JFK Assassination Forum

Weigman GIF

https://app.box.com/s/l5k8ahxrdq0lj2jcw5uggpdrf5bkgkzf

You let the evidence drive your beliefs. You don't try to bend the evidence to fit your beliefs.

I would suggest that objectivity requires not having any belief, especially pre-conceived beliefs.

Just how did you come to that conclusion?

Do you think two seconds would make much difference to whether his lung didn't collapse until he got to Parkland?

There were two holes, one in the back and the other in the front. Air entering through either would result in a collapsed lung. There was nothing occluding the back hole until he fell back onto his wife at about z280.  The right arm was moving until about z250 when it appears to have covered the location of the front wound.

You can determine that from the two dimensional Z-film?Oh, goody. We have someone else who puts absolute faith in witness recollections
Not really.Would you care to debate that?What record would that be?

There are 20+ witnesses who said that JFK reacted to the first wound in ways not seen in the zfilm until after z193. They are: T.E. Moore; Nellie Connally; David Powers; Gayle Newman; William Newman; John Chism; Faye Chism; James Altgens; Abraham Zapruder; Clint Hill; Linda Willis; George Hickey; Sam Kinney; Paul Landis; Cecil Ault; Harold Norman; Malcolm Summers; Mary Moorman; Jean Newman; Charles Brehm; znc Pierce Allman. Not a single witness said he smiled and waved after the first shot, let alone for 3 seconds.

There were 40+ witnesses who said that the last two shots were close together, which means the first shot must have hit JFK because he is reacting 5 seconds before the last shot.  Here they are:

Yes, because another group of witnesses remember it differently. and the Z-film supports them. JBC said he turned to look over his right shoulder when he heard the first shot. He did that at Z164.

Do you really think Governor Connally is trying desperately to see JFK at z164 or even 193-198?:
Even JBC did not suggest that he turned to look at JFK there.  He thought he must have turned when he was behind the Stemmons sign.  At this point JFK is as far right as he could be. Earlier in the motorcade JBC had turned to chat with JFK and had no difficulty seeing him.

Then there was Rosemary Willis who quit running after the limo and stopped running and turned back to look in the direction of the TSBD. She began that in the early Z170s. I don't put my faith in witnesses based on whether or not they tell a story I choose to believe. I believe the witnesses that can be corroborated.

Rosemary's sister, Linda, said that the first shot occurred when JFK was between her and the Stemmons sign, in her line of sight.
There is certainly lots of corroboration for the 1.......2...3 shot pattern, first shot after z186, first shot causes visible reaction to JFK, JFK reacting before second shot, last two shots in quick succession but still distinct shots.

For example, SS Agent Bennett said he was scanning the crowd to the right when he heard the first shot. He then turned to look at JFK and SAW the second shot strike him below his right shoulder. Bennett wrote that in his notes on the flight back to Washington. That is significant because JFK was on his back the whole time he was at Parkland and the only way Bennett could have known about the back wound was if he saw it strike JFK.

Glen Bennett gave a statement that is materially different than his earlier notes and was never called and never cross-examined on the differences. In the first, he recalled two shots (CE 2112):

• At this point I heard a noise that immediately reminded me of a firecracker. I immediately, upon hearing the supposed fire cracker, looked at the Boss's car. At this exact time I saw a shot that hit the Boss about 4 inches down from the right shoulder; a second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the Boss's head.

He appears to be saying that he heard and "immediately" looked at the President and saw a shot that had hit the President about 4 inches down from the right shoulder.

In his statement written the next day, possibly after hearing others talk about three shots, he said there were three shots and the second shot struck the President. He is the only witness who said this and his evidence is not only uncorroborated, it is different than his first statement.  There are 20+ others who disagree with Bennett's last statement (see above list).

John McAdams was a die-hard Nutter professor that taught a class on JFK at Marquette University. He is dead.

Bob Harris is a JFK researcher and author that can be seen on You Tube and various websites.

Tom Sorensen is a real person that posts on my website JFK.Boards

I know for a fact Peter Goth was not Martin because I know who that was.
(no, it was not Tom)

I wonder about John Corbett, came out of nowhere in discussions like he's always been here. 

I wonder about Vince Baxter, I caught him a couple of times "quoting Mytton" curious he has the same initials as one of his bedtime heroes.

I wonder what happened to "Richard Smith" I guess he was shamed by the Trump thread and his golden boy now tangled up in Operation Epic Failure.

I'm sure there are many more and VPNs make it difficult for Duncan to keep it clean.

I wonder about Vince Baxter, I caught him a couple of times "quoting Mytton" curious he has the same initials as one of his bedtime heroes.

Guess who graced us with his presence today; Mytton's buddy Vincent Baxter

He hasn't posted since 2019, but today there he was;

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=profile;u=925

Must be a coincidence, right?

Sorry, somewhere else? If you read his book then you must know that in that section that you quoted he cites the HSCA and Itek analysis? He also mentions Josiah Thompson's debunking and includes a footnote. He's not saying any of this was original and from him.

When I said "them" I was referring to all 16 points. I'm not going to go back and individually list out here where McAdams got all 16 points from. That's why I listed the page numbers so people could explore each point on their own.

McAdams doesn't claim them as original to him. I'm sure McAdams got them somewhere else during his research but I've compiled them here as I found them noteworthy as I read through his book.

Sorry, somewhere else? If you read his book then you must know that in that section that you quoted he cites the HSCA and Itek analysis? He also mentions Josiah Thompson's debunking and includes a footnote. He's not saying any of this was original and from him.