JFK Assassination Forum

I might suggest that one of the flaws in your approach is that you would not raise those arguments but would readily accept the evidence of witnesses if it fit with the second shot SBT. 

Not if their recollections conflicted with what the Z-film shows.

The arguments could apply to all the facts observed by witnesses, including the number of shots, just like this  :

BINGO!!! No eye or ear witness account should be accepted as factual without corroboration. If a witness tells us something, we should immediately tell ourselves, "That might or might not be true". We should then compare what that witness tells us to the body of evidence to see if fits or not. If an eyewitness account can neither be corroborated nor refuted, we should neither assume it is correct nor incorrect. It could be either. When I read or hear an eyewitness account and there is no other evidence to compare it to, I would consider it a coin flip whether or not that witness is correct. If I ever serve on a jury again and the prosecution's case rests primarily on the account of an eyewitness and there was no corroborating evidence, I would vote to acquit because I would certainly have reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused.

The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 6 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the number of shots fired? For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the number of shots?

The actual timing (z271-z313) is 2.3 seconds.  Would you expect any witness to say they thought they were 2.3 seconds apart? In whole seconds, not more than two seconds means less than three.

I'm saying no witness would have any idea what frame of the Z-film the second shot was fired at. Therefore any computation based on the elapsed time in the Z-film is meaningless in terms of corroborating the witnesses.

The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 9 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the spacing of the shots. For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the spacing? Then you have the witnesses saying there wasn't more than 2 seconds between the second and third shots. If those people are correct, there were two gunman. Oswald could not have accurately fired his rifle that rapidly.

In stressful situations, events seem to speed up. After the first shot which missed, a lot of people weren't even aware there was an assassination attempt going on. JBC was one of the few exceptions. Once they saw, JFK's reaction to being hit by the second shot, suddenly the gravity of the situation would have become apparent to those people. It's not surprising that those people thought it SEEMED like the third shot came much more rapidly than it actually did. Things aren't always what they seem. People's ability to perceive and accurately remember an event like that is going to be compromised. That's why I have far more faith in one witness, Zapruder's camera, than all the other DP witnesses combined. That witness was not surprised by what happened. That witness was not experiencing stress. That witness viewed and recorded the event as calmly and accurately as it would a child's birthday party.

Keep putting total faith in your witnesses. It wii prevent you from ever learning the truth of the assassination.

I might suggest that one of the flaws in your approach is that you would not raise those arguments but would readily accept the evidence of witnesses if it fit with the second shot SBT. 

The arguments could apply to all the facts observed by witnesses, including the number of shots, just like this  :

The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 6 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the number of shots fired? For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the number of shots?

Then you have the witnesses saying there wasn't more than 2 seconds between the second and third shots.

The actual timing (z271-z313) is 2.3 seconds.  Would you expect any witness to say they thought they were 2.3 seconds apart? In whole seconds, not more than two seconds means less than three.

Once again, it's for researchers and people familiar with the JFKA. We are pointing to those who follow the JFKA of where LHO lived in Fort Worth with the proximity of Clean Towels business. Good grief, we aren't saying because LHO lived near Clean Towel means it was connected with him. 

This is a new one.. because Lee Harvey Oswald lived near a towel business, the truck parked in Dealey Plaza must have been connected to the assassination?? Riiiiiiight. You have quite the imagination!

We brought up LHO and where he lived to inform people who follow the JFKA of where Clean Towel business was located in regards to it's proximity to where he once lived in Fort Worth.

This is a new one.. because Lee Harvey Oswald lived near a towel business, the truck parked in Dealey Plaza must have been connected to the assassination?? Riiiiiiight. You have quite the imagination!

Ben, you're not mentally well. Until you get some help, you're on ignore.