Not all. I certainly agree there was no early missed shot.  So did the Connallys.  The problem with your scenario is that it conflicts with the Connally’s clear recollections that JBC was not struck in the back by the first shot..

Ironically, this is the same single witness Corbett bases the entirety of his opinion on.
A man who went into shock after suffering a life-threatening, massively traumatic gunshot injury through the torso.
There is copious research highlighting the effects such a traumatic injury can have on the memory recall of the victims.
There is ample evidence that Connally is suffering from a number of these effects.
He is possibly the most unreliable witness to the shooting in Dealey Plaza.
Researchers like yourself and Corbett treat him as if he were a bystander recalling what he witnessed. At no point do either of you acknowledge how the trauma and shock of his life-threatening injury may have affected his recall of events.

Like all true Nutters, you labour under the delusion that what you think is a fact, just because you think it.
There was no early shot.
Both men were shot through at z222/z223.
This is based solely on the mountain of valid evidence pointing to this conclusion.
Your opinion is based on a single witness.

Not all. I certainly agree there was no early missed shot.  So did the Connallys.  The problem with your scenario is that it conflicts with the Connally’s clear recollections that JBC was not struck in the back by the first shot..

Taking the earlier difficult shot gave Oswald an extra chance to hit JFK. He  could still be able to take the easier later shots if he missed which he did. It could be argued that by taking the early first shot, he could have cost himself a chance at the later shots, but that didn't happen. That was a decision Oswald had to make and the fact someone else might have made a different choice proves nothing. Given that Oswald eventually succeeded in what he was trying to do, I see no reason to second guess his choice.

This is all just made up nonsense based on nothing.

I am offering a witness report observing the shooter staring "transfixed" for 10 - 15 seconds in the direction of the underpass.
This was seconds before the motorcade entered Dealey Plaza.
I offer an image showing what the shooter was looking at, the area in which we see both men actually reacting to being shot in the Z-film.
It makes complete sense that the shooter is focussed on the 'kill zone'.
The arrangement of boxes, known as the Sniper's Perch, also demonstrates the direction in which the shooter intended to fire. He put these boxes in position with the shooting in mind.

Like all true Nutters, you labour under the delusion that what you think is a fact, just because you think it.
There was no early shot.
Both men were shot through at z222/z223.
This is based solely on the mountain of valid evidence pointing to this conclusion.
Your opinion is based on a single witness.

Front entry doesn't make sense because it doesn't line up with Adams & Styles' descent of the steps or Truly & Bakers' entry in to the First Floor...

As can be seen in Couch/Darnell, Lovelady & Shelley are headed up to the Train Yard where they went back in to the Depository through the west entry doors...

Obviously, Adams & Styles squeaked out the rear exit just before Truly & Baker ran in and were on the stairs just ahead of where Oswald needed to be in his alleged run down from the 6th Floor...It was actually Mrs Garner who was the one who should have seen and heard Oswald but didn't from her spot on the 4th Floor landing...

Obviously, Adams & Styles squeaked out the rear exit just before Truly & Baker ran in...

This is really bizarre.
I completely agree that Adams and Styles "squeaked out the rear exit" just before Truly and Baker arrived at the area near the freight elevators on the first floor.
The Dillard picture proves Adams had left her position by the fourth floor window within 15 seconds of the final shot.
She stated that before the limo had even reached the underpass she had decided to get down there.
She consistently insisted that she ran all the way down, placing her on the first floor within 60 seconds of the shot, if not sooner.

The thing I don't understand is this, Brian, and maybe you can invent something else to account for this:
When Adams hit the first floor within 60 seconds of the shooting she saw Shelley and Lovelady not far from the elevators as she raced by. She even tried to interact with them but they didn't respond.
Truly and Baker arrived at the same location seconds later where Baker reported two white men (who can only be Shelley and Lovelady) hanging around that area.
How is it possible for the two men you claim to be Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street extension, get to the area near the elevators on the first floor where they were observed by Adams and Baker, within 60 seconds of the shooting?
Do you even realise how you are contradicting yourself?

"Random"? "Loose with the facts"? I quoted sourced statements from autopsy witnesses, including Dr. Robert Karnei and Dr. John Ebersole, proving that the autopsy doctors established beyond any doubt that the back wound had no exit point. I pointed out that the transcript of the 1/27/64 WC executive session proves that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound as an exit point for the back wound. And, I quoted sourced statements that prove the autopsy doctors knew about the throat wound before the autopsy and that Humes talked to Perry well before the autopsy ended, contrary to Humes's lie that he didn't talk to Perry until the following morning.

The only thing you have proven is that you are really, really bad at figuring things out. You want to give more weight to a preliminary hypothesis that to a final conclusion that was based upon all information gathered.

LOL! Are you caught in a time warp where it's still 1964? I mean, is this a serious question? Are you aware that the FBI and Secret Service analyses of the shooting concluded that JFK and Connally were hit by separate bullets? Are you aware that Connally himself insisted he was hit by a different bullet than the one that hit JFK in the back? Are you aware that the most sophisticated, advanced SBT trajectory study ever conducted, done by Knott Lab in 2023, determined that JFK and Connally were never in position for the SBT to be possible, proving that they could not have been hit by the same bullet?

Yes, those were the preliminary conclusions. The staff lawyers investigating the shooting later determined that was not what happened and developed the SBT based on solid evidence and logical thinking. Their finding has stood the test of time. Not everyone agrees just as not everyone agrees the earth is round or that American astronauts landed on the moon.

The question you should be asking yourself is, "How can I still believe in the SBT when there is so much compelling evidence that the back wound had no exit point, that no bullet exited the throat, and that the throat wound was an entry wound?" 

The question you should be asking is "Why do I continue to dispute the fact that Oswald assassinated JFK given so much compelling evidence that is what happened."

Can you read? You have totally misread what Boswell said. He said nothing about his "initial impression" or "first impression." He said that initially they were unable to probe the back wound because the muscles blocked the wound path, but that after they opened the chest, they were able to probe the wound and determine that the bullet did not enter the lung cavity but merely caused bruising outside the pleura.

It always get's confusing when MTG chooses to reply to multiple people in the same post but I believe this is where he has switched over to me.

Do you really need to be told that was Boswell's initial impression. That impression was made early in the process and is at odds with the final conclusion which all three members of the autopsy team signed. Unlike you, Boswell understood the earlier impression that the bullet had no exit was an erroneous one as they discovered there was a clear bullet path leading from the back entrance to the throat exit. The discovered the bruised pleura, the perforation of the strap muscles, the grazing of the rings of the trachea, which led them to the tracheostomy. We don't know at one point in the process they began to suspect the tracheostomy had been performed over the exit wound but they were able to confirm that suspicion when Humes talked to Perry. You, being a silly CT, think the autopsy team should have stuck with that first erroneous impression that there was no exit for the back wound no matter what they learned later in the fact finding process. Somebody on the autopsy teams said early on there was "no exit" and by God, they were stuck with that no matter what they learned afterwards.

As I documented, Dr. Karnei explained that after they removed the chest organs and resumed the probing, the men around the autopsy table could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity. Dr. Ebersole said that "further probing" and "inspection" revealed "there was no point of exit." It was this point, explained Sibert and O'Neill, that the autopsy doctors, particularly Finck, announced that the back wound had no exit point.

They thought there was no exit until they discovered the trail of tissue damage leading to the tracheostomy in the throat. Then they understood why there was no bullet in the body. It had exited from JFK's throat.

People are going to easily see through your dishonest, phony argument that this was just a "first impression." No, this was the final, definitive, visually confirmed finding by the end of the autopsy.

You are a damn liar. You get no respect because you deserve no respect.

That's why Sibert and O'Neill, the two FBI agents at the autopsy, included the "no exit" finding in their report on the autopsy. That's why they told the ARRB that at the end of the autopsy, there was no doubt whatsoever that the back wound had no exit point. 

Moronic. Cite the bystanders instead of the people actually conducting the autopsy.

LOL! I again ask, can you read? Do you understand English beyond a grade-school level? How can you make this argument with a straight face?

In a previous reply, you repeated the long-debunked lone-gunman lie that Humes did not know about the throat wound until the morning after the autopsy. I just proved to you that this is false, that Humes talked to Perry at least 90 minutes before the autopsy ended. So there was no "more and better information" to be gathered.

You have never shown any evidence anyone on the autopsy team knew that. You have shown that Perry said it. There is no evidence any of them saw Perry's presser.

At the end of the autopsy, at least 90 minutes after Humes had talked to Perry about the throat wound, the autopsy doctors were absolutely certain that the back wound had no exit point

More lies. Have you no shame?

-- they knew this because they had been able to probe the wound to its end after they removed the chest organs and had seen with their own eyes that the wound path did not enter the lining of the chest cavity.

How do you suppose they were able to document the bruised pleura, the perforated strap muscles, the damaged trachea rings? Do you think they just made that up after the autopsy was over? Why do you suppose every member of the FPP concurred with the finding that the bullet exited from JFK's throat?

That's why Dr. Karnei explained that after the doctors opened the chest, removed the chest organs, and resumed the probing, the men around the autopsy table could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity. That's why Dr. Ebersole said that "further probing" and "inspection" revealed "there was no point of exit." That's why Navy medical technician James Jenkins, serving as Dr. Boswell's assistant during the autopsy, observed that he and others around the autopsy table could see the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity and that "there was no entry into the chest cavity." That's why Dr. Boswell himself told the ARRB that the bullet "had not pierced through into the lung cavity." That's why Sibert and O'Neill observed in their 11/26/63 report on the autopsy that "further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance." That's why Sibert and O'Neill confirmed this fact in the plainest possible English to the ARRB, stressing that the autopsy doctors had no doubt whatsoever about this.

It was only after Oswald was murdered that the no-exit finding was suppressed and replaced by the fiction that the back-wound bullet exited the throat. In order to make that tale even theoretically possible, Humes had to relocate the back wound some 2 inches upward so as to put it above the throat wound and to enable a downward trajectory through the neck, a falsehood that the HSCA FPP corrected, to their credit.

You continue to try to make your case with lies. That says all that needs to be said about your case.