JFK Assassination Forum

Or the other way around.

The Connallys always maintained 3 shots, 3 hits and they were in a very good position to know.

How would JBC have known whether JFK was hit by the first shot or the second.
As for Nellie, she didn't get much of anything right.
[quote
 
My comment was based on the scenario where the first shot struck JFK. The Commission noted the abundant evidence that the first shot did not miss (WR 112):
[/quote]
You must have missed the first line on page 112:
"Governor Connally's testimony supports the view that the first shot missed"

The WC suggested that if the first shot did not miss and the third was the last shot (for which they cited much evidence) then the shooter was shooting at very near the minimum allowable time between shots, which would put the first shot striking JFK "at about frame z213" (WR 115).
The delay was based on the first shot striking JFK.  They were trying to understand why JBC did not feel it immediately (WR 112):

JFK and JBC both felt it at the same time and both reacted at the same time when both of them threw their arms upward in perfect unison at Z226. It's no wonder they had a hard time understanding how Oswald could have fired so rapidly AND so accurately if there had been a second shot miss.

This passage shows just how wrong witnesses can be.
" According to Altgens, he snapped the picture "almost simultaneously" with a shot which he is confident was the first one fired."
His photo has been synced to Z255 which isn't even close to the time either the first or second shot was fired. The reality is it was taken 2 seconds after the second shot was fired and hit both men. Altgens statement doesn't even fit your theory that the shots were fired at Z193 and Z271. I can't find the full set of Altgens photos but it would not surprise me if he actually took photo #5 simultaneously with the first shot, but that's speculation. What isn't speculation is that he got it wrong.

Clint Hill also got it wrong. He only remembers hearing 2 shots. He remembers the shot that hit JFK in the back thinking that was the first shot. He race forward and saw the head shot at what he estimates was 5 seconds. That's pretty close. It was actually 4.9 seconds between the two shots which struck JFK. So which shot didn't he hear. An earlier first shot or an intervening shot between the two that hit JFK. It's hard for me to believe he wouldn't have heard an intervening shot between the two which hit JFK.

They noted that JFK seemed to be reacting to his neck wound by raising his hands to his throat and that he was blocked by the Stemmons sign (WR 98).  Although Shaneyfelt had suggested his reaction was "barely apparent" at z225, the Commission put that comment in quotes and did not adopt it as their conclusion.  After all, JFK's left forearm had moved from a vertical position on his right side to a horizontal position in front of his chest by z 224 and the right hand from a vertical wave to a horizontal curl.  The WC may have thought that was a bit more than a "barely apparent" reaction.

If the WC had the benefit of modern technology and more time to look at blow ups of the Z-frames.  they might have figured out that JFK's right hand was still moving down at Z225 and didn't start upward until Z226, the same frame JBC's arm started up. Coincidence? Hardly.

The reduction in the amount of white area of the shirt from z223-224 appears to be the reverse of the increase in white area from z222-223.  Besides, no one at the time had even suggested this was a bulge let alone a bulge from the bullet striking it.

Another example of the WC missing clues because they lacked the technology to do a frame-by-frame study with magnified frames. What they did was create still photos of the magnified frames but that didn't allow them to see the subtle changes from frame to frame like the bulging of JBC's jacket or JFK's hand still moving downward at Z225. They also apparently missed the upward movement of JBC's right arm at Z226. I don't blame them for that. It took decades and armies of researchers to discover these very important clues.

In any event, both did react to the first shot so there is nothing "co-incidental" about their reactions being at roughly the same time.  One might expect JBC's to be slower since his was a deliberate reaction after realizing that it was a rifle shot and an assassination was underway. 

So you have JFK reacting to getting shot and JBC reacting to the sound of a shot at precisely the same time and in precisely the same manner, even though according to you that even happened 33 frames, almost 2 seconds earlier. You also choose to ignore immediately after his arm flip, JBC doubled over and dipped to his right, then began twisting dramatically in his seat. And you want to pretend all those gyrations are no in reaction to being shot. Was he anticipating getting shot at 271?

Most observers, including members of the Commission, thought there was a material delay in JBC's reaction.I am not sure where you are getting your information but it is not correct.  The wound in the back was 1.5 cm by .8 cm. The bullet was exactly 3 cm long. Dr. Shaw said the bullet made a nice tunnelling wound along the fifth rib and "The fact that the muscle bundles on either side of the fifth rib were not damaged meant that the missile to strip away 10 centimeters of the rib had to follow this rib pretty much along its line of inclination." (4 H 112).  Difficult to imagine a sideways bullet doing that.

The reason they considered the possibility of a delayed reaction by JBC is because the way he said he reacted after being struck. He said he doubled over. The Z-film showed he dipped to his right as well as doubling over. Those reactions occurred in the Z230s, about a half second after his initial reflexive reaction of flipping his arm upward and Z226. Had they noticed that, they wouldn't have had to speculate about a delayed reaction. They probably would have narrowed down the time frame for the first shot from betweem Z210 and Z225 to a few frames before Z225, probably in the Z221-222 window.

It is a much bigger challenge to explain how a shot with JBC turned forward could have entered at the back of the armpit and exited under and medial to his right nipple without penetrating the pleural cavity and without damaging any of the muscles around the rib. If the bullet had deflected to the right with him facing forward, it would not have exited where it did.  However, with him turned around sharply to the rear, the right nipple moves to the right of the scapula. So the fifth rib keeping the bullet to the right before passing through the rib (at mid-armpit) keeps the bullet from penetrating the chest wall.  Turn around like that from a sitting position and you can see how the right nipple moves a bit to the right of the scapula and you can see how the fifth rib makes an almost straight path between them.

How about showing us an ACCURATE drawing of JBC's position at Z271 that show how a bullet could enter his back by his right armpit and exit from the right side of his torso. I know I'll be waiting a long time to see that. Like forever.

Credit: Alex Harris.  "The JFK Theorist"

Raw footage #86: Robert Groden’s original scan of his 16mm copy of Dave Wiegman’s film

It was one of Groden's ex-wives that stole some things. It's hard to tell exactly what she took, but she did take some stuff. It would be nearly impossible to take everything he has. Groden has 4 storage units and a house full of stuff. At one point he owned the house next door to him and used it exclusively for storage, but had to sell the house when he became short on money and had to move everything into his house he lives in.

For example, he has about 4 or 5 big tote boxes of photos he took on the set of "JFK" in 1991. He probably has around 5,000 photos just from the JFK movie.

   If you have not done this already, You need to volunteer your services to compile an inventory of the Groden stuff that is currently spread all over hell's half acre. This can be on paper and/or filmed. Summer should give you the needed time to at least begin this. It would also go well with the Groden Bio your are currently working on.

read much?

Once again, you talk out of two sides of your mouth.

There is no sound on any film. You are backing into your a preset conclusion with no basis of fact.
You said witnesses cannot be relied on and are often times wrong. How do you know JBC was correct about when he turned?
He disputed the SBT directly. You cherry pick what you want.

As I explained earlier, JBC knew he had been hit by the second shot. His objection to the SBT was that he believed JFK had been hit by the first shot. That's why he refused to believe the SBT. In later years when asked if they could have been both hit by the second shot, he said it was a possibility. In fact if JFK was hit by the second shot (which he was) and JBC was correct that he was hit by the second shot (he was), the SBT is not only a possibility, it is a certainty.

Phil Willis took his number 5 picture when he heard a shot. That was about Z-frame 202.

It makes no sense that Oswald would have taken a shot through the tree at Z202 when his target would come into the clear a half second later.

Willis wouldn't have known which frame he snapped his picture, so somebody apparently synced his photo to the Z-film. If it Willis' photo was taken at or about Z202, Willis would have heard a the second shot one second later which is close enough for him to think it happened at the same time. The other possibility is that Willis conflated photo 5 with photo 4 and he actually heard the first shot at the time of the first shot. I seriously doubt that Willis was counting his pictures as he was taking them. In any case, it's silly to belkeve Oswald would fire a shot through the tree when all he had to do was wait another half second before he would have a clear line of sight.

Hugh Betzner took his number 3 picture and was winding his camera when he heard the same shot.

If he was winding his camera when he heard the shot, how does that establish which frame of the Z-film he heard that shot?

Sam Holland, was on the bridge. He heard the same shot when JFK reached for his brow. That occurs about Z-204.

JFK was not reaching for his brow at Z202. He had been waving to the spectators on his right and was starting to lower his hand by that time. That motion continued until he was behind the sign when the second shot was fired. Are we supposed to believe that Sam Holland could tell exactly where JFK's hand was at the time of the shot from his vantage point on the overpass?

Look at Betzner 3 and Willis 5 - see where the car is between two pictures. WC wouldn't. Look at "Black Dog Man" in both pictures.
A human figure taken with 2 different cameras - both oddly without any flesh tone or distinct characteristics. (a black man huh?)
[/quote]
Gee, it couldn't have been that he was standing in the shadows.

Rosemary told the HSCA: Ms. Willis stated that she was present with her father and a sister in the area of the grass section of the plaza at
the time of the Presidential motorcade on November 22, 1963. The other was a person who was standing just behind the
concrete wall near the triple underpass. "That person appeared to "disappear the next instant."

Oh that's some real compelling evidence.

How do you know when Rosemary Willis stopped and why?

I can see her stop and look back toward the TSBD. The rest requires the ability to add 2 + 2.

She ran ahead of the limo - how do you know she
wasn't looking back for the car. Her father told Shaw Trial he called her name - How do you know she didn't turn for that ?
She stopped for a shot. - When was the shot? You don't know. Witnesses are often wrong (but only when you want).

I don't know why she stopped. Put in the context of the other evidence we have, it fits that she was looking back to where it seemed the sound of gunfire came from. In Altgens 6, the two SS agents on the right running board of the Queen Mary are seen looking back toward the TSBD. I don't know why they did that but I think I could make a pretty good guess.

  Your time line isn't proof of anything
Interesting, she actually stops short right around z- frame 200.

That is less than two seconds from the time she started to slow down. That seems like a reasonable amount of time for her to come to a complete stop before she turned toward the TSBD.

WC defenders have no choice but to claim the evidence points to Lee regardless of any direct conflicts.

There is no forensic evidence that conflicts with the conclusion Oswald was the assassin. That all points to him. It's inevitable that conclusion is going to conflict with some of the eyewitness testimony because that body of evidence conflicts with itself. There is no way to reach any conclusion that doesn't conflict with what somebody has said.

There is nothing forensic or even valid in cherry-picking witness statements to a pretext while ignoring corroborated conflicts.

Such as?

broken evidence short of proof.

Since all the forensic evidence points to Oswald and nobody else, Oswald deniers have no choice but to claim it's the evidence that is invalid.