconds) between the first two shots (frames 160 to 224) and even
more time (five seconds) between the last two shots (frames 224 to
313), for Oswald to reload, reacquire the target (the head of
President Kennedy) plus two full seconds to lock onto it. If the
bullet does not traverse the neck of President Kennedy, it does not
cause Governor Connally's jacket and lapel to bulge. The lapel
bulge is a very important bit of actual physical evidence in
establishing the fact that one bullet hit both men and that Oswald
had plenty of time to hit the President, first in the neck and then
in the head. These experiments confirm the mechanism of the lapel
bulge and the behavior of the bullet.
Folks, be advised that Lattimer's claims about his SBT reenactment are bogus and were exposed as such years ago, as I have discussed in other threads. A picture of one of Lattimer's test bullets shows it was split at the nose in several places and was markedly deformed, much more deformed than CE 399. When Stewart Galanor asked Lattimer, in a filmed interview, if he could examine the bullets that struck all three simulation objects, Lattimer said he had thrown them away (Galanor, Cover-Up, New York: Kestrel Books, 1998, p. 42).Lattimer said that some of his 1994 slugs had nose damage from the metal walls of his bullet trap.
An AAT wound ballistics test directed by Dr. Wecht, which included animal bones inside a large gelatin block, proved that merely striking the wrist bone would have caused substantial deformity in the bullet.
We now know, thanks to the ARRB materials and other sources, that the back wound had no exit point. This was absolutely, categorically established at the autopsy, and that's one reason that Humes had to burn the first two drafts of the autopsy report.
Also, as several doctors have established with overlays on x-rays, using technology that was unavailable in the 1960s, there was no path from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing through part of the spine.
I might that Dr. Jones and Dr. Crenshaw independently confirmed Dr. Carrico's account that the throat wound was above the tie knot, which means, among other things, that the slits in JFK's shirt were made by the nurses as they hurried cut away JFK's clothing. This is why the slits are irregular, have no fabric missing from them, and contained no metallic traces when the FBI lab tested them. This is also why there is no hole through the tie knot (but only a small nick on the left side of the knot, and the nick is not on the edge of the knot).
Lattimer said that some of his 1994 slugs had nose damage from the metal walls of his bullet trap. There have been other test re-enactments of the SBT that show little damage to the slug.
JFK's spine was indeed badly injured -- jfk (had he survived the magic bullet) would have been a quadriplegic. Here are 4 pages from Mortal Error -- by Meninger -- re Donahue's investigation.
The problem, as I have demonstrated in Figure 11, is that CT scans were not available in 1963—or this fantasized trajectory would have been dead on arrival.
If this trajectory is valid, the bullet would either have struck a vertebral body (as it does in figure 11), or if traveling between vertebral bodies (e.g., at a higher or lower level), it would have punctured the lung, which did not occur. The trajectory of the Magic Bullet is also very unlikely in the vertical plane—the throat wound is far too superior [high/above] to represent an exit for the back wound (which is near T1—or possibly even lower). In particular, the throat wound lay just above the necktie, which is far above T1. Also recall that the bullet, presumably from a Mannlicher-Carcano on the sixth floor of the TSBD, was traveling downward. (JFK Assassination Paradoxes, p. 10)
Wecht probably just had bullets fired that arrived at the impact site nose-on and at full-velocity. Those will disintegrate and mushroom.
But the SBT has the bullet that caused Connally's wounds slow-downed and tumbling.
The slowing-down and tumbling (along with more as the bullet went through the "Connally" torso) resulted in a bullet that, having struck two hard tissue obstructions, was similar to CE399.
The initial belief at autopsy that the back wound had no exit (though it bothered the pathologists at the time) didn't come out of the ARRB hearings. It was recorded in the 1963 Silbert-O'Neill Report, made by two FBI agents present at the autopsy. Humes revised the Autopsy Report over the weekend after a phone conservation with Dr. Perry of Parkland Hospital.
The bullet can easily pass from the back wound to the neck outshoot without striking bone. The missile channel will cause a great deal of pressure; in this case, there was bruising across the top of the right lung. The T1 transverse process had a non-displaced fracture, possibly caused by the passing of the bullet.
A neck wound above the shirt collar wouldn't match the wound location shown in the autopsy photo.
In the motorcade, was the tie knot slightly off to the left?
One, I repeat the point that ARRB materials prove that the autopsy doctors absolutely, positively established that the back wound had no exit point during the autopsy. Several recent books discuss this historic evidence, and I've presented some of it in this forum. We now know that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about a buillet exiting the throat.Wesley Fisk & Dr Alex Krstik & Chris Leigh & David King of Adelaide based "Anatomical Surrogate Technology" looked into the magic bullet in 2004. I can't find a paper or report. Their slug had similar damage to CE399 & Lattimer's slug. There are 3 youtube footages. The main footage is….
Two, Lattimer's claim that some of his test bullets were damaged by his bullet trap is unbelievable and suspicious.
Three, why did Lattimer throw away the bullets that he claimed penetrated all three simulation objects? This smells to high heaven of fraud.
Four, no valid SBT simulations have produced bullets that look like CE 399 after doing the required amount of damage. The WC's own extensive wound ballistics tests failed to do so, as we know from the man who conducted those tests, Dr. Joseph Dolce. The ATT partial SBT simulation did not even produce such a bullet--the bullet went through two objects (gelatin and animal bone) and emerged much more deformed than CE 399.
I take it you are rather new to the JFK case. Most of your fellow lone-gunman theorists reject the idea that JFK's spine was damaged, because this would render impossible their silly neuromuscular-reaction theory for explaining JFK's fierce backward motion after the head shot.
I actually agree that JFK's spine was damaged, but it was not nearly as damaged as it would have been if a bullet had gone from the back wound to the throat wound. Some of the autopsy x-rays do indeed show fragments in the neck and damage to the spine; this damage was caused by the projectile that entered the throat and by the bullet (or fragment) that penetrated about 2 inches into the back. Again, if a bullet had gone from the back wound to the throat wound, even if you assume an entry point at T1, the damage to the spine would have been far more extensive.
If CT scans had been available in the 1960s, CE 399's alleged trajectory would have been recognized as impossible. Dr. Mantik explains the problem in his new book:
To get the full impact of Dr. Mantik's point, one needs to view the CT scans that he provides.
The initial belief at autopsy that the back wound had no exit (though it bothered the pathologists at the time) didn't come out of the ARRB hearings. It was recorded in the 1963 Silbert-O'Neill Report, made by two FBI agents present at the autopsy. Humes revised the Autopsy Report over the weekend after a phone conservation with Dr. Perry of Parkland Hospital.
there was bruising across the top of the right lung
According to Dr. Lattimer, out of approximately 20 attempts, four bullets struck all three objects. A photograph of one of the test bullets appears in Dr. Lattimer's paper reporting the results of his experiments (Journal of American College of Surgeons, May 1994). It was split at the nose in several places and was significantly more deformed than Commission Exhibit 399. I asked Dr. Lattimer if I could examine and photograph this bullet and the other three bullets as well, and he told me that he had thrown them all away. (Filmed interview of Dr. Lattimer, May 20, 1997) (Cover-Up, New York: Kestrel Books, 1998, p. 42)
You're citing two layers of hearsay by non-medical people of a "conversation" not recorded?
Isn't CBS part of the Mass Media Coverup? What x-ray with a probe did the three pathologists describe in their 1967 "Military Review" or in sworn testimony?
Why does Humes seem to probe the whole neck transit, then say he doesn't want to use it to authenticate the SBT?
Is there some law that pathologists can only write a set number of drafts?
ou wrote:
"And we also now know that Jenkins told the HSCA that the back-wound
enabled Humes "to reach the end of the wound" and that the wound tract
was "not into the chest cavity.""
Not the same as the probe pushing against the cavity lining.
Since you're citing Jenkins, he said the autopsy doctors had no knowledge of the throat wound during the autopsy.
The Silbert-O'Neill Report also says as much.
What Finck told the ARRB about the extent of the probing:
Q: When you were performing the autopsy of President Kennedy,
did you make any attempts to track the course of the bullet—
A: Yes.
Q:—that you referred to as the upper back?
A: Yes. That was unsuccessful with a probe from what I remember.
Q: What kind of probe did you use?
A: I don't remember.
Q: Is there a standard type of probe that is used in autopsies?
A: A non-metallic probe.
Q: In using the probe, did you attempt to determine the angle of the
entrance of the bullet into President Kennedy's body?
A: Yes. It was unsuccessful from what I remember.
Q: In the probes that you did make, did you find any evidence that
would support a bullet going into the upper back and existing from the
place where the tracheotomy incision had been performed?
A: From what I recall, we stated the probing was unsuccessful.
...
Q: Do you have any recollection of photographs being taken with probes
inserted into the wounds?
A: I don't.
...
Q: At the time you concluded the autopsy, on the night of November
22nd-23rd, did you have any conclusion in your own mind about what
had happened to the bullet that entered the upper thoracic cavity?
A: No. And that was the reason for the phone call of Dr. Humes the
following morning, and he found out there was a wound of exit in the
front of the neck. But at the time of the autopsy, we were not aware
of that exit wound in the front of the neck.
...
Q: Sure. Did the angle of the probe when you inserted the probe into
the wound, begin in a direction that pointed down into the thoracic
cavity rather than out the throat?
A: I don't think I can answer the question, because we said the probing
was unsuccessful. So how can I determine an angle if the probing
was unsuccessful?
Humes to the ARRB:
A. My problem is, very simply stated, we had an entrance wound high
in the posterior back above the scapula. We didn't know where the
exit wound was at that point. I'd be the first one to admit it. We knew
in general in the past that we should have been more prescient than
we were, I must confess, because when we removed the breast plate
and examined the thoracic cavity, we saw a contusion on the upper
lobe of the lung. There was no defect in the pleura anyplace. So it's
obvious that the missile had gone over that top of the lung.
...
... it's helpful to take a long probe and put it in the position. It can tell
you a lot of things. If you know where the point of entrance and the
point of exit are, it's duck soup. But for me to start probing around in
this man's neck, all I would make was false passages. There wouldn't
be any track that I could put a probe through or anything of that nature.
It just doesn't work that way.
Q. Was any probe used at all to track the path—
A. I don't recall that there was. There might have been some abortive
efforts superficially in the back of the neck, but no.
...
Q. Do you recall any photograph or X-ray that was taken with a probe
inserted into the post thorax?
A. No, absolutely not. I do not have a recollection of such.
Boswell to the ARRB:
Q. Previously in the deposition, you've made reference to there being a
probe to help track the direction of the neck wound. Do you recall that?
A. Mm-hmm.
Q. Could you tell me about how long the probe was or describe the
dimensions of the probe?
A. It's a little soft metal instrument that looks like a needle with a blunt
end on one end and a flattened end on the other, like a needle that you
would knit with or something. And it's, I would say, eight inches long,
blunt on one end and sort of has a sharp point on the other end.
Q. Were there any X-rays taken with the probe inside the body that
you recall?
A. No.
Q. How far in did the probe go?
A. Very short distance. Three inches, about.
Q. Were there any photographs taken with the probe inserted?
A. I doubt it.
...
... When we saw the clothing, we realized that where I had drawn this was—
if you looked at the back of the coat, it was in the exact same place. But the
coat had been—was up like this. He was waving, and this was all scrunched
up like this. And the bullet went through the coat way below where this
would be on his body, because it was really at the base of his neck. And the
way I know this best is my memory of the fact that—see, we probed this hole
which was in his neck with all sorts of probes and everything, and it was such
a small hole, basically, and the muscles were so big and strong and had
closed the hole and you couldn't get a finger or a probe through it. But when
we opened the chest and we got at—the lung extends up under the clavicle
and high just beneath the neck here, and the bullet had not pierced through
into the lung cavity but had caused hemorrhage just outside the pleura.
And so if I can move this up to here—it's shown better on the front, actually.
The wound came through and downward just above the thoracic cavity and
out at about the thyroid cartilage. So if you put a probe in this and got it back
through like this, that would come out right at the base of the neck.
I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura [lining of the chest cavity] . . . . You could actually see where it was making an indentation . . . where it was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity. . . . No way that could have exited in the front.
I found a copy of Lattimer's 1994 report re tests re Connally's lapel bulge flap flip at Z224.Here are my latest estimates (done today) off Lattimer's 18 frames (actually 18 photos)(it was not a film)(camera took 30 pix/sec)(Lattimer's test dunn in 1994).
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/L%20Disk/Lattimer%20John%20Dr/Item%2006.pdf
Lattimer's tests show that the flip goes from say 20% at his Frame-06 to say 90% at Frame-07.
His frames are 30 fps. The Zapruder frames are 18.3 fps.
I said that reactions show that Oswald's shot-2 was at i reckoned Z218. However, the Zapruder footage shows that the lapel flip happened (ie attained 100% flip or nearly) between Z223 & Z224.
Therefore i need to change my estimate for Oswald's shot-2 being at Z218, it was at Z219, or a fraction later than Z219.
At Z219 & Z220 Connally was hidden by the road signage – hence the Zapruder footage missed showing the cloud of debris that caused the bulge & the flip.
Lattimer said that his tests confirmed that the shot was at Z224.
NNOOOOOOOOO.
His sequence clearly shows that his lapel flip happened at his Frame-07 (ie just before Frame-07), not at his Frame-00.
His first photo is Frame-minus-01 if u like – it merely shows his "Connally" test dummy etc before the shot.
His first frame of his shot sequence is what i call Frame-00 – it shows that the shot & the debris cloud have already happened. What i call Frame-07 is the 8th frame of his shot sequence.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/192566201@N05/52543820000/in/dateposted-public/
https://i.postimg.cc/hvCw3MrK/latimer-4-Copy-2.jpg
(https://i.postimg.cc/hvCw3MrK/lattimer-4-2.jpg)
Dr. Boswell said that the autopsy doctors assumed that the anterior neck wound was a wound of exit, saying the hole is not that big and that it was "far bigger than a wound of entry." He said the doctors didn't explicitly discuss the possibility of a tracheotomy having been performed but said it was assumed this was a possibility. . . . Dr. Boswell said he remembered seeing part of the perimeter of a bullet wound in the anterior neck. ( p. 8 )
DR. BOSWELL indicated that "we had gotten ourselves in dutch [in trouble] with the neck and throat wounds with regard to the Secret Service." DR. BOSWELL indicated that one of the agents (he wasn't sure if FBI or Secret Service) was on the phone most of the time. (He seemed to be implying they were on the phone that was in the main autopsy room.) (p. 4)
Dr. BOSWELL was asked why the back wound was probed if the autopsy doctors knew the bullet had exited out the anterior neck (as Dr. BOSWELL stated earlier in the interview).
Dr. BOSWELL said that Dr. BURKLEY didn't mention the fact that a tracheotomy had been performed. He said that Dr. BURKLEY was very upset and this might have explained his failure to mention this important fact. Dr. BOSWELL said (without indicating that he was being inconsistent with his previous statement), the doctors felt the anterior neck damage was caused by a tracheotomy wound and in the later courses of the autopsy thought it may have included the exit wound of a bullet. (pp. 11-12; again, all parenthetical comments are Purdy's)
Dr. BOSWELL is a little vague as to when the doctors felt that a bullet may have fallen out the neck wound, but seemed to indicate it occurred around the time they learned the bullet had been discovered in Parkland. . . . (p. 12)
I have been told, by a man who is a personal friend of Dr. Humes, that he says one of the x-rays shows a wire left in the bullet path through the neck. If this is indeed true, publication of same would forever resolve the discussion about back versus neck wound and generally settle the dust about the autopsy.
According to BOSWELL, HUMES probed the neck wound [the back wound] with his little finger (indicating a point on the little finger which did not go past the first knuckle, less than one inch). He said HUMES also probed it with a metal probe. (p. 6)
Commander Humes put his finger in it, and, you know, said that ... he could probe the bottom of it with his finger. . . . I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura. You could actually see where it was making an indentation. . . . It was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AXW-bE6isPQ/UolNvHneNSI/AAAAAAAAw1I/wwG51z8e7zY/s1600/Z-Film+Clip+(SBT+In+Motion)(2).gif) (http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He) |
You're citing two layers of hearsay by non-medical people of a "conversation" not recorded?bump
(https://images2.imgbox.com/0e/8c/tco7yMJB_o.jpg)
Isn't CBS part of the Mass Media Coverup? What x-ray with a probe did the three pathologists describe in their 1967 "Military Review" or in sworn testimony? Why does Humes seem to probe the whole neck transit, then say he doesn't want to use it to authenticate the SBT?
Is there some law that pathologists can only write a set number of drafts?
You wrote:
"And we also now know that Jenkins told the HSCA that the back-wound
enabled Humes "to reach the end of the wound" and that the wound tract
was "not into the chest cavity.""
Not the same as the probe pushing against the cavity lining.
Since you're citing Jenkins, he said the autopsy doctors had no knowledge of the throat wound during the autopsy. The Silbert-O'Neill Report also says as much.
What Finck told the ARRB about the extent of the probing:
Q: When you were performing the autopsy of President Kennedy,
did you make any attempts to track the course of the bullet—
A: Yes.
Q:—that you referred to as the upper back?
A: Yes. That was unsuccessful with a probe from what I remember.
Q: What kind of probe did you use?
A: I don't remember.
Q: Is there a standard type of probe that is used in autopsies?
A: A non-metallic probe.
Q: In using the probe, did you attempt to determine the angle of the
entrance of the bullet into President Kennedy's body?
A: Yes. It was unsuccessful from what I remember.
Q: In the probes that you did make, did you find any evidence that
would support a bullet going into the upper back and existing from the
place where the tracheotomy incision had been performed?
A: From what I recall, we stated the probing was unsuccessful.
...
Q: Do you have any recollection of photographs being taken with probes
inserted into the wounds?
A: I don't.
...
Q: At the time you concluded the autopsy, on the night of November
22nd-23rd, did you have any conclusion in your own mind about what
had happened to the bullet that entered the upper thoracic cavity?
A: No. And that was the reason for the phone call of Dr. Humes the
following morning, and he found out there was a wound of exit in the
front of the neck. But at the time of the autopsy, we were not aware
of that exit wound in the front of the neck.
...
Q: Sure. Did the angle of the probe when you inserted the probe into
the wound, begin in a direction that pointed down into the thoracic
cavity rather than out the throat?
A: I don't think I can answer the question, because we said the probing
was unsuccessful. So how can I determine an angle if the probing
was unsuccessful?
_____
Humes to the ARRB:
A. My problem is, very simply stated, we had an entrance wound high
in the posterior back above the scapula. We didn't know where the
exit wound was at that point. I'd be the first one to admit it. We knew
in general in the past that we should have been more prescient than
we were, I must confess, because when we removed the breast plate
and examined the thoracic cavity, we saw a contusion on the upper
lobe of the lung. There was no defect in the pleura anyplace. So it's
obvious that the missile had gone over that top of the lung.
...
... it's helpful to take a long probe and put it in the position. It can tell
you a lot of things. If you know where the point of entrance and the
point of exit are, it's duck soup. But for me to start probing around in
this man's neck, all I would make was false passages. There wouldn't
be any track that I could put a probe through or anything of that nature.
It just doesn't work that way.
Q. Was any probe used at all to track the path—
A. I don't recall that there was. There might have been some abortive
efforts superficially in the back of the neck, but no.
...
Q. Do you recall any photograph or X-ray that was taken with a probe
inserted into the post thorax?
A. No, absolutely not. I do not have a recollection of such.
_____
Boswell to the ARRB:
Q. Previously in the deposition, you've made reference to there being a
probe to help track the direction of the neck wound. Do you recall that?
A. Mm-hmm.
Q. Could you tell me about how long the probe was or describe the
dimensions of the probe?
A. It's a little soft metal instrument that looks like a needle with a blunt
end on one end and a flattened end on the other, like a needle that you
would knit with or something. And it's, I would say, eight inches long,
blunt on one end and sort of has a sharp point on the other end.
Q. Were there any X-rays taken with the probe inside the body that
you recall?
A. No.
Q. How far in did the probe go?
A. Very short distance. Three inches, about.
Q. Were there any photographs taken with the probe inserted?
A. I doubt it.
...
... When we saw the clothing, we realized that where I had drawn this was—
if you looked at the back of the coat, it was in the exact same place. But the
coat had been—was up like this. He was waving, and this was all scrunched
up like this. And the bullet went through the coat way below where this
would be on his body, because it was really at the base of his neck. And the
way I know this best is my memory of the fact that—see, we probed this hole
which was in his neck with all sorts of probes and everything, and it was such
a small hole, basically, and the muscles were so big and strong and had
closed the hole and you couldn't get a finger or a probe through it. But when
we opened the chest and we got at—the lung extends up under the clavicle
and high just beneath the neck here, and the bullet had not pierced through
into the lung cavity but had caused hemorrhage just outside the pleura.
And so if I can move this up to here—it's shown better on the front, actually.
The wound came through and downward just above the thoracic cavity and
out at about the thyroid cartilage. So if you put a probe in this and got it back
through like this, that would come out right at the base of the neck.
Again, the Knott Lab Laser testing recently concluded that the SBT was IMPOSSIBLE. ALL of this discussion is Now Immaterial. FOLLOW THE SCIENCE. No SBT = Multiple Shooters = Conspiracy CASE CLOSED !!!Nope. Your BS meter is definitely sick. I suggest the carnivore diet.
Nope. Your BS meter is definitely sick. I suggest the carnivore diet.
The Knott Lab put a lot of work into modelling the location of jfk & of Connally, but in the end stuffed it all up.
Blind Freddie can see that they have JFK leaning back in his seat.
If they had him leaning forward just a little, as per all of the pix & footages, then their SBT would work, as per other analysts.
The shot happens at Z218, ie while jfk is behind the large Stemmons sign, ie halfway along the sign.
Allso, Lattimer showed that the bulging jacket & the lapel flip-eversion cannot happen unless the slug has firstly passed throo JFK & is tumbling while passing throo Connally.
FOLLOW THE SCIENCE = SBT.
I'll stick with the KNOTT LAB SCIENCE, vs your laughable "Magic 8 Ball" conjecture. SBT = DOA
The lapel flip is a red herring created by Gerald Posner. It is a meaningless event, if not a bogus one. David Wimp makes a strong case that the lapel flip is an optical illusion caused by reflected light: http://joliraja.com/LapelFlip/LapelFlapTD.htm (http://joliraja.com/LapelFlip/LapelFlapTD.htm).
If we assume the lapel flip is real, we should first and foremost recognize that it is nowhere near Connally's exit wound. The hole in Connally's jacket is nearly 1 foot from the lapel flip.
The lapel flip occurs in just 1/18th/second. Really? Since when can lapels flip up and down with such amazing speed?
If Connally's lapel ever did flip up and down, it would have done so because of the strong breeze that was intermittently gusting in Dealey Plaza during the shooting. But, again, how can a lapel flip up and down with such incredible speed? And even if it somehow managed to do so, the flip occurs nearly 12 inches from Connally's exit wound.
I found a copy of Lattimer's 1994 report re tests re Connally's lapel bulge flap flip at Z224.Here are my latest estimates (done today) off Lattimer's 18 frames (actually 18 photos)(it was not a film)(camera took 30 pix/sec)(Lattimer's test dunn in 1994).
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/L%20Disk/Lattimer%20John%20Dr/Item%2006.pdf
Lattimer's tests show that the flip goes from say 20% at his Frame-06 to say 90% at Frame-07.
His frames are 30 fps. The Zapruder frames are 18.3 fps.
I said that reactions show that Oswald's shot-2 was at i reckoned Z218. However, the Zapruder footage shows that the lapel flip happened (ie attained 100% flip or nearly) between Z223 & Z224.
Therefore i need to change my estimate for Oswald's shot-2 being at Z218, it was at Z219, or a fraction later than Z219.
At Z219 & Z220 Connally was hidden by the road signage – hence the Zapruder footage missed showing the cloud of debris that caused the bulge & the flip.
Lattimer said that his tests confirmed that the shot was at Z224.
NNOOOOOOOOO.
His sequence clearly shows that his lapel flip happened at his Frame-07 (ie just before Frame-07), not at his Frame-00.
His first photo is Frame-minus-01 if u like – it merely shows his "Connally" test dummy etc before the shot.
His first frame of his shot sequence is what i call Frame-00 – it shows that the shot & the debris cloud have already happened. What i call Frame-07 is the 8th frame of his shot sequence.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/192566201@N05/52543820000/in/dateposted-public/
https://i.postimg.cc/hvCw3MrK/latimer-4-Copy-2.jpg
(https://i.postimg.cc/hvCw3MrK/lattimer-4-2.jpg)
I made a giff of Lattimer's 18 frames (1994 test).bump
The tie is out of there.
Lattimer's slug takes a big chunk out of the lapel (as can be seen). He didnt tell us that.
The 1994 exit outshoot is not in the correct place, it is too high & too close to center.
And, the silly 1994 lapel (the 1994 lapel is very long) & the silly 1994 jacket are unlike the (shortish) 1963 lapel & jacket, hence the 1994 tie escapes, & the 1994 lapel loozes a chunk (missing chunk is vizible in the photos).
So, koz of the (missing) chunk, Lattimer's 1994 lapel would (i think) have flipped more violently than the 1963 lapel (see lapel flip in Z224), & (i think) it would have flipped earlier than the 1963 lapel.
Which means that my estimate of Z218 for Oswald's shot-2 is looking better & better (ie rather than Lattimer's Z220).
Lattimer actually said that his test showed that the shot was at Z224, even tho as can be seen his 1994 test timings clearly tell us that the shot must have been at Z220, & (as i said) the 1994 flip would have been seen later if Lattimer's 1994 slug had missed the lapel (we know that the 1963 slug missed the lapel), which means that the shot at the supposed Z220 would in fact have been say Z219 (or even at my Z218).
I estimated that Oswald's shot-2 was at Z218, which is when JFK was hidden by the traffic sign, in fact Z218 is when JFK was halfway along the sign (ie at the midpoint of his disappearance).
My estimate of Z218 was based on the typical human reaction time that would give the JFK & Connally reactions seen in Zapruder frame Z224.
So, JFK's & Connally's 1963 reaction times were similar to the reaction time for Connally's 1963 jacket flap-flip (flap-flip happened at Z224) -- 6 Zapruder frames is 0.30 sec (Latimer said 1/3rd of a sec).
(https://i.postimg.cc/rs46PdWP/ezgif-4-3ddceefcb4.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/dt6G1qbc/JBC-at-Love-Field-2.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2862.96.html
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
I made a giff of Lattimer's 18 frames (1994 test).The shot through the jacket/torso model made by Lattimer looks nothing like what is seen in any of the Zapruder frames. There is no sign of any movement over several frames as shown in the Latimer film. In the Zfilm the complete change occurs between one frame (z223-224):
The tie is out of there.
Lattimer's slug takes a big chunk out of the lapel (as can be seen). He didnt tell us that.
The 1994 exit outshoot is not in the correct place, it is too high & too close to center.
And, the silly 1994 lapel (the 1994 lapel is very long) & the silly 1994 jacket are unlike the (shortish) 1963 lapel & jacket, hence the 1994 tie escapes, & the 1994 lapel loozes a chunk (missing chunk is vizible in the photos).
So, koz of the (missing) chunk, Lattimer's 1994 lapel would (i think) have flipped more violently than the 1963 lapel (see lapel flip in Z224), & (i think) it would have flipped earlier than the 1963 lapel.
Which means that my estimate of Z218 for Oswald's shot-2 is looking better & better (ie rather than Lattimer's Z220).
Lattimer actually said that his test showed that the shot was at Z224, even tho as can be seen his 1994 test timings clearly tell us that the shot must have been at Z220, & (as i said) the 1994 flip would have been seen later if Lattimer's 1994 slug had missed the lapel (we know that the 1963 slug missed the lapel), which means that the shot at the supposed Z220 would in fact have been say Z219 (or even at my Z218).
I estimated that Oswald's shot-2 was at Z218, which is when JFK was hidden by the traffic sign, in fact Z218 is when JFK was halfway along the sign (ie at the midpoint of his disappearance).
My estimate of Z218 was based on the typical human reaction time that would give the JFK & Connally reactions seen in Zapruder frame Z224.
So, JFK's & Connally's 1963 reaction times were similar to the reaction time for Connally's 1963 jacket flap-flip (flap-flip happened at Z224) -- 6 Zapruder frames is 0.30 sec (Latimer said 1/3rd of a sec).
(https://i.postimg.cc/rs46PdWP/ezgif-4-3ddceefcb4.gif)
The shot through the jacket/torso model made by Lattimer looks nothing like what is seen in any of the Zapruder frames. There is no sign of any movement over several frames as shown in the Lattimer film. In the Zfilm the complete change occurs between one frame (z223-224):Yes, there is a small movement of the lapel outwards in Z222, i hadnt noticed.
(https://i.postimg.cc/x1Hv2sfV/flip2.gif)
Since, as you point out, the bullet passed through the right chest pocket:
(https://i.postimg.cc/yx9CV4kz/JBC-jacket-inside.jpg)
the only way to lift the lapel would be to move the whole right side of the jacket outward until the lapel flips. But if the shot was before z222 how can we explain the fact that the jacket moves in the opposite direction from z222-223:
(https://i.postimg.cc/kMpXyqxf/flip1.gif)
The theory of Lattimer was that the jacket would move because of the blast of blood and tissue that we see in Latimer's film exploding from the chest. Not only do we not see a similar effect in the zfilm but there is no evidence of such an explosion of blood and tissue on the clothing.
Here are my latest estimates (done today) off Lattimer's 18 frames (actually 18 photos)(it was not a film)(camera took 30 pix/sec)(Lattimer's test dunn in 1994).In the above analysis we can see that the max lapel flip happens at frame07 2 frames after the jacket bulge starts to diminish at frame05.
Its difficult to see what is what in Lattimer's 1994 frames (pix) – its partly guesswork.
The flap on the jacket on the 1994 dummy was much longer than the 1963 jacket, so i have divided the 1994 flap into the lower flap & the upper flap.
In the 1963 Zapruder frames the 1963 flap is in effect the upper flap in the 1994 frames.
I assumed that the 1963 slug hit Connally at Z220.0. This accords with the max flip at Lattimer 07 (1994) happening at the same time as the flip in Z224 (1963).
We don’t see any debris cloud in the 1963 Zapruder frames – the exit outshoot on the 1963 jacket is hidden below the level of the 1963 limo door.
Frame … Time s … Bulge % … Lower/Upper [Flap Flip %] … Debris Cloud % … Zapruder Frame … Connally 1963 Flap.
…. 00 …. 0.0000 …. 000 ……….. 010 …. 000 ……………………………….. 075 ……………………. Z220.0 ….…. hidden by sign..
…. 01 …. 0.0333 …. 040 ………...010 …. 000 ……………………………….. 100 …………………... Z220.6 …….. hidden by sign..
…. 02 …. 0.0667 …. 070 ……….. 060 …. 010 ………………………………. 050 ……………………. Z221.2 … half hidden by sign..
…. 03 …. 0.1000 …. 100 ……….. 100 …. 010 ………………………………. 040 ……………………. Z221.8 … half hidden by sign..
…. 04 …. 0.1333 …. 100 …….... 100 …. 010 ………………………………. 030 ……………………. Z222.4 …….….... no flip [edit 1dec2023][Andrew Mason has pointed out that there is a small flip or bulge in Z222].
…. 05 …. 0.1667 …. 090 …….…. 100 …. 020 ……………………………... 010 ……………………. Z223.0 …….….... no flip ..
…. 06 …. 0.2000 …. 080 …….... 100 …. 050 ………………………………. 005 …………………….. Z223.7 …….….... no flip ..
…. 07 …. 0.2333 …. 070 ……….. 100 …. 100 …………………….………. 000 …………………….. Z224.3 …….. flipped ..
…. 08 …. 0.2667 …. 060 ……….. 100 …. 100 ………………………….…. 000 …………………….. Z224.9 …….. flipped ..
…. 09 …. 0.3000 …. 050 ……... 100 …. 100 …………………………….. 000 ……………….….…. Z225.4 …….. flipped ..
…. 10 …. 0.3333 …. 040 ……... 100 …. 080 …………………………….. 000 ……………….……. Z225.9 …….. flipped ..
…. 11 …. 0.3667 …. 030 ………. 100 …. 050 …………………………….. 000 ……………….…... Z226.8 …….. flipped ..
…. 12 …. 0.4000 …. 020 ………. 100 …. 030 ……………………………. 000 ……….…………... Z227.3 ……...….. blurred frame ..
…. 13 …. 0.4333 …. 020 ……... 080 …. 020 ……………………………... 000 ……….………….. Z227.9 ……...….. blurred frame..
…. 14 …. 0.4667 …. 010 ……... 050 …. 010 ……………………………... 000 …………….……. Z228.4 …….. hidden ..
…. 15 …. 0.5000 …. 010 ……... 030 …. 005 …………………….……….. 000 …………….….…. Z229.2 …….. hidden ..
…. 16 …. 0.5333 …. 000 ………. 020 …. 000 ……………….….…………. 000 …………….……. Z229.8 …….. hidden ..
…. 17 …. 0.5667 …. 000 ……... 010 …. 000 …………………..…………. 000 …………….……. Z2230.3 …….. hidden ..
…. …. …. 0.6000 …. ……. ……... …... …. …... …………………..…………. ..... …………….……. Z231.0 …….. hidden ..
The shot through the jacket/torso model made by Lattimer looks nothing like what is seen in any of the Zapruder frames.
Very good observation, John. The jacket pluck 223ff is consistent with the Lattimer experiment.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xv6hObo_xcI/YDBXp3WOKZI/AAAAAAAA3u8/9Yl2zkkcPPYxoPNRSzXm-46GAu-b_SYqwCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/Flag_of_Australia.gif)
On the right, the flag bulge pulls material from the right edge, maybe like how Connally's jacket edge supposedly moves between Z222 and Z223. Pretty sure Mason could afford a Carcano and perform an experiment, rather than nitpicking at Lattimer's.
Andrew also charges there's no blood visible "exploding from the chest". But at that resolution would blood be apparent against a dark surface?
Yes, there is a small movement of the lapel outwards in Z222, i hadnt noticed.While you are thinking about it it you might ask yourself how does the jacket bulge out but not the shirt or the tie? The tie does not move at all.
And, yes, the lapel seems to have moved back inwards in Z223 (& then we have the full blown flip outwards in Z224).
I dont know how the upper lapel could flip out then in then out in the space of 3 frames.
However, my posting detailing the timings in Lattimer's 18 frames duz show the upper lapel & lower lapel doing different things. I will have to think about it.
In 1963 the outshoot was below the level of the side of the limo, hence the cloud of steam & debris could not be seen in Zapruder.
U are correct that the lapel flips between Z223 & Z224.
But u cant say that that is different to Lattimer. We cant see what the lapel duz after Z226 (frame too blurry)(lapel hidden by arm/hand).
I think that Lattimer did not tell us anything about how much debris was found inside shirt & inside jacket in 1994.
And i dont know how much debris was found in 1963.
C'mon Andrew, are you sure they're "nothing alike"?A few of the differences:
I see the top part of Connally's jacket move forward and create the same shape as seen in Lattimer's recreation and then the after effects are obscured by Connally's raised arm.
Consider Connally's positioning as to where the camera is and also Connally was seated which makes the bottom of the jacket compress into your lap and thus applies differing forces to the jacket.How does the jacket bulge but not the shirt? If the shirt bulged, the tie would have to move. It doesn't.
In addition look at the right side of Connally's white shirt collar and how the jacket when hit rises and momentarily hides the white part, just like Lattimers recreation.
While you are thinking about it it you might ask yourself how does the jacket bulge out but not the shirt or the tie? The tie does not move at all.In my giff of Lattimer's 1994 bulge & flip the tie appears to be short, shorter than the lapel even.
Here is the shirt:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ydDCG4qr/JBC-Shirt-front.jpg)
Not that much blood there and there would be a less hitting the jacket. Lattimer proved that the bullet itself cannot cause the jacket to bulge.
Nice try Jerry. But since the tie is clipped to the shirt it should move with the shirt. Neither shirt nor tie budges at all. The jacket moves independently of the underlying shirt - just like the jacket opened a bit from z222-223.
Connally's jacket in front had more loose material than
the tucked-in shirt and tie-with-clip. But nice try.
It's a later picture, but it looks like
the Guv wore his belt high.
Here are my latest estimates (done today) off Lattimer's 18 frames (actually 18 photos)(it was not a film)(camera took 30 pix/sec)(Lattimer's test dunn in 1994).In the above analysis we can see that the max lapel flip happens at frame07 2 frames after the jacket bulge starts to diminish at frame05.
Its difficult to see what is what in Lattimer's 1994 frames (pix) – its partly guesswork.
The flap on the jacket on the 1994 dummy was much longer than the 1963 jacket, so i have divided the 1994 flap into the lower flap & the upper flap.
In the 1963 Zapruder frames the 1963 flap is in effect the upper flap in the 1994 frames.
I assumed that the 1963 slug hit Connally at Z220.0. This accords with the max flip at Lattimer 07 (1994) happening at the same time as the flip in Z224 (1963).
We don’t see any debris cloud in the 1963 Zapruder frames – the exit outshoot on the 1963 jacket is hidden below the level of the 1963 limo door.
Frame … Time s … Bulge % … Lower/Upper [Flap Flip %] … Debris Cloud % … Zapruder Frame … Connally 1963 Flap.
…. 00 …. 0.0000 …. 000 ……….. 010 …. 000 ……………………………….. 075 ……………………. Z220.0 ….…. hidden by sign..
…. 01 …. 0.0333 …. 040 ………...010 …. 000 ……………………………….. 100 …………………... Z220.6 …….. hidden by sign..
…. 02 …. 0.0667 …. 070 ……….. 060 …. 010 ………………………………. 050 ……………………. Z221.2 … half hidden by sign..
…. 03 …. 0.1000 …. 100 ……….. 100 …. 010 ………………………………. 040 ……………………. Z221.8 … half hidden by sign..
…. 04 …. 0.1333 …. 100 …….... 100 …. 010 ………………………………. 030 ……………………. Z222.4 …….….... no flip [edit 1dec2023][Andrew Mason has pointed out that there is a small flip or bulge in Z222].
…. 05 …. 0.1667 …. 090 …….…. 100 …. 020 ……………………………... 010 ……………………. Z223.0 …….….... no flip ..
…. 06 …. 0.2000 …. 080 …….... 100 …. 050 ………………………………. 005 …………………….. Z223.7 …….….... no flip ..
…. 07 …. 0.2333 …. 070 ……….. 100 …. 100 …………………….………. 000 …………………….. Z224.3 …….. flipped ..
…. 08 …. 0.2667 …. 060 ……….. 100 …. 100 ………………………….…. 000 …………………….. Z224.9 …….. flipped ..
…. 09 …. 0.3000 …. 050 ……... 100 …. 100 …………………………….. 000 ……………….….…. Z225.4 …….. flipped ..
…. 10 …. 0.3333 …. 040 ……... 100 …. 080 …………………………….. 000 ……………….……. Z225.9 …….. flipped ..
…. 11 …. 0.3667 …. 030 ………. 100 …. 050 …………………………….. 000 ……………….…... Z226.8 …….. flipped ..
…. 12 …. 0.4000 …. 020 ………. 100 …. 030 ……………………………. 000 ……….…………... Z227.3 ……...….. blurred frame ..
…. 13 …. 0.4333 …. 020 ……... 080 …. 020 ……………………………... 000 ……….………….. Z227.9 ……...….. blurred frame..
…. 14 …. 0.4667 …. 010 ……... 050 …. 010 ……………………………... 000 …………….……. Z228.4 …….. hidden ..
…. 15 …. 0.5000 …. 010 ……... 030 …. 005 …………………….……….. 000 …………….….…. Z229.2 …….. hidden ..
…. 16 …. 0.5333 …. 000 ………. 020 …. 000 ……………….….…………. 000 …………….……. Z229.8 …….. hidden ..
…. 17 …. 0.5667 …. 000 ……... 010 …. 000 …………………..…………. 000 …………….……. Z2230.3 …….. hidden ..
…. …. …. 0.6000 …. ……. ……... …... …. …... …………………..…………. ..... …………….……. Z231.0 …….. hidden ..
In my giff of Lattimer's 1994 bulge & flip the tie appears to be short, shorter than the lapel even.Nice work.
The tie comes out (in 1994), & the end of the tie lifts up to about where we might possibly see it over the top of the side of the jfklimo in the Zapruder 1963 frames/giffs (if the tie came out in 1963).
Anyhow, the tie might have come out in 1963, but it is unlikely that the coming out would be vizible in Zapruder.
I will have a closer look at the 1963 frames to see if there is any hint of tie coming out.
I forget whether Lattimer said that in 1994 the jacket did not bulge nor the lapel flip unless the slug was tumbling during outshoot.
Or whether Lattimer was referring to the lapel flip only.
In any case we can safely assume that the shirt bulges as per the jacket. We can see a bit of shirt bulge in 1994, but i dont think we can see shirt bulge in 1963 (shirt might have bulged, but not vizible in Zapruder)(too blurry etc).
And anyhow why would the movement of the shirt be important?
Its strange that the 1994 lapel on Connally's left side duznt appear to bulge or flip at all.
Lattimer's outshoot in 1994 is much closer to centerline than the outshoot in 1963, & higher. The 1994 outshoot was just a couple of inches from the tie.
In fact the 1994 slug took a big chunk out of the edge of the lapel (as can be seen).
(https://i.postimg.cc/rs46PdWP/ezgif-4-3ddceefcb4.gif)
Connally's lapel flip at Z224.
The exiting slug missed the lapel by a mile. And in any case it was at Z218 plus or minus a frame or two.
What caused the lapel to flip?
Did the slug exit a bit side-on? In which case it shook the whole coat. And that shaking caused the lapel to stand up at Z218 -- which Zapruder didnt show koz it woz black on black. And then a gust flipped the lapel further so that Zapruder did show it.
What have i missed?
The lapel flap can first be seen in Z-223.Yes, my early postings on this forum were often naive, but i was learning fast (thanx to many smart members here).
[T]he headshot was [the] last shot (of at least 4 shots).
I made a giff of Lattimer's 18 frames (1994 test).Nice work.
The tie is out of there.
Lattimer's slug takes a big chunk out of the lapel (as can be seen). He didnt tell us that.
The 1994 exit outshoot is not in the correct place, it is too high & too close to center.
And, the silly 1994 lapel (the 1994 lapel is very long) & the silly 1994 jacket are unlike the (shortish) 1963 lapel & jacket, hence the 1994 tie escapes, & the 1994 lapel loozes a chunk (missing chunk is vizible in the photos).
So, koz of the (missing) chunk, Lattimer's 1994 lapel would (i think) have flipped more violently than the 1963 lapel (see lapel flip in Z224), & (i think) it would have flipped earlier than the 1963 lapel.
Which means that my estimate of Z218 for Oswald's shot-2 is looking better & better (ie rather than Lattimer's Z220).
Lattimer actually said that his test showed that the shot was at Z224, even tho as can be seen his 1994 test timings clearly tell us that the shot must have been at Z220, & (as i said) the 1994 flip would have been seen later if Lattimer's 1994 slug had missed the lapel (we know that the 1963 slug missed the lapel), which means that the shot at the supposed Z220 would in fact have been say Z219 (or even at my Z218).
I estimated that Oswald's shot-2 was at Z218, which is when JFK was hidden by the traffic sign, in fact Z218 is when JFK was halfway along the sign (ie at the midpoint of his disappearance).
My estimate of Z218 was based on the typical human reaction time that would give the JFK & Connally reactions seen in Zapruder frame Z224.
So, JFK's & Connally's 1963 reaction times were similar to the reaction time for Connally's 1963 jacket flap-flip (flap-flip happened at Z224) -- 6 Zapruder frames is 0.30 sec (Latimer said 1/3rd of a sec).
(https://i.postimg.cc/rs46PdWP/ezgif-4-3ddceefcb4.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/dt6G1qbc/JBC-at-Love-Field-2.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2862.96.html
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
Connally's lapel flip at Z224. The exiting slug missed the lapel by a mile. And in any case it was at Z218 plus or minus a frame or two. What caused the lapel to flip?
Did the slug exit a bit side-on? In which case it shook the whole coat. And that shaking caused the lapel to stand up at Z218 -- which Zapruder didnt show koz it woz black on black. And then a gust flipped the lapel further so that Zapruder did show it.
I deal with the lapel flip in A Comforting Lie.
As you note, there is no bullet hole in the lapel of Connally’s jacket. The actual hole in the jacket is about 12 inches from the lapel and 2 inches below the right nipple. The passage of a bullet through cloth almost a foot away from the lapel could not have caused the lapel flip.
There was a strong wind blowing intermittently in Dealey Plaza during the shooting. If the lapel flip is not an optical illusion, and if lapels can flip up and down in only 18th/second, i.e., 55 milliseconds, the wind gusts would be the only logical explanation. But can lapels flip up and down with such incredible speed, even if blown by a gust of wind? This seems highly unlikely.
David Wimp argues that the lapel flip is an optical illusion caused by reflected light. See his article “The ‘Lapel Flip’ as Reflected Light."
Another possibility is that in the original, unedited Zapruder film, the lapel flip did not happen with such impossible, lightning-fast speed, and thus was simply the result of a gust of wind. But, if the original film likewise showed a 55-millisecond lapel flip, then Wimp's theory is the most plausible explanation for it.
Did the same gust of wind also cause his jacket to "puff" or bulge outward one frame earlier, or was that a different gust of wind?
One, let's start with the Knott Laboratory digital trajectory analysis of the SBT, the most sophisticated analysis ever done on the subject, that proves that JFK and Connally were not aligned to allow the SBT to occur.
The Knott Laboratory "analysis" regarding how JFK and JBC were horizontally and vertically positioned and how far the latter was turned to his right when CE-399 hit him is based on the graphics from a video game and is, therefore, a joke.
Using a 3D laser scanner (Leica RTC360), we conducted 36 laser scans of Dealey Plaza. This laser scanner captures up to two million points per second and HDR imagery, resulting in a point cloud, or digital twin, of the scene. This provides forensic engineers with a scientifically accurate model from which measurements can be taken. The Dealey Plaza point cloud has over 851 million data points.
The next step was to reconstruct the scene to historic accuracy for November 22, 1963. To do so, our visualization experts used historic photographs of the plaza and presidential limousine, as well as the “Zapruder film,” which is widely considered the best video footage of the incident. Using a process called photogrammetry, the visualization team was able to place these images into the point cloud, syncing their locations within the scene. Altogether, 25 historic photographs and 7 frames of the Zapruder film were used for this photogrammetry. . . .
Photogrammetry, camera matching, camera tracking and object matching processes were also used to establish the location of Oswald’s perch, the correct dimensions of the limousine, create the digital models of President Kennedy and Governor Connally, and establish their positions, frame by frame, throughout the incident. . . .
With the ability to measure distances, locations and angles from the point cloud, we could develop the exact trajectory between Oswald’s shooting position and points on each body. Our visualization experts tested bullet trajectories using the two frames from the Zapruder film (Z210 and Z225) where the first shots occurred.
For the single bullet theory to be true, the shooting position, bullet exit point on President Kennedy, and entry point on Governor Connally should all be reasonably in line. When drawing this line from the sixth-floor perch of the Texas Book Depository to the positions of the two men and their entry/exit points, we found a significant difference in both distance and angle. (https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-laboratory-presents-digital-reconstruction-and-findings-on-the-assassination-of-president-john-f-kennedy/)
Your reply is the joke. You can't be serious. I'm wondering if you've actually bothered to even read the Knott Lab analysis. The Knott Lab trajectory analysis dwarfs any previous analysis. No previous analysis even comes close to the sophistication and comprehensiveness of the Knott Lab analysis. No other analysis used millions of data points laser-recorded in Dealey Plaza and converted into a digital replica of the plaza.
Your reply is the joke. You can't be serious. I'm wondering if you've actually bothered to even read the Knott Lab analysis. The Knott Lab trajectory analysis dwarfs any previous analysis. No previous analysis even comes close to the sophistication and comprehensiveness of the Knott Lab analysis. No other analysis used millions of data points laser-recorded in Dealey Plaza and converted into a digital replica of the plaza. Just to refresh your memory about the Knott Lab analysis:
From this point cloud, the team of forensic engineers was able to match images from the scene and the Zapruder film using a process called photogrammetry. They modeled the presidential limousine using multiple photographs and established the correct dimensions of the vehicle. Through a process called match moving, they synced frames from the Zapruder film into the digital recreation of the scene. The match moving enabled the alignment of the digital models of Kennedy and Connally in the vehicle to establish their positions frame by frame throughout the incident.
“With the ability to measure distances, locations and angles from the point cloud, we could develop the exact trajectory between Oswald’s shooting position and points on each body,” said Stanley Stoll, CEO & Principal Engineer of Knott Laboratory. “Our team tested bullet trajectories using the two frames from the Zapruder film where the first shots occurred and the known entry and exit points on Kennedy and Connally.”
Stoll continued, “The shooting position, bullet exit point on President Kennedy, and entry point on Governor Connally should all be reasonably in line. When drawing this line from the sixth floor perch of the Texas Book Depository to the positions of the two men and their entry/exit points, we found a significant angle difference. This case is ongoing, but evidence strongly suggests there is more to the story in this historic event. Modern science refutes the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.” (https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-lab-uses-forensic-science-to-refute-warren-commission-findings-on-jfk-assassination/)
Michael - You know you are on the right track when they slander you. They have nowhere else to go.
What makes the Knott Laboratory SBT trajectory analysis all the more impressive and important is that Knott Laboratory has been an industry leader in forensic engineering and accident reconstruction animation services for over 40 years. The company's experts include structural and mechanical engineers, fire and explosion investigators, visualization experts, accident reconstructionists, and digital media forensics experts. That's why John Orr, a former Justice Department attorney, hired them to analyze the SBT.Since Michael decided to bring this over from the other thread, I guess I have to reply here, too. To repeat the high-level version:
To reconstruct the shooting scene with modern technology, Knott's experts conducted a high-definition laser scan of Dealey Plaza to generate a point cloud of up to 2 million points per second, to accurately measure point-to-point anywhere in the scene. Knott Laboratory also obtained historic photographic evidence from the plaza, the limousine, and the Zapruder film. Here's what happened after that:
No previous SBT analysis even came close to this level of locational data volume and accuracy and analytical sophistication. WC apologists can do nothing but offer lame excuses for refusing to accept this scientific finding. If Knott Lab had determined that JFK and Connally were SBT aligned, lone-gunman theorists would be hailing the trajectory analysis as definitive and conclusive, but since it found the opposite, they dismiss it, proving that not even hard science can sway them from their emotional devotion to the lone-assassin scenario.
What makes the Knott Laboratory SBT trajectory analysis all the more impressive and important is that Knott Laboratory has been an industry leader in forensic engineering and accident reconstruction animation services for over 40 years. The company's experts include structural and mechanical engineers, fire and explosion investigators, visualization experts, accident reconstructionists, and digital media forensics experts. That's why John Orr, a former Justice Department attorney, hired them to analyze the SBT.
To reconstruct the shooting scene with modern technology, Knott's experts conducted a high-definition laser scan of Dealey Plaza to generate a point cloud of up to 2 million points per second, to accurately measure point-to-point anywhere in the scene. Knott Laboratory also obtained historic photographic evidence from the plaza, the limousine, and the Zapruder film. Here's what happened after that:
No previous SBT analysis even came close to this level of locational data volume and accuracy and analytical sophistication. WC apologists can do nothing but offer lame excuses for refusing to accept this scientific finding. If Knott Lab had determined that JFK and Connally were SBT aligned, lone-gunman theorists would be hailing the trajectory analysis as definitive and conclusive, but since it found the opposite, they dismiss it, proving that not even hard science can sway them from their emotional devotion to the lone-assassin scenario.
So when do they start overturning the 1,000's of cases that courts have permitted the Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE bullet tracing evidence to be admitted? That's Not happening. You guys are doing what you do best. Jabbering. Knott Lab uses SCIENCE.
So when do they start overturning the 1,000's of cases that courts have permitted the Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE bullet tracing evidence to be admitted? That's Not happening. You guys are doing what you do best. Jabbering. Knott Lab uses SCIENCE.A quick Google search for "Knott Lab Bullet Tracing" yields nothing other than their work for the JFK thing. So exactly how many other "bullet tracing" cases have they cracked, with science or without?
There are Knott Labs across the USA. Their Forensic SCIENCE bullet tracing EVIDENCE is routinely admitted into courts across this country. "Googling" is Not an "end all be all". They take you where They want you to go. Solely relying on Google is like believing something simply because it is on the Internet.In other words, you have no idea how much "bullet tracing" they've done.
So when do they start overturning the 1,000's of cases that courts have permitted the Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE bullet tracing evidence to be admitted? That's Not happening. You guys are doing what you do best. Jabbering. Knott Lab uses SCIENCE.
There are Knott Labs across the USA. Their Forensic SCIENCE bullet tracing EVIDENCE is routinely admitted into courts across this country.
Michael Griffith and other conspiracy fantasists (yes, there are sensible ones) rejected the Itek study, the Myers recreation of the shooting, the analysis of the Zapruder film, the backyard photos and the x-rays. All were dismissed as meaningless and worthless.
Now he's lecturing people on believing the "science"?
Mr. Griffith believes that Clay Shaw, David Ferrie and Oswald conspired to assassinate the president. They came up with the plan at a gathering while complete strangers (!?) listened to them. They then took that plan to the CIA who carried it out. Yes they did. The plan that was overheard by strangers. However he also believes in John Newman's work. Newman says the Pentagon, chiefly Lemnitzer and Lansdale, was behind the assassination but not the CIA. But Mr. Griffith said he believes the Garrison claim about the CIA. So which is it? The CIA or military? Does he know the difference? He also believes, as I mentioned above, that the Zapruder film was faked, the backyard photos faked, the x-rays faked and that all of this fakery and more has been covered up. He says that "disinformation agents" from the government, apparently the CIA but who knows?, are actively covering up what happened. Right now. On the internet. And in the media. Yes, he believes all of this. And more..
So how many people does he say did all of this? Faked all of this? Including those today, the disinformation agents? He says, "About twenty to thirty."
And one more: He says Sirhan Sirhan was "hypno-programmed" (whatever that is) to shoot RFK.
If the phrase "crackpot beliefs" comes to mind then welcome to the club.
He also believes, as I mentioned above, that the Zapruder film was faked,
In other words, you have no idea how much "bullet tracing" they've done.
The reaction shown in frames 224-225 may have started at an earlier point--possibly as early as frame 199 (where there appears to be some jerkiness in his [JFK's] movement) or, with a higher degree of possibility, at frames 204-205 (where his right elbow appears to be raised to an artificially high position). (WC memo, 4/22/64, p. 1)
The fact that JFK was hit before Z223 was established years ago. Most lone-gunman theorists now insist the alleged magic-bullet hit occurred at Z223-224. But Kennedy's reaction at Z225 proves he must have been hit no later than Z221, and that's if you ignore his Z199-207 and Z224 reactions. Dr. Robert Piziali, an expert on injuries, admitted under cross examination at the 1992 ABA mock Oswald trial that if Kennedy was reacting to a wound in Z225, this would mean the bullet could have struck him no later than Z221. He explained there would have been a delay of 4 frames between the bullet's impact and Kennedy's reaction to it with his right hand. Obviously, this poses a fatal problem for the Z223-224 SBT. Dr. Piziali attempted to solve this problem by denying that Z225 shows Kennedy reacting to a wound with his right hand! In fact, Dr. Piziali denied Kennedy is reacting to a wound at all, in any way, in Z225! This is a good example of how SBT defenders will perform amazing flip-flops when confronted with troublesome facts.
Until the Z223-224 version of the SBT came along, there was wide agreement on both sides that JFK is reacting to a wound in Z225:
* Itek concluded Kennedy "is clearly reacting to a wound by frame 225."
* The photographic evidence panel of the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded Kennedy is reacting to a wound in Z225; they also concluded that JFK was hit by Z190 and that his Z224-225 reaction was a continuation of the reaction that starts at Z200.
* Richard Trask, a respected researcher and longtime student of the Zapruder film, observes that Kennedy "emerges from the behind the sign at Z225 clearly having been shot."
* Dr. John Lattimer, an staunch WC apologist and a darling among lone-gunman theorists, concluded Kennedy shows a "reflex reaction" to a wound in Z225 and opined the wound occurred at about Z220. In fact, in his book Kennedy and Lincoln, Lattimer acknowledges that Kennedy's elbows are beginning to "fly upward in frame 224" (p. 241). This is a crucial admission, and Lattimer deserves credit for acknowledging the obvious fact that JFK is reacting to a wound in Z224, which means he was hit no later than Z220. This, in turn, proves that his dramatic Z226-232 reaction must have been caused by a different bullet than the one that hit him between Z190 and Z221.
* Ardent lone-gunman theorist Gerald Posner opines that at Z225 Kennedy "appears to be reacting to a bullet."
* In fact, we know from the 4/22/64 WC memorandum for the record that when a group of wound ballistics experts, the autopsy doctors, and Commission staffers reviewed the Zapruder film frame by frame, with the aid of enlargements, the consensus was that Kennedy "had been definitely hit by frames 224-225."
It should be noted that this group included Dr. F. W. Light, the deputy chief of the Biophysics Division at Edgewood Arsenal, and Dr. Alfred G. Olivier, the chief of the Wound Ballistics Branch of the Biophysics Division at Edgewood Arsenal. The group further noted that the Z224-225 reaction may have begun as early as Z199, and also at around Z204-205:
The fact that these experts recognized unusual movements by JFK starting at Z199 is significant. The HSCA PEP noticed the same unusual movements and concluded JFK was hit by Z190.
What do we see in Z225? JFK is clearly in distress. His face is contorted and his hands are in front of his chest, right hand above left. Both his forearms are bent inward and his hands are moving upward toward his throat or mouth. It is obvious from Kennedy's face and hands--especially his right hand--that he is reacting to a wound in Z225. This means the bullet could not have struck later than Z221. JFK could not have begun to visibly react in Z225 in a response to a bullet that hit him at Z223 or Z224. Humans simply cannot react that quickly with their limbs. Thus, if Connally was hit at Z223, he must have been hit by a different bullet than the one that hit JFK no later than Z221.
So you wanna Now embrace eyewitnesses? How about going with the #1 Eyewitness? The Victim. The guy that actually got shot. Gov Connally said Separate/Different Shots struck JFK and Him. Case Closed!
Can you explain why this group of self-proclaimed, distinguished experts is in direct conflict with a large group of eyewitnesses who tell a completely different story? You know the eyewitnesses.
Ultimately the whole post comes down to was JBC struck by the same bullet as JFK. The answer according to the other group of experts who stood along the street beside the car, rode in cars and motorcycles behind the car, and were occupants of the car is yes. They give a detailed account of the two shots and the reactions of the victims, JBC and JFK. Nobody in this group is guessing or estimating reaction times and all the other nonsense needed to be viewed as an expert opinion.
A partial list includes: DPD Chaney, DPD Hargis, SA Clint Hill, UPI Photographer Altgens, Zapruder, and 40+ other eyewitnesses who stated there were only two shots. The 20+ eyewitnesses who watch the car accelerate after the second shot before a third shot. The 20+ eyewitnesses who claim the second and third shot were so close it sounded like one.
The occupants of the car:
Jackie, Nellie both stated JBC cried out Oh No, No, No after the first shot and before the second.
JBC stated he cried out Oh No, No, No, after he was struck by the bullet.
SA Greer is a two shot witness
SA Kellerman stated the car accelerated after the second shot and before a third.
The Chism's state the first shot occurred before JFK reached their location. Z217-218.
Jean Newman stated the first shot occurred approximately 10 feet after the car had passed her location. Z200
These eyewitnesses should be given priority over experts estimating reaction times as if it was something etched in stone.
Huh??? You are way off. Nellie Connally said there were three shots. She said she and her husband heard the first, that her husband was hit by the second shot, and that the head shot came next. Kellerman said there were at least three shots. In any shooting with multiple shots, some witnesses won't notice one or two of the shots/will only hear one or two of the shots. This is common, especially when two of the shots are very close together, and many witnesses commented that two of the shots came virtually at the time.
You also have all the witnesses who reported seeing a bullet strike the pavement early in the shooting. Even Posner finds these witnesses convincing. So did the HSCA.
Anyway, you are missing the point that JFK's obvious shot reaction in Z225 refutes the Z223-224 SBT.
No. It is crystal clear what Nellie saw and heard. The exact same as Jackie. Mrs. CONNALLY. -----------------------------------As the first shot was hit, and I turned to look at the same time, I recall John saying, "Oh, no, no, Good for Posner and the HSCA. The first shot took place where the eyewitnesses stated it took place. Z210-214 Are you making any headway on explaining Knotts Lab missing shooter and bullet?
I'm sorry, but I just can't take your reply seriously. Mrs. Connally said there were three shots. So did Governor Connally.
Another problem with the lapel-flip SBT is that it cannot explain the sudden slamming down of Connally's right shoulder starting in Z238. The Z238-243 shoulder collapse fits perfectly with the bullet's impact at Z234-237. Connally himself identified Z234 as the moment of impact. Interestingly, the two surgeons who operated on Connally, Dr. Charles Gregory and Dr. Robert Shaw, after studying the shooting sequence frame by frame, concluded that Connally was hit between Z234 and Z237.
A fact that most WC apologists ignore is that there is a strong blur episode from Z156-159. The HSCA blur analysis shows that Z156-159 blur episode manifests in both blur measurements, i.e., percent of field of view and frame-to-frame departure from smooth panning. Several witnesses said the first shot was fired during or immediately after the limo's turn onto Elm Street. A 10-year-old girl named Rosemary Willis, running along the grass to the left of the limousine, begins to noticeably slow down between Z162 and Z174, and she is standing still by no later than Z187. When she was an adult, Ms. Willis explained that she stopped running because she heard a loud noise behind her. This shot was fired at right around Z150.
I mention the Z150 shot because it came no more than 40 frames before the Z186-190 shot, indicating this shot could not have been fired by the same gunman who fired Z186-190 shot. The Z190-200 blur episode clearly indicates the blur-causing shot was fired at right around Z186. But, even if we assume it was fired at Z190, this would have been only 2.1 seconds after the Z150 shot. Given that the blur starts at Z190, positing the shot at Z190 is unreasonable. We must allow at least 4 frames between shot and blur. A Z186 shot would be only 1.9 seconds after the Z150 shot.
What cannot be taken seriously is this make-believe storyline. This pseudo evidence is unbelievable. Another back door attempt to add another shooter to the assassination, for no other reason than you want the assassination to be a conspiracy. Not because it was one or this post makes any sense. You are just randomly guessing at the circumstances surrounding the assassination. You are referencing make believe shots that no one heard like they were real. If you cannot explain the wound in JBC’s back and how it got there, then give it up. The rest of this is just useless mumblings.
The eyewitnesses explain by their location exactly where the first shot took place. No guessing or interpretation is required. The eyewitnesses tell you the first shot hit them both. Why do you think they are lying about it. Is that what is required to believe there was a conspiracy? Everyone is lying about everything and only you can decipher the truth?
You want to quote the HSCA but completely ignore the testimony of Thomas Canning explaining there is no explanation for JBC’s wound other that a bullet passing through JFK. You don’t have to believe Mr. Canning; anyone can look at pictures of how JFK and JBC were oriented in the car and come up with the exact same conclusion. Do you think you are not intelligent enough to look at the photos, the same as Mr. Canning, and come up with the exact same conclusion? Maybe it is time to admit SBT is the answer or not and keep chasing your tail.
What cannot be taken seriously is this make-believe storyline. This pseudo evidence is unbelievable. Another back door attempt to add another shooter to the assassination, for no other reason than you want the assassination to be a conspiracy. Not because it was one or this post makes any sense. You are just randomly guessing at the circumstances surrounding the assassination. You are referencing make believe shots that no one heard like they were real. If you cannot explain the wound in JBC’s back and how it got there, then give it up. The rest of this is just useless mumblings.
The eyewitnesses explain by their location exactly where the first shot took place. No guessing or interpretation is required. The eyewitnesses tell you the first shot hit them both. Why do you think they are lying about it. Is that what is required to believe there was a conspiracy? Everyone is lying about everything and only you can decipher the truth?
You want to quote the HSCA but completely ignore the testimony of Thomas Canning explaining there is no explanation for JBC’s wound other that a bullet passing through JFK. You don’t have to believe Mr. Canning; anyone can look at pictures of how JFK and JBC were oriented in the car and come up with the exact same conclusion. Do you think you are not intelligent enough to look at the photos, the same as Mr. Canning, and come up with the exact same conclusion? Maybe it is time to admit SBT is the answer or not and keep chasing your tail.
[Max] Holland has the shooter now going from a standing up position to a sitting down position between shots #1 and #2.
IOW, your emotional attachment to the lone-gunman theory prevents you from being objective. You dismiss the HSCA's science-based and reenactment-confirmed blur analysis of the Zapruder film because it proves there were four shots at the absolute bare minimum. (The HSCA photographic experts admitted there were seven blur episodes that exceeded the threshold of 2 percent of the field of view and exceeded the threshold of 10 for frame-to-frame departure from smooth panning.)
You ignore the undeniable evidence of the Rosemary Willis reaction in the Zapruder film, which proves a shot was fired before Z162. She slowed down, stopped, and turned to look back because she heard a gunshot. Her slowdown starts no later than Z162, and by Z187 she has completely stopped and is looking back toward the TSBD and the Dal-Tex Building. The girl's reaction meshes perfectly with the blur episode that starts at Z156.
Canning's trajectory analysis was a joke. I am surprised to see anyone citing it after everything we now know about it, not to mention the fact that it was superseded by the far more sophisticated and far more data-driven 2023 Knott Laboratory trajectory analysis, which proved that JFK and Connally were not SBT aligned. I take it you don't know that Canning assumed that JFK was hit at or just before Z190. Anyway, Canning's analysis has been rendered irrelevant by the Knott Lab trajectory analysis. I suggest you read up on the Knott Lab analysis:
https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-lab-uses-forensic-science-to-refute-warren-commission-findings-on-jfk-assassination/
Getting back to Canning's trajectory analysis for a moment, Canning ignored the HSCA medical panel's finding about the magic bullet's trajectory. The HSCA's forensic experts determined from the back wound's abrasion collar that the bullet struck the back at a slightly upward angle. Canning simply ignored this. Also, Canning found that he could not get his vertical trajectory lines to match up if he used the location for the back wound determined by the HSCA's medical panel--because it was nearly 2 inches lower than the bogus location given by the autopsy doctors. Canning brushed aside this problem as a meaningless "experimental error." Canning had to resort to manipulation to make the horizontal trajectory work as well: He had to assume that Connally was positioned so far to the left that his right shoulder was practically in the middle of the jump seat. Frame 224 alone visibly refutes any attempt to move Connally that far to the left.
You're attempting to Avoid getting into the "timing" issue between shots. PLUS, your good buddy Holland has the shooter now going from a standing up position to a sitting down position between shots #1 and #2. This adds even more to this timing issue conundrum. Holland sold out the Lone Nutter's to get his cockamamie theory on "National Geographic".
Storing,
A sitting down position, or a kneeling down position?
If the latter, what do you mean by "now"?
The WC did Not have the sniper's nest shooter doing a Jack-in-the-box. This is why the WC focused on the position of the boxes inside the sniper's nest. The shooter's alleged up-n-down routine is a Holland "The Lost Bullet" twist. This is what I mean by "now" even though that "twist" does date back. The LN's have always failed to make the 6 Second elapsed firing time for 3 shots fired from a bolt action rifle work. Holland has almost doubled the elapsed firing time to roughly 11 seconds, with the Shooter firing Shot #1 almost straight down, and the shooter then stumbling over those boxes to get down into a sitting position to fire shots #2 and #3.
Storing,Z124 doesn't fit with what Jim Towner or Tina Towner recalled. Jim Towner estimated the first shot was 10 or 15 seconds after taking this photo:
The Warren Commission didn't realize that Oswald had taken 10.2 seconds to fire all three shots in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza, and that his first one had missed everything at hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming at Z-133.
There always must be a Rosemary Willis reference in any good once upon a time conspiracy story. The story’s plot is a young girl, who has supernatural dog ears hearing, now relates hearing a shot nobody else in Dealey Plaza hears. Bippity Boppety Boop and a conspiracy is born.
“it was superseded by the far more sophisticated and far more data-driven 2023 Knott Laboratory trajectory analysis, which proved that JFK and Connally were not SBT aligned.”
A shot at Z190 did not happen unless you think JFK continued to wave at Woodward and friends despite being shot through the throat. That JFK what a trooper.
The eyewitnesses state where the first shot took place. Pay attention to them.
Canning was spot on. Knotts Lab proved Canning was correct. The green line, lines up perfectly with the JBC back wound when Knotts Lab move JFK and JBC to where Canning thought they were sitting.
All this nonsense you post circling around the main issue of SBT does not change the central issue of your contention there was two separate shots wounding these men and not just one. Until you explain what happened to the bullet passing through JFK and where is the shooter for JBC’s wounds you appear to be flopping around looking for validity.
Z124 doesn't fit with what Jim Towner or Tina Towner recalled.
IOW, your emotional attachment to the lone-gunman theory prevents you from being objective. You dismiss the HSCA's science-based and reenactment-confirmed blur analysis of the Zapruder film because it proves there were four shots at the absolute bare minimum. (The HSCA photographic experts admitted there were seven blur episodes that exceeded the threshold of 2 percent of the field of view and exceeded the threshold of 10 for frame-to-frame departure from smooth panning.)MG:I take it you don't know that Canning assumed that JFK was hit at or just before Z190.
You ignore the undeniable evidence of the Rosemary Willis reaction in the Zapruder film, which proves a shot was fired before Z162. She slowed down, stopped, and turned to look back because she heard a gunshot. Her slowdown starts no later than Z162, and by Z187 she has completely stopped and is looking back toward the TSBD and the Dal-Tex Building. The girl's reaction meshes perfectly with the blur episode that starts at Z156.
Canning's trajectory analysis was a joke. I am surprised to see anyone citing it after everything we now know about it, not to mention the fact that it was superseded by the far more sophisticated and far more data-driven 2023 Knott Laboratory trajectory analysis, which proved that JFK and Connally were not SBT aligned. I take it you don't know that Canning assumed that JFK was hit at or just before Z190. Anyway, Canning's analysis has been rendered irrelevant by the Knott Lab trajectory analysis. I suggest you read up on the Knott Lab analysis:
https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-lab-uses-forensic-science-to-refute-warren-commission-findings-on-jfk-assassination/
Getting back to Canning's trajectory analysis for a moment, Canning ignored the HSCA medical panel's finding about the magic bullet's trajectory. The HSCA's forensic experts determined from the back wound's abrasion collar that the bullet struck the back at a slightly upward angle. Canning simply ignored this. Also, Canning found that he could not get his vertical trajectory lines to match up if he used the location for the back wound determined by the HSCA's medical panel--because it was nearly 2 inches lower than the bogus location given by the autopsy doctors. Canning brushed aside this problem as a meaningless "experimental error." Canning had to resort to manipulation to make the horizontal trajectory work as well: He had to assume that Connally was positioned so far to the left that his right shoulder was practically in the middle of the jump seat. Frame 224 alone visibly refutes any attempt to move Connally that far to the left.
Dan Rather described the Zapruder Film he saw the weekend after the assassination. Rather described seeing the JFK Limo turning onto Elm St. Sitzman said the same thing. She said from that Perch they could see the JFK Limo coming down Houston St and turning onto Elm St. This is Proof that the Current Zapruder Film has been altered.
"Bullet passing through JFK...." ? Are you talking about a bullet passing through JFK fired from the Front? Humes was unable to even put a finger into that BACK Wound further than his knuckle.
"Bullet passing through JFK...." ? Are you talking about a bullet passing through JFK fired from the Front? Humes was unable to even put a finger into that BACK Wound further than his knuckle.
Not sure where you are getting Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE tracking a, "....separate bullet striking JBC from out of nowhere". Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE found the SBT, "Is Impossible". Please try and stay Factual.
Just stick to the Facts. The SCIENCE.
Lend less credence to what people said and pay more attention to the conscious (i.e., not "startle") reactions of JFK, Jackie, JBC, Nellie Connally, Roy Kellerman, George Hickey, and Rosemary Willis to the sounds of the first, missing-everything shot at hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming at Z-133.Translation:...more credence to guessing about what they are reacting and ignoring the evidence (if, indeed, they are reacting to anything).
If SBT is impossible, then explain the two shots. Can't?There were three shots, and none missed. Easy to explain from the evidence:
There were three shots, and none missed. Easy to explain from the evidence:Three shots. Three hits. One shooter.
- The first shot just after z186 and just before z202 (Betzner and Willis, VP car occupants, VP security car occupants, actions of SA Ready and Rosemary Willis (head turn z202-206)). Also fits 1..........2.....3 shot pattern, which means JFK was necessarily hit by first shot.
- Second shot just before Greer makes his first turn to the rear (seen turning at z280-283) and just after Hickey turns around to see JFK at the time of the second shot (he is still turned rearward in Altgens' #6 at z255), and just before he starts sailing forward and falling back onto Nellie.
- Third shot z313.
There were three shots, and none missed. Easy to explain from the evidence:Three shots. Three hits. One shooter.
- The first shot just after z186 and just before z202 (Betzner and Willis, VP car occupants, VP security car occupants, actions of SA Ready and Rosemary Willis (head turn z202-206)). Also fits 1..........2.....3 shot pattern, which means JFK was necessarily hit by first shot.
- Second shot just before Greer makes his first turn to the rear (seen turning at z280-283) and just after Hickey turns around to see JFK at the time of the second shot (he is still turned rearward in Altgens' #6 at z255), and just before he starts sailing forward and falling back onto Nellie.
- Third shot z313.
It would be better if you would discuss these three shots three hits with Michael Griffith. He is all about this kind of thinking. You won’t have to prove anything to him. In fact, the weirder the better.At this point after all of these investigations, the release of the documents, the passage of time, it seems obvious (even more now than before) that most of these conspiracy activists have an agenda where they use the assassination to express their grievances with some element of the government. It's not really about the assassination; it's about the assassination as a symbol of something deeper and darker. It's been that way for awhile, probably from the very beginning, but it's more explicit (and desperate) now.
Personally, I think it is as messed up as it gets.
The Media's own Dan Rather described to this nation the Zapruder Film he watched the weekend following the assassination. Rather reported to this Nation that the Z Film he watched: (1) Showed the JFK Limo turning onto Elm St, (2) Showed Blood on Gov. Connally's shirt, and (3) Showed an Agent in the front seat of the JFK Limo with a Phone. NONE of this is on the Current Zapruder Film. This begs the question of how does a Lone Nut manage to kill a POTUS and then alter the Zapruder Film?
Storing,
The Zapruder film wasn't altered.
With his camera off, Zapruder patiently watched the lead cars and motorcycles pass by him. Then, when saw the group of three motorcycles turn onto Elm Street, he started filming, thinking that the limo would be right behind them. But it wasn't. So, he paused filming and didn't resume until he saw, with his very own eyes, the limo turn onto Elm Street and start coming straight towards him.
It would be better if you would discuss these three shots three hits with Michael Griffith. He is all about this kind of thinking. You won’t have to prove anything to him. In fact, the weirder the better.So all the Secret Service agents who have accepted 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter are weird and messed up? See Gerald Blaine's book : The Kennedy Detail and the discussion beginning about 33:15 of this video:
Personally, I think it is as messed up as it gets.
(1) Are you intentionally avoiding addressing the Dan Rather description of the Zapruder Film he watched? (2) What Zapruder Film have you watched? The Current Zapruder Film does Not show the Limo, "........coming Straight Towards him".
Even Humes did Not support the SBT. Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE finding that the SBT "Is Impossible" was the final nail in the SBT coffin. Oswald was involved in the JFK Assassination. He just was Not in the 6th Floor window.1.) Humes was never an expert in Firearms injuries. How would he know?
So all the Secret Service agents who have accepted 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter are weird and messed up? See Gerald Blaine's book : The Kennedy Detail and the discussion beginning about 33:15 of this video:
https://www.c-span.org/program/book-tv/the-kennedy-detail/239360 (https://www.c-span.org/program/book-tv/the-kennedy-detail/239360)
Also weird, according to you, were the Connallys and Dave Powers. The FBI agents who all were working on the 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter scenario until May 1964 even made a scale model of where the shots occurred based on evidence (weird as you may think):
(https://i.postimg.cc/rwzySSfg/6130052-low-res-600px.jpg)
The SBT is a theory that is not supported by those who were there, like the weird Connallys and Clint Hill. Weird Hill was adamant that JFK was hit by the first shot. Posner tries to argue with him in this video but to no avail. See this interview beginning at the 39 minute mark:
SA Hill is a two shot witness.I didn't say he heard three shots. I said he accepts that there were three shots and that the second shot occurred as he was running, which was after z255 because we see him in the Altgens 6 photo standing on the running board.
So was SA Greer and SA Kellerman. So was Jackie, Nellie, and JBC.Now you are just making stuff up. Greer said there were three shots and that he turned around immediately after the second and then again just before the third. Kellerman said there were three shots (2 H 78):
Weird is being to kind. This is just more of the same poorly researched, poorly thought-out nonsense that it always is.In my world it is weird to make up your own evidence and then accuse others of being weird because they rely on the actual evidence.
I didn't say he heard three shots. I said he accepts that there were three shots and that the second shot occurred as he was running, which was after z255 because we see him in the Altgens 6 photo standing on the running board.
Now you are just making stuff up. Greer said there were three shots and that he turned around immediately after the second and then again just before the third. Kellerman said there were three shots (2 H 78):
- Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say that I have, from the firecracker report
and the two other shots that I know, those were three shots. But, Mr. Specter,
if President Kennedy had from all reports four wounds, Governor Connally
three, there have got to be more than three shots, gentlemen.
The reason he described the shots as a flurry is apparent from the answer to a question by Gerald Ford (2 H 78-79):
- Mr. SPECTER. Will you repeat that, Mr. Kellerman?
Mr. KELLERMAN. President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and
shoulder and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports, had three. There
have got to be more than three shots.
Representative FORD. Is that why you have described-
Mr. KELLERMAN. The flurry.
Representative FORD. The noise as a flurry?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right, sir.
JBC heard two and felt another one. 2+1=3. Nellie heard 3. Jackie wasn't clear about anything.
In my world it is weird to make up your own evidence and then accuse others of being weird because they rely on the actual evidence.
With respect to the Humes opinion on the SBT, do the research. Then we can discuss.Been doing the research for 35+ years. Enough to know that Humes had no real expertise in GSWs to base an informed opinion on.
Mr 35+ Yrs - Not based on GSR
Mr 35+ Yrs - Not based on GSWAre you even trying to make sense any more?
At this point after all of these investigations, the release of the documents, the passage of time, it seems obvious (even more now than before) that most of these conspiracy activists have an agenda where they use the assassination to express their grievances with some element of the government. It's not really about the assassination; it's about the assassination as a symbol of something deeper and darker. It's been that way for awhile, probably from the very beginning, but it's more explicit (and desperate) now.
On the conspiracy Left, it's the CIA and the Cold War policies, policies they think were illegitimate and immoral (some were but not all). Good lord, it never ends with them. And they see Oswald, as a fellow leftist, as a victim of this McCarthyite hysteria.
On the Right, it's the "Deep State" that tried to get Trump but got JFK. They really don't go after the Cold War policies since they are anti-communists and think they were largely justified. Why the MAGA conspiracy Right thinks they went after JFK is a puzzle to me. JFK as Trump? Trump as JFK? Really?
Where Michael Griffith fits in to this is a mystery. He seems to be a conspiracy hobbyist that is just doing this for...well I don't know. He has nearly everything faked but insists it was 20 to 30 people. He has disinformation agents right now manipulating opinion. And the news media being used to promote the lone assassin theory. It's all Oliver Stone/Jim Garrison type thinking but he's not a leftist. So again, I'm lost as to where he is coming from.
You need to stay away from subjects you are unfamiliar with. You're just flailing.Oh, but I'm very, very, very familiar with this subject. You, on the other hand, haven't been able rebut the point I made about Humes' lack of training or experience with GSWs. That's why you're forced to reply with nothing but empty BS.
Oh, but I'm very, very, very familiar with this subject. You, on the other hand, haven't been able rebut the point I made about Humes' lack of training or experience with GSWs. That's why you're forced to reply with nothing but empty BS.
The subject here centered on Humes. But, you prefer to pound your chest and go on about 35+ years, blah, blah, blah. 35+ years or not, nobody knows everything. Do some research in this area and get back to me. I don't wanna be mean, but you currently are coming up short in this area. Again, nobody knows everything.
The subject here centered on Humes. But, you prefer to pound your chest and go on about 35+ years, blah, blah, blah. 35+ years or not, nobody knows everything. Do some research in this area and get back to me. I don't wanna be mean, but you currently are coming up short in this area. Again, nobody knows everything.No. I pointed out that Humes lacked the training or expertise to be considered an authority on gunshot wounds. Your response was pure faux condescension: "With respect to the Humes opinion on the SBT, do the research. Then we can discuss." In reality, I've done a great deal of research over the SBT, Humes included, over a few decades...and said so. The 35+ years thing is simply a statement of fact.
No. I pointed out that Humes lacked the training or expertise to be considered an authority on gunshot wounds. Your response was pure faux condescension: "With respect to the Humes opinion on the SBT, do the research. Then we can discuss." In reality, I've done a great deal of research over the SBT, Humes included, over a few decades...and said so. The 35+ years thing is simply a statement of fact.
At the same time, you haven't presented a single sliver of anything to add to the conversation, about Humes or otherwise.
Again, Humes opinion on the SBT had nothing to do with "gunshot wounds". Just ask me and I'll help you out. Nobody knows it All.Humes' (or anyone else's) opinion on the SBT would necessarily involve knowledge of gunshot wounds and the way that bullets interact with the human body.
Humes' (or anyone else's) opinion on the SBT would necessarily involve knowledge of gunshot wounds and the way that bullets interact with the human body.
Oh, so now you wanta reverse course and get into how bullets interact with the human body? Just ask for information/help. Nobody knows everything.I haven't reversed anything. My position is the same now as it was in my first reply, and every reply in between.
I'm not gonna get into a food fight regarding your "vomit" smear. Instead, I suggest you look into the recently discovered TSBD Huge Gates escape route. Have a good day.That would be par for the course. So far, you haven't accomplished anything other than repeatedly unload hot air. And now you try to change the subject about something that's actually been known since 1964.
1964 is when the WR was released. Please tell me whatever you know about the Huge Gates. Thanks
1964 is when the WR was released. Please tell me whatever you know about the Huge Gates. ThanksI assume you mean what are commonly called the "red gates" between the TSBD proper and the annex?
I make a legit JFK Assassination inquiry and you fail at funny.
No. Hill was standing on the running board at Z306. Clearly stated there were only two shots.Show us where he said there were only two shots. He always said he heard only two shots. He has said many times that he accepts that there were three shots. He has always maintained that JFK reacted to the first shot by hunching forward and to the left.
[Clint Hill] has always maintained that JFK reacted to the first shot by hunching forward and to the left.
You're merely repeating what I have previously posted regarding the Huge Gates.There was a discussion a few years ago about the red gates being open about the red gates being open, between Dan O', Martin, and I. It was part of a longer threat regarding when the TSBD was firmly sealed off. I think you missed it.
There was a discussion a few years ago about the red gates being open between Dan O', Martin, and myself. It was part of a longer thread regarding when the TSBD was firmly sealed off. I think you missed it.
Show us where he said there were only two shots. He always said he heard only two shots. He has said many times that he accepts that there were three shots. He has always maintained that JFK reacted to the first shot by hunching forward and to the left.SSA Hill had jumped offa the running board & was hitting the tarmac when SSA Hickey accidentally fired his first shot of his 4 shot auto burst of his AR15 (this first shot probly wounded Tague).
Re: standing on running board at z306. We do not have a visual record of when Hill stepped off the running board. We know it was after Altgens 6 at z254-255. It is difficult to estimate how long it took for him to get along-side the front of the QM when we first see him in the Nix film. He does not reach the rear hand-hold until z338 which is 4.5 seconds after Altgens 6.
I expect that when he stepped off the running board and hit the road, he was not immediately running at the car speed and probably went back a few feet before running faster than the car. If he left the car at z265 that would give him 4 seconds to make it to the back of the limo at z338.
If he leaped off at z307 that would give him 1.69 seconds to get up to speed and dash the 14 feet from the running board to grab the handhold:
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmLhP8wz/Distance-from-Hill-to-Limo.jpg)
That is not much time. He would need to average 20 feet/second or 14 mph from the time he jumped off the running board until reaching the hand-hold (assuming the limo was moving at 12 feet/sec or 8 mph).
I would suggest that 4 seconds is probably closer to the actual running time.
So where did the 3 shots from the sniper's nest end up?
So where did the 3 shots from the sniper's nest end up?Oswald's first shot at pseudo Z105-110 ricocheted offa the signal arm & the brass (copper?) jacket separated from the lead slug, the jacket breaking into two pieces, the remnant slug making a hole in the limo floor, & some of the lead splatter hit jfk on the back of his head.
Oswald's first shot at pseudo Z105-110 ricocheted offa the signal arm & the brass (copper?) jacket separated from the lead slug, the jacket breaking into two pieces, the remnant slug making a hole in the limo floor, & some of the lead splatter hit jfk on the back of his head.
Oswald's second shot was at Z218, the magic bullet.
Oswald did not fire his one last remaining bullet, & he watched Hickey shoot at least four shots at about Z300-Z312, the last shot hitting jfk in the head at Z313.
You account for 2 shots being fired from the sniper's nest. So how do we end up with 3 hulls on the floor of the sniper's nest?
You account for 2 shots being fired from the sniper's nest. So how do we end up with 3 hulls on the floor of the sniper's nest?I believe that it is good praktice to keep a fired hull in the chamber during the off season.
I believe that it is good practice to keep a fired hull in the chamber during the off season.
Didn't most witnesses say they heard three shots?A flurry of say four auto AR15 shots at say 400 rpm would take 0.46 seconds which would be difficult to hear properly what with the echoes off fence & concrete.
A flurry of say four auto AR15 shots at say 400 rpm would take 0.46 seconds which would be difficult to hear properly what with the echoes off fence & concrete.
So, there were at least 6 shots spanning say 11 seconds, plus echoes.
I believe that it is good praktice to keep a fired hull in the chamber during the off season.
Show us where he said there were only two shots. He always said he heard only two shots. He has said many times that he accepts that there were three shots. He has always maintained that JFK reacted to the first shot by hunching forward and to the left.
Re: standing on running board at z306. We do not have a visual record of when Hill stepped off the running board. We know it was after Altgens 6 at z254-255. It is difficult to estimate how long it took for him to get along-side the front of the QM when we first see him in the Nix film. He does not reach the rear hand-hold until z338 which is 4.5 seconds after Altgens 6.
I expect that when he stepped off the running board and hit the road, he was not immediately running at the car speed and probably went back a few feet before running faster than the car. If he left the car at z265 that would give him 4 seconds to make it to the back of the limo at z338.
If he leaped off at z307 that would give him 1.69 seconds to get up to speed and dash the 14 feet from the running board to grab the handhold:
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmLhP8wz/Distance-from-Hill-to-Limo.jpg)
That is not much time. He would need to average 20 feet/second or 14 mph from the time he jumped off the running board until reaching the hand-hold (assuming the limo was moving at 12 feet/sec or 8 mph).
I would suggest that 4 seconds is probably closer to the actual running time.
Exactly what qualifies as the "off season" for an assassin? You're talking like this rifle was also used to shoot wildlife. Really?i say that in jest. I uzually say that it involves shooting a president out of season without a permit.
You're wrong.I am 100% confident that 100% of what i have ever posted on the jfkassassinationforum & on the education forum is 100% correct.
Clint Hill stated there were only two shots.Of course. I never said otherwise. I said he accepts that there were three shots. You think that's weird. I don't.
You actually believe in the 1/3 of a second between Hill jumping off of the running board and the headshot, that there was another shot he did not hear? Really?I am saying that the evidence puts the second shot at a point after Altgens' #6 photo at z255 and before JBC begins falling back which starts about z278. It was enough after z255 so that the interval between the second and third shots was noticeably shorter than the interval between the first and second. The first struck JFK in the back and exited his throat. I say that the evidence puts it between z190 and z200 not at z223.
Clint Hill jumps off the running board at Z307 and grabs a hold of the handholds on the back of the limousine at Z337.You see him jumping off?
The speed of the camera is 18.3 frames/second. That is 30 frames. 1 Frame is approximately 1 foot of car travel. It took Clint Hill 1.65 seconds to reach the handholds. He ran at a speed of 30 feet per 1.6 seconds or 18.75 feet per second.I don't quite understand how you get 30 feet but it is not far off. The separation Hill-handhold is 14 feet. In 1.65 seconds at 8 mph (11.7 fps) the car moves 19 feet. So in 1.65 seconds he has to cover 19+14 feet. So his average speed is 33 ft/1.65 sec. = 20 fps= 13.6 mph. That has to be his average speed from the time he jumps off until he reaches the car.
18,75 feet/second is equal to 12.8 mph.
12.8mph is very doable even by your standards. Average sprinting speed of a male is 14.5 mph or 21 feet/sec.The 10 m split time for Usain Bolt in his 2009 world record 100 m of 9.58 sec. was 1.85 sec. 10 m is 32 feet. So you think Clint Hill, wearing a suit and street shoes could beat Usain Bolt at his prime? You seem to be saying he did.
SA Kinney, driving the SS car, states SA Clint Hill never left the SS car until the headshot. But do not let that fact get in the way of this weird theory.You are reading things into Kinney's statement. Your interpretation of what Kinney meant does not fit with his interviews with Gerald Blaine. In his book "The Kennedy Detail", chapter 12 - Six Seconds in Dallas, author Gerald Blaine says this:
SA Kinney also had the second shot as the headshot. The same as Hickey. Hair flying: Kinney and Hickey were roommates and both reference the hair flying.Except that Hickey said the flying hair on the right side of JFK's head was on the second shot and it appeared not to have hit JFK. He saw the third shot hit JFK in the head. See: Hickey, 18 H 762 (statement 30Nov63).
Of course. I never said otherwise. I said he accepts that there were three shots. You think that's weird. I don't.I am saying that the evidence puts the second shot at a point after Altgens' #6 photo at z255 and before JBC begins falling back which starts about z278. It was enough after z255 so that the interval between the second and third shots was noticeably shorter than the interval between the first and second. The first struck JFK in the back and exited his throat. I say that the evidence puts it between z190 and z200 not at z223. You see him jumping off? I don't quite understand how you get 30 feet but it is not far off. The separation Hill-handhold is 14 feet. In 1.65 seconds at 8 mph (11.7 fps) the car moves 19 feet. So in 1.65 seconds he has to cover 19+14 feet. So his average speed is 33 ft/1.65 sec. = 20 fps= 13.6 mph. That has to be his average speed from the time he jumps off until he reaches the car.Hmmmmm -- i reckoned that Kinney touched his brakes which made SSA Hickey fall forward -- but now it appears that i can add that Kinney allso veered to the right --- & the sudden veer would not have helped Hickey's balance -- Hmmmmm.
Have you ever tried jumping off a car moving at 8 mph and trying to out-run it? I haven't but if you have please relate to us how long it took for you to get up to a speed of running faster than the car.
The 10 m split time for Usain Bolt in his 2009 world record 100 m of 9.58 sec. was 1.85 sec. 10 m is 32 feet. So you think Clint Hill, wearing a suit and street shoes could beat Usain Bolt at his prime? You seem to be saying he did.
You are reading things into Kinney's statement. Your interpretation of what Kinney meant does not fit with his interviews with Gerald Blaine. In his book "The Kennedy Detail", chapter 12 - Six Seconds in Dallas, author Gerald Blaine says this:Except that Hickey said the flying hair on the right side of JFK's head was on the second shot and it appeared not to have hit JFK. He saw the third shot hit JFK in the head. See: Hickey, 18 H 762 (statement 30Nov63).
- "Follow-up car driver Sam Kinney’s responsibility was to maintain his focus
on the president’s car. He saw Kennedy’s reaction to the first shot and then saw
Clint leap onto the pavement a split second later. He immediately turned the
follow-up car slightly to the right to clear a path for Clint to reach the president
and first lady. His eyes were still focused on President Kennedy when he heard
the second shot and saw Governor Connally slump toward his wife".What is interesting to note, though, about Hickey is that JFK's hair actually does fly up and back down just as he described - at z273-278:
- At the moment he was almost sitting erect I heard two reports which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound than the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them. It looked to me as if the President was struck in the right upper rear of his head. 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. The last shot seemed to hit his head and cause a noise at the point of impact which made him fall forward and to his left again.
(https://i.postimg.cc/yxcWyDBs/JFK-hair-flip.gif)
which is immediately before JBC starts sailing forward and falling back onto Nellie...
Both Connally and his wife said he wasn’t hit by the shot that hit JFKThe worst witnesses were Jackie & then Mrs Connolly & then all of the SSA's & then all of the cops.
I think there is another moment a couple of seconds later. Connally turns to look back and then reacts.
First bullet hits JFK.
Second shot hits Connally
Third shot hits JFK.
Connally was fairly well placed to know 😀Mr Connolly made sense early on -- then he changed his tune.
Both Connally and his wife said he wasn’t hit by the shot that hit JFK
I think there is another moment a couple of seconds later. Connally turns to look back and then reacts.
First bullet hits JFK.
Second shot hits Connally
Third shot hits JFK.
Once again, they want people to disregard eyewitness testimony. This time, the testimony of the only living victim/Gov Connally of the shooting at the time. Ridiculous and endlessly ridiculous as it is applied to JFK Assassination eyewitness after eyewitness. This is indicative of how weak the LN position was and continues to be. Can you imagine the Prosecution in a court of law continually telling the jury to ignore a conga line of eyewitnesses to a crime because, "eyewitnesses have faulty memories". That's "My Cousin Vinny" material.
Mr Connolly made sense early on -- then he changed his tune.
Nope.
CE-399 hit both of them around Z-222.
It’s not possible to know exactly when JFK IS STRUCK.You don't see Connally reacting here at 224-225-226? His right shoulder (on our left) is pushed downwards.
JFK is out of view at frame 222.
He could have been hit anywhere from approximately 200-225
Connally seems to me to react @240-242 when his hands are up near his chest.
There could be more than 2 seconds between the shots?
It’s very difficult even with the Zapruder film to be certain.
But I don’t see a single bullet hitting both men.
I think Connally was correct.
When the heck are you going to change his name to the correct spelling?I have been eating/drinking strictly carnivore since Nov 2023.
Are you obsessing on Sicilian pastries or something?
You don't see Connally reacting here at 224-225-226? His right shoulder (on our left) is pushed downwards.
And he is clearly reacting around 228-230.
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12526665532/Keyh89xt2oa6389/Zapruder-Film-In-Motion-Clip.gif)
It’s not possible to know exactly when JFK IS STRUCK.
JFK is out of view at frame 222.
He could have been hit anywhere from approximately 200-225
Connally seems to me to react @240-242 when his hands are up near his chest.
There could be more than 2 seconds between the shots?
It’s very difficult even with the Zapruder film to be certain.
But I don’t see a single bullet hitting both men.
I think Connally was correct.
It’s not possible to know exactly when JFK IS STRUCK.Matilda. Please do yourself a favor & read (all of) my (old) postings.
JFK is out of view at frame 222.
He could have been hit anywhere from approximately 200-225
Connally seems to me to react @240-242 when his hands are up near his chest.
There could be more than 2 seconds between the shots?
It’s very difficult even with the Zapruder film to be certain.
But I don’t see a single bullet hitting both men.
I think Connally was correct.
Matilda. Please do yourself a favor & read (all of) my (old) postings.
I know exactly what happened when, in Dealey Plaza.
Dont waste your time with the conspiracy theories on this forum.
If u karnt see how the SBT is ok then u must have a kind of mental disorder (i daresay that u are very religious?).
SA Hickey firing the AR15 would be a, "....conspiracy theory on this forum". That's your baby.Yes there was a conspiracy (after) to hide the truth that it was an accidental negligent homicide (as well as an attempted assassination by Oswald).
Frank. Please do yourself a favor & read (all of) my (old) postings.
I know exactly what happened when, in Dealey Plaza.
Dont waste your time with the conspiracy theories on this forum.
If u karnt see how the SBT is ok then u must have a kind of mental disorder.
Yes there was a conspiracy (after) to hide the truth that it was an accidental negligent homicide (as well as an attempted assassination by Oswald).
The proper name here is a cover up rather than conspiracy.
There were 3 books saying so (that Hickey killed jfk).
I have 2 ovem (Donahue)(McLaren).
I dont know what the 3rd book says (it costs about $250)(too rich for me).
So where did the 3 shots from the sniper's nest end up?According to those who were there, JFK reacted to his throat wound on the first shot. According to these people, the first shot occurred:
And what about Wiegman claiming he felt the "compression" of a bullet on his face, just prior to his jumping out of Camera Car #1 at the corner of Houston/Elm? The JFK Limo at that same point in time was still on Elm St. How does Wiegman feel the compression of a bullet fired downward from the TSBD 6th Floor, when he is inside the 6th car behind the JFK Limo? He doesn't. The Bullet Compression that Wiegman felt was fired at close to ground level. A 2nd Shooter.
According to those who were there, JFK reacted to his throat wound on the first shot. According to these people, the first shot occurred:
So the first shot passed through JFK. We don't know what it hit for sure but the Connallys said it did not hit JBC in the back.
The third shot was the head shot at z313.
The second shot occurred after the midpoint between shots 1 and 3 and before JBC falls back onto Nellie. I put it at z271-272 for various reasons based on evidence. This bullet struck JBC in the right armpit and caused him to fall back onto his wife.
That’s pretty much what I think. Although the precise timing of the first and second shots are debatable.
(I do wonder whether Connally hasn’t turned around too much by 270 to be hit in the back).
Connally was hit in the back between Z-222 and Z-224.
Dear Royell "Whaddabout Dis and Waddabout Dat?" Storing,
What about Secret Service Agent George Hickey's leaning over to look at the pavement starting around frame 150 in the Zapruder film?
-- Tom
PS I could go on and on.
In 225 he appears to be smiling.
There's a difference between Wiegman claiming a bullet whizzed by his face at close to ground level, and someone possibly, "leaning over to look at the pavement". Wiegman also said when he ran Up the knoll he saw SA Lem Johns up there. SA Johns claimed that he jumped out of the LBJ SS Car and ran down Elm St toward the JFK Limo when the Kill Shot was fired. SA Johns said he was then stranded on Elm St and never left the street. There are No Images of SA Lem Johns physically being on Elm St at any point in time. Also, NO eyewitnesses saw SA Johns running down Elm St or on Elm St that day. For Wiegman to see Johns UP on the knoll, would put Johns within a stones throw of the "bushes" and the Huge Gates. Think about it.
Storing,
What do you mean "possibly"?
What do you think Hickey's doing in Z-150?
Leaning over to vomit because he had too much to drink earlier that morning at The Cellar?
I do Not know what Hickey might be doing. I am curious why SA Hickey is sitting so much higher than everyone else inside the Queen Mary. He has to be sitting on top of something. Maybe something connected to that AR15 on the floorboard?
That’s pretty much what I think. Although the precise timing of the first and second shots are debatable.
(I do wonder whether Connally hasn’t turned around too much by 270 to be hit in the back).
If SA Hickey fired the AR15, then the Agents around him knew it. That's a "conspiracy". The Fake News Media has redefined "conspiracy". You have fallen for their re-branding scheme. It's what they do.A plot (conspiracy) is not the same as a cover up.
A plot (conspiracy) is not the same as a cover up.
The Hickey shots were not intentional (intentional would be conspiracy).
Acting in concert is a Conspiracy. Your "not intentional" vs "intentional" has nothing to do with determining a possible Conspiracy.If a senior SSAgent destroys a doc to hide Hickey's negligent homicide then that is illegal but aint necessarily a conspiracy.
[...]
Why did Hickey lean over and start looking at the pavement around Z-150?Koz of Oswald's shot at pseudo Z105-110.
I do Not know what Hickey might be doing. I am curious why SA Hickey is sitting so much higher than everyone else inside the Queen Mary. He has to be sitting on top of something. Maybe something connected to that AR15 on the floorboard?Hickey was always partially sitting/standing. Here is his position on Houston:
Of course. I never said otherwise. I said he accepts that there were three shots. You think that's weird. I don't.I am saying that the evidence puts the second shot at a point after Altgens' #6 photo at z255 and before JBC begins falling back which starts about z278. It was enough after z255 so that the interval between the second and third shots was noticeably shorter than the interval between the first and second. The first struck JFK in the back and exited his throat. I say that the evidence puts it between z190 and z200 not at z223. You see him jumping off? I don't quite understand how you get 30 feet but it is not far off. The separation Hill-handhold is 14 feet. In 1.65 seconds at 8 mph (11.7 fps) the car moves 19 feet. So in 1.65 seconds he has to cover 19+14 feet. So his average speed is 33 ft/1.65 sec. = 20 fps= 13.6 mph. That has to be his average speed from the time he jumps off until he reaches the car.
Have you ever tried jumping off a car moving at 8 mph and trying to out-run it? I haven't but if you have please relate to us how long it took for you to get up to a speed of running faster than the car.
The 10 m split time for Usain Bolt in his 2009 world record 100 m of 9.58 sec. was 1.85 sec. 10 m is 32 feet. So you think Clint Hill, wearing a suit and street shoes could beat Usain Bolt at his prime? You seem to be saying he did.
You are reading things into Kinney's statement. Your interpretation of what Kinney meant does not fit with his interviews with Gerald Blaine. In his book "The Kennedy Detail", chapter 12 - Six Seconds in Dallas, author Gerald Blaine says this:Except that Hickey said the flying hair on the right side of JFK's head was on the second shot and it appeared not to have hit JFK. He saw the third shot hit JFK in the head. See: Hickey, 18 H 762 (statement 30Nov63).
- "Follow-up car driver Sam Kinney’s responsibility was to maintain his focus
on the president’s car. He saw Kennedy’s reaction to the first shot and then saw
Clint leap onto the pavement a split second later. He immediately turned the
follow-up car slightly to the right to clear a path for Clint to reach the president
and first lady. His eyes were still focused on President Kennedy when he heard
the second shot and saw Governor Connally slump toward his wife".What is interesting to note, though, about Hickey is that JFK's hair actually does fly up and back down just as he described - at z273-278:
- At the moment he was almost sitting erect I heard two reports which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound than the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them. It looked to me as if the President was struck in the right upper rear of his head. 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. The last shot seemed to hit his head and cause a noise at the point of impact which made him fall forward and to his left again.
(https://i.postimg.cc/yxcWyDBs/JFK-hair-flip.gif)
which is immediately before JBC starts sailing forward and falling back onto Nellie...
You see him jumping off?In order to see him jump off, you need a frame while he is on the running board. Neither Muchmore or Nix films show that. Muchmore just shows Hill along side the front of the QM.
Yes, not only can you see Hill jump off the car in the Muchmore film. SA Hill jumps off close to the headshot and the car is seen noticeably slowing down, while the motorcycles reactions were slower to the Limo slowing down. SA Hill makes it to the Limo in 5 steps. SA Kinney stated Hill jumped off the running board after the headshot.
SA KinneyThat is consistent with what Hickey said happened on the second shot - that the hair on the right side of the President's head flew up but did not appear to hit him. It was the third and last shot that struck his head.
"At this time the second shot was fired and I observed hair flying from the right side of his head."
What is really weird is refusing to acknowledge the fact SA Landis’s statement is the exact same as SA Hill’s with only two shots having been fired. SA Landis was standing on the running board inches behind SA Hill and never left the car.Landis was on the right side behind Jack Ready. SA William McIntyre was behind Hill. McIntyre heard three shots.
As has been pointed out to you numerous times, the eyewitnesses do not agree with you. Simply put, this is just a bunch of forced fit nonsense because you refuse to accept how messed up this really is.Not sure what you mean. Everyone who reported hearing 3 shots disagrees with you.
The 10 m split time for Usain Bolt in his 2009 world record 100 m of 9.58 sec. was 1.85 sec. 10 m is 32 feet. So you think Clint Hill, wearing a suit and street shoes could beat Usain Bolt at his prime? You seem to be saying he didSplit times every 10 m are determined by analysis of the race film such as this analysis (https://speedendurance.com/2009/08/19/usain-bolt-10-meter-splits-fastest-top-speed-2008-vs-2009/).
Usain Bolt’s speed at the finish line was 27.3 mph or 40 ft/sec. Your point is he went from 0 mph to 27.3mph? At no point in time is it known what speed he is at and when.
What is interesting is after all these years of having Hickey’s statement read to you. You still refuse to accept what he stated. I would assume it is only because it completely refutes this Z255 shot you are always promoting.I have never suggested the second shot was as early as z255. z255 is only 2 frames after the midpoint between z193 and z313. The second shot was well after the midpoint. I put it at z271-2.
“Practically no time element between them” and you think that means what? Try not to embarrass yourself with your explanation for this like you have with your explanation for the hair flying.“Practically no time element between them” means "almost but not quite.
If you believe there were 2 or 3 shooters using different weapons, who is to say these alleged "echoes" were actually the sound of other weapon(s) being fired from a close by position inside Dealey Plaza? "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" had an informant on that presentation claiming 3 shooters. 1 shooter in front of the JFK Limo and 2 behind it. 1 of the 2 shooters behind the Limo being "ALMOST on the horizontal". So, maybe you have a shooter on the TSBD 6th Floor and another shooter close by, "ALMOST on the horizontal"? These 2 shooters/2 shots being fired by different weapons at almost the same time could be mistaken as an "echo". Just because people believe they are hearing an echo, does Not make this a Fact. How many ear witnesses initially thought the 1st shot or even the 2nd shot were firecrackers? And this includes law enforcement also making this "fire cracker" mistake.
There is ZERO Evidence of a shot being fired almost downward through a 1/4 open window. And then we have the repositioning of the JFK Limo on Elm St. And then comes the SBT. ALL Hokum.
Storing,There is as much evidence for multiple shooters as there is for a missed, or any, shot at z124.
Why in the world would any rational person believe there were two or three shooters?
If you do, then how many bad guys do you figure were involved in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, the getting-away, and the all-important cover up?
Oodles and gobs?
If you do, then it means that for some reason you WANT to believe it was a conspiracy.
The unusual deformation of Carcano-marked-up CE-399, in conjunction with the wounds that JFK and JBC suffered at some point between Z-222 and Z-224, in-and-of-itself virtually proves that the former Marine sharpshooter known as Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK all by him widdle Marxist self.
The reason the first (missing everything) shot sounded different was because it was at hypothetical "Z-124." ("Hypothetical" meaning it wasn't caught on-film. The reason it wasn't caught on film was because it occurred half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming at Z-133 after about a 17-second pause.) It was a steeply-downward-angled shot which required Oswald's standing and awkwardly leaning forward while taking it. The muzzle of his short rifle was, therefore, inside the building when he fired it, ergo, it created a different sound than his next two, fired-while-kneeling-down, muzzle-outside-the-building shots.
If a bullet tore through Connally in Z223-224, what, pray tell, slammed his right shoulder downward in Z238-245?
Why does Connally's right shoulder drop between frames 224 and 225?If one just goes by the zfilm, you could conclude that JBC was hit in the back at the same time that JFK received his neck wound. (Ok, you would have to fudge the trajectory a bit because JFK's hands appear to be in front of his neck exit wound. Also a right to left path through JFK does not easily fit a strike on JBC's right side - but let's just leave that issue aside).
Why does his hat start moving between frames 224 and 225?
Why does his tie flap out between frames 224 and 225?
Why does he quickly rotate his head to his left between frames 224 and 225?
Why are JFK's and JBC's mouths open in Z-225? Are they simultaneously saying, "Boy, that sure sounded like a cherry bomb to me!"?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6ae0yfUIYv4qoif2IWD_cFHIYy_QHA6JTuelYWPSQqpRcJvruU71MRKkkBeQBIwZRAjhkXrlkDfx_0EsZ5sXAq0vYhbUCb3f9X7vW3Dw4nmpV9kk35sp6qFNkMq_JhH0rkqkdwpA-2p4T/s1600/110a.+Z224-Z225+Toggling+Clip.gif
If one just goes by the zfilm, you could conclude that JBC was hit in the back at the same time that JFK received his neck wound. (Ok, you would have to fudge the trajectory a bit because JFK's hands appear to be in front of his neck exit wound. Also a right to left path through JFK does not easily fit a strike on JBC's right side - but let's just leave that issue aside).
But if one looks at the rest of the evidence, one can see that there is not only a reasonable explanation for what JBC is doing but also several bodies of consistent, independent pieces of evidence that are inconsistent with JBC being hit in the back there and that there had been only one shot to that point.
So you cannot answer that question unless you look at all the evidence. When you do, you discover a huge amount of evidence that does not fit the SBT. But, not surprisingly, it still fits all three shots being fired by a single shooter.
If one just goes by the zfilm, you could conclude that JBC was hit in the back at the same time that JFK received his neck wound. (Ok, you would have to fudge the trajectory a bit because JFK's hands appear to be in front of his neck exit wound. Also a right to left path through JFK does not easily fit a strike on JBC's right side - but let's just leave that issue aside).
But if one looks at the rest of the evidence, one can see that there is not only a reasonable explanation for what JBC is doing but also several bodies of consistent, independent pieces of evidence that are inconsistent with JBC being hit in the back there and that there had been only one shot to that point.
So you cannot answer that question unless you look at all the evidence. When you do, you discover a huge amount of evidence that does not fit the SBT. But, not surprisingly, it still fits all three shots being fired by a single shooter.
I ask again,
If the lapel flip is not an optical illusion created by reflected light, since when can a lapel move up and then back down in just 56 milliseconds? A piece of clothing cannot move up and down that rapidly on this planet.
If a bullet tore through Connally in Z223-224, what, pray tell, slammed his right shoulder downward in Z238-245?
If a bullet tore through Connally in Z223-224, why did Connally himself, the man who actually experienced the event, insist he was not hit before Z229 after carefully studying a high-quality print of the Zapruder film under high magnification? Why did both of Connally's surgeons agree with Connally on this point?
If a bullet tore through JFK in Z223-224, what, pray tell, caused him to start to bring his left hand up toward his throat in Z224, keeping in mind that even a reflex reaction would take at least 4 frames, and why is Jackie already staring at JFK in Z221?
Doesn't Jackie's reaction in Z221 clearly prove that JFK had already begun to visibly react to a wound before that frame?
Isn't it obvious that JFK's Z224 reaction is a continuation of the reaction that he starts at around Z200, when his right hand freezes in mid-wave and he suddenly starts to turn his head to the left?
You see, one huge problem for WC apologists is that you are chained down by the single-bullet theory and the three-shot scenario. To anyone with two functioning eyes, it is obvious that JFK and Connally were hit by separate bullets, as the Knott Laboratory SBT trajectory analysis confirmed. It is equally obvious that JFK began to react to a wound long before Z223. But you can't accept these obvious facts because they would mean admitting that at least four shots were fired.
I ask again,
If the lapel flip is not an optical illusion created by reflected light, since when can a lapel move up and then back down in just 56 milliseconds? A piece of clothing cannot move up and down that rapidly on this planet.
If a bullet tore through Connally in Z223-224, what, pray tell, slammed his right shoulder downward in Z238-245?
If a bullet tore through Connally in Z223-224, why did Connally himself, the man who actually experienced the event, insist he was not hit before Z229 after carefully studying a high-quality print of the Zapruder film under high magnification? Why did both of Connally's surgeons agree with Connally on this point?
If a bullet tore through JFK in Z223-224, what, pray tell, caused him to start to bring his left hand up toward his throat in Z224, keeping in mind that even a reflex reaction would take at least 4 frames, and why is Jackie already staring at JFK in Z221?
Doesn't Jackie's reaction in Z221 clearly prove that JFK had already begun to visibly react to a wound before that frame?
Isn't it obvious that JFK's Z224 reaction is a continuation of the reaction that he starts at around Z200, when his right hand freezes in mid-wave and he suddenly starts to turn his head to the left?
You see, one huge problem for WC apologists is that you are chained down by the single-bullet theory and the three-shot scenario. To anyone with two functioning eyes, it is obvious that JFK and Connally were hit by separate bullets, as the Knott Laboratory SBT trajectory analysis confirmed. It is equally obvious that JFK began to react to a wound long before Z223. But you can't accept these obvious facts because they would mean admitting that at least four shots were fired.
How many bad guys do you figure were involved, altogether, in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, the getting-away, and the all-important (and evidently ongoing!!!) cover up?What part of: “ But, not surprisingly, it still fits all three shots being fired by a single shooter.” makes you think I am suggesting there was more than one bad guy?
Just a few, or oodles and gobs?
What part of: “But, not surprisingly, it still fits all three shots being fired by a single shooter” makes you think I am suggesting there was more than one bad guy?
If you think there was only one bad guy and it was someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald, do you think he intentionally framed Oswald for the assassination, or do you think that there was just a bunch of coincidences that worked against the poor little Marxist / former Marine sharpshooter?
Regardless, did the solitary bad guy ask Oswald to bring his neato short-rifle and some ammo to work that day, and then ask him that morning if he could borrow it during lunchtime to play with?
Hahahaha! Reflected light which is black and at the same time obscures Connally's white shirt? Brilliant, absolutely brilliant, that's some far out "optical illusion", Dude!
(https://i.postimg.cc/SKF02NxS/Z-Film-Clip-SBTIn-Motion3.gif)
Kennedy is clearly lifting his elbows as soon as he is struck and emerging from behind the sign.
(https://i.postimg.cc/HLQqQDrQ/Z-Film-Clip-SBTIn-Motion2.gif)
BTW, for someone who believes that the Zapruder film is heavily altered, you sure like to use the same film down to individual frames to establish your warped worldview, pathetic!
JohnM
This alleged "lapel flip" could be tied to Dan Rather's description of the Zapruder Film that he viewed only days after 11/22/63. One of the inconsistent things that Rather described during his Nationally Broadcast Description of the Zapruder Film was seeing BLOOD on the White Shirt of Gov Connally. This "Lapel Flip" could be hiding the Blood that Rather described but is Not visible on the Current Zapruder Film. Blood on Connally's white shirt possibly revealing a shot from in front/side of the JFK Limo.We can also tell that there is nothing pushing outward on the clothing because the shirt and tie does not budge. If the jacket lapel had flipped due to the exit of blood and bullet the shirt would necessarily have moved as well. If it had, the tie would have moved.
You're barking up the wrong tree Tom, Mason is a dyed in the wool LNer, and IIRC his only deviation from the official story is that he believes that Oswald took three shots and hit his target twice and the missed shot hit Connally.The evidence leaves no room for doubt that Oswald fired all three shots. And it is highly improbable on the evidence we have that anyone else was involved.
The following extract is from the Warren Commission Report.As a background to this, Bugliosi, in his chapter on the SBT wrote:
"Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds. However, Governor Connally's testimony and certain other factors have given rise to some difference of opinion as to this probability but there is no question in the mind of any member of the Commission that all the shots which caused the President's and Governor Connally's wounds were fired from the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository."
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-1
Dan Rather described seeing BLOOD on Gov Connally's white shirt on the Zapruder Film. And he reported this multiple times only days after 11/22/63
Dan Rather described seeing BLOOD on Gov Connally's white shirt on the Zapruder Film. And he reported this multiple times only days after 11/22/63
Dan Rather was the CBS Prime Time News Anchor. He was the CBS version of Walter Cronkite. Do you realize that you are lambasting the Fake News Media at its' highest level? Welcome aboard.
Dan Rather, the guy who falsely asserted on national TV that the Killian Documents, pertaining to George W. Bush's National Guard service, had been authenticated by experts retained by CBS?I think Rather gave a reasonably accurate description of the zfilm..
Dan Rather, the guy who, after viewing the Zapruder film, said that the fatal head shot drove Kennedy violently forward? (It did, but only about 2.25 inches which Rather wouldn't have been able to discern unless the film had been enlarged and slowed way down).
Dan Rather's claiming to have seen the limo make the turn onto Elm Street in the Zapruder film and blood on JBC's shirt in same probably weren't the first journalistic mistakes he'd ever made, and they certainly weren't the last.
I think Rather gave a reasonably accurate description of the zfilm..
1. He said first shot struck JFK and his description suggests that he thought it hit before he went behind the Stemmons sign.
2. He said that Connally then turned around to the President when he was hit by a second shot and fell back on his wife. He did not say he saw blood. He just said that “at that moment a shot clearly hit the Governor”.
3.When he described the impact of the third shot which struck the President in the head he says “his head could be seen to move violently forward” and then demonstrates this by moving his head down and forward in an abrupt movement, not dissimilar to the movement seen between z312-314.
I think Rather gave a reasonably accurate description of the zfilm..
1. He said first shot struck JFK and his description suggests that he thought it hit before he went behind the Stemmons sign.
2. He said that Connally then turned around to the President when he was hit by a second shot and fell back on his wife. He did not say he saw blood. He just said that “at that moment a shot clearly hit the Governor”.
3.When he described the impact of the third shot which struck the President in the head he says “his head could be seen to move violently forward” and then demonstrates this by moving his head down and forward in an abrupt movement, not dissimilar to the movement seen between z312-314.