Why do you prefer, as an indication of when the first shot occurred, Zapruder's jiggling of his camera to Elsie Dorman's finger's slipping off the "filming now" button at approximately "Z-124" and around Z-222, too?

In 2008, Dale Myers wrote:

"Elsie Dorman told Sixth Floor Museum curator Gary Mack in the early 1980’s that she remembered that the first shot was very loud, sounded like it came from behind her (i.e., from inside the building), and that she stopped filming just after the first shot. Elsie Dorman, who died in 1983, had filmed the motorcade from a fourth-floor window of the Depository. [Max] Holland and [Kenneth] Scearce cite my work on the synchronization of amateur films of the Kennedy motorcade (Epipolar Geometric Analysis of Amateur Films Related to Acoustics Evidence in the John F. Kennedy Assassination) as supportive of their theory [that Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot was fired just before Zapruder resumed filming], noting that Dorman stopped her camera three times – first at a point 0.12 seconds before Zapruder began [sic; resumed] filming the limousine (i.e., Z133); a second time at the equivalent of Z228, just after the second shot; and a third and final time at the equivalent of Z411, about five seconds after the last shot."

The jiggle at Z155 is very similar to the jiggles at Z227 and Z318 which were in response to shots fired 7-8 frames earlier and which closely followed shots in which we know when they struck. While it is not proof positive, to me it creates the preponderance of evidence as to when the first shot was fired. The arguments for a shot fired before Zapruder resumed filming are quite thin compared to the arguments for a shot in the Z147-148 window.

You really show your ignorance with this one.

Given your obvious lack of education, as evidenced by your repeated junior-high-level writing and grammatical errors, you really should avoid using the word "ignorance," especially toward others.

The reason exit wounds are usually larger than entrance wounds is because lead bullets will deform when striking a body whether they hit bone or soft tissue. A deformed bullet will not make a nice neat round exit wound. Oswald was firing a FMJ bullet. These bullets do not deform when striking soft tissue. They make the same size hole going out as they do coming in when they don't strike bone. Lead or lead nosed bullets are more common and an experienced ER doctor like Perry would have seen more exit wounds caused by soft lead bullets than FMJ bullets. It's amazing that somebody who has been at this as long as you have needs that explained to you.

Yeah, uh-huh. Blah, blah, blah. You have no clue what you're talking about. ALL of the exit wounds in the WC's SBT wound ballistics test were larger than the entry wounds -- every single one of them. Not even the HSCA FPP floated your ridiculous claim that FMJ bullets make entry and exit wounds that are the same size if they don't hit bone. Instead, the FPP majority appealed to the impossible shored-wound theory to explain the entry-like appearance of the throat wound.

Plus, we've known since the 1990s via CT scans of males with the same torso dimensions as JFK that there was no path from the back wound to the throat wound that could have missed striking the vertebrae or missed tearing through the right lung. As usual, you are years behind the information curve.

I notice you are still in denial about the 1970s to 1990s disclosures that the autopsy doctors established for an absolute, observable fact that the back wound had no exit point. We've known for years from the released transcript of the 1/27/64 WC executive session that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound. The first draft correctly stated that the back wound had no exit point, which is also what the 11/26/63 Sibert and O'Neill report on the autopsy says ("Autopsy of Body of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy," 11/26/63, p. 4). Sibert and O'Neill both emphatically confirmed this in their ARRB testimony. Two witnesses at the autopsy independently confirmed that men around the autopsy table could see the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity -- it was at this point that Finck declared, "this wound has no exit."

I also notice you are still in denial about the fact that JFK's clothing proves concretely that no bullet exited the throat, as I document in "JFK's Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible".

Oswald was firing a FMJ bullet.

You mean you believe he was firing "an FMJ bullet." English 101 again. I recommend you take a grade-school-level online course in basic English so you can learn how to properly use indefinite articles ("a" and "an"), among other things.

You don't get to dictate what options WC defenders have. We get to decide that.

You don't get to decide anything. You're not even qualified to be talking about the JFK case in a public forum. You don't even know all the important claims that your side has made, much less the evidence that WC skeptics have presented, as you have proven over and over again.

The list of inexcusable gaffes you have made just in the last four months would fill at least one page, such as your howlers that Wecht agreed with everything the FPP majority said except for the SBT, that the HSCA FPP identified one of the skull fragments as frontal bone, that the SBT does not require that the alleged magic bullet nicked JFK's tie knot, that the back wound was above the throat wound, that Olivier's head-shot wound ballistics test proves that FMJ bullets can both shatter into dozens of tiny fragments and break into a number of sizable fragments after striking skull bone, that wound ballistics tests are useless in the JFK case, that trajectory analyses are useless in the JFK case, that moving a wound 4 inches would have no meaningful impact on the trajectory of the bullet that caused it, etc., etc., etc.

The back wound was unquestionably an entrance wound. If the throat wound was also an entrance wound, there was no exit for either wound. That means there should have been two bullets in the body. There were none. These bullets apparently vanished inside JFK's body. That requires not one but two Magic Bullets.

I've answered this argument twice now, but you just keep repeating it. Once again:

(1) We have several credible reports from personnel at the autopsy that two bullets and over 10 bullet fragments were found during the autopsy but were never entered into evidence.

(2) If a glass fragment from the windshield shot caused the throat wound, which is an entirely plausible scenario, the fragment would have been easy to miss and would have been hard to see on the x-rays.

(3) We've known for years that the official collection of autopsy x-rays is missing a number of x-rays, including x-rays of the chest and neck. The evidence of this fact is compelling.

(4) We've known for years that Humes and Boswell performed illicit surgery on the body before the autopsy began. Two witnesses, including one of the morticians, saw this pre-autopsy surgery. The mortician, Tom Robinson, said that during the surgery at least 10 fragments were removed and placed in a container, and Navy corpsman Dennis David prepared a receipt for four of the larger fragments of those fragments. Yet, the official autopsy record says that only two fragments were removed from the body.

(5) Bullets do not always leave a body but sometimes expend their energy and come to a stop in the body. Dr. Perry believed that the throat-wound bullet ranged downward into the chest, as evidenced by the damage that he saw behind and below the wound -- and that damage, BTW, was larger than the throat wound itself, a textbook indication of an entry wound.

And I notice you said nothing about the presence of an abrasion collar around the throat wound, another good indication that it was an entry wound, even though I noted this fact in the paragraph that you quoted and to which you were supposedly responding. 

Just a reminder that the only theory that WC apologists can offer to explain the throat wound's small size and entry-like appearance is the impossible shored-wound theory. We know from Humes' own notes that Dr. Perry told him the wound was only about 5 mm in diameter. In his 11/22/63 notes, Dr. Perry

You really show your ignorance with this one. The reason exit wounds are usually larger than entrance wounds is because lead bullets will deform when striking a body whether they hit bone or soft tissue. A deformed bullet will not make a nice neat round exit wound. Oswald was firing a FMJ bullet. These bullets do not deform when striking soft tissue. They make the same size hole going out as they do coming in when they don't strike bone. Lead or lead nosed bullets are more common and an experienced ER doctor like Perry would have seen more exit wounds caused by soft lead bullets than FMJ bullets. It's amazing that somebody who has been at this as long as you have needs that explained to you.

The Parkland doctors said the throat wound had “no jagged edges or stellate lacerations”  (6 WH 3), had “relatively smooth edges (6 WH 54), and was “rather clean” (3 WH 372).

In addition, two of the Parkland doctors seemed to indicate the wound had an abrasion collar; one of them specifically said it had bruising around its edges (7 HSCA 302; 6 WH 42). When Dr. Perry was interviewed by Harold Weisberg, he specified that the throat wound had an abrasion collar. Entry wounds usually have abrasion collars, while exit wounds usually do not.

Again, the only theory that WC defenders have offered to explain the throat wound's small size and entry-like appearance is the impossible shored-wound theory. Even today, some WC apologists still cite the theory to explain the throat wound, unaware the theory has been debunked.

You don't get to dictate what options WC defenders have. We get to decide that. The back wound was unquestionably an entrance wound. If the throat wound was also an entrance wound, there was no exit for either wound. That means there should have been two bullets in the body. There were none. These bullets apparently vanished inside JFK's body. That requires not one but two Magic Bullets.

I assume the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell is the best extant copy...It should therefore be obtained, scanned, and analyzed...It will show Joe Molina as being the man in front of Calvery on the steps...Molina said in testimony that after the shots he drifted in the direction of the Knoll on the top platform of the front steps and then descended the steps and headed to the Knoll...You are seeing him in that process in Couch/Darnell...Since their clothing indicates that the pair fast-walking up the extension are Lovelady & Shelley the man on the steps has to be Molina...We can see that most sources on both Greg Parker's site and The Education Forum claim the man on the steps is Lovelady...They are wrong...It is Molina...Throw in Stanton as Prayer Man and I am being disallowed membership by people who don't know how to do basic photo identification analysis...Parker and Kamp have seriously damaged good research...

.Parker and Kamp have seriously damaged good research...

??
You are basing your identification of Shelley and Lovelady on Kamp's work!!