"Evidence," my you-know-what.

The first shot at "Z-124" sounded different from the other two, probably because the muzzle of Oswald's short-rifle was inside the building for the steeply-downward-angled shot when he fired it.

A lot of people thought it was just another motorcycle backfire, or a firecracker, or even a tire blowout. That, and the fact that Dealy Plaza is an echo chamber, threw off a lot of people. Unfortunately, eighty of them provided their mistaken opinions.

One has to understand how to assess probabilities of independent events. The probability that 25 would independently imagine seeing the same thing, which did not occur, while none would report what actually did occur, is effectively zero.

Is English your second language?

Yes. Have you considered remedial reading classes? They may help.

If there are witnesses describing the location of the 1st shot heard being when the crowd is thinning out or is “spotty” then that’s not at Z124 because there’s much larger crowd around that front TSBD entrance and where Amos Euins was.

This issue is a prime example of the fact that some people judge the facts by their theory instead of judging their theory by the facts.

Oh, the irony! There is nobody on this forum who exemplifies that approach more than MTG. He sees bullet holes where none exist. He cites the opinions of people who operate outside their field of expertise and ignores what people who are actual experts in those fields. He will embrace any opinion that runs counter to the findings of the WC because he decided long ago that the WC was wrong because he wanted to believe a different story than the one the WC gave us. He doesn't even care if the people he cites conflict with each other as long as their opinions conflict with the WC.

We have solid, mutually corroborating eyewitness accounts, from three different locations, that there was a bullet hole in the windshield. Two of the witnesses were police officers. Two other witnesses were Secret Service agents. One witness was a medical student who went on to become the head of the surgery department at a major hospital in the Dallas area.

A perfect example of what I just wrote. He cites the opinions of people who took just a casual glance at the windshield and ignore the findings of the Secret Service who were able to give a close examination of the windshield and determined that it had been struck from the inside and that a missile hand NOT gone through the windshield in either direction.

We have a highly credible witness, George Whitaker, who was actually involved in replacing the limo's windshield on 11/25/63 at the Ford Motor Company's River Rouge Assembly Plant in Dearborn, Michigan, and this same witness saw the bullet hole and was certain, based on years of relevant experience, that it was a front-to-back hole.

Relevant experience??? Just how many windshields with bullet holes in them does he think George Whitaker replaced?

Whitaker said in a recorded 1993 interview that when he arrived to work on 11/25/63, the limo was already at the plant, in Building B, and that the windshield had already been removed. Two of the employees whom he supervised had been ordered to remove it, and they were given a cover story if anyone asked them what they did. He examined the windshield and saw the bullet hole. He added that the windshield was soon destroyed. Toward the end of his life, Whitaker produced a written statement about what he had seen and experienced on 11/25/1963.

I'll take the word of the Secret Service over George Whitaker.

We have support for Whitaker's account in the second-hand accounts of two family members whose father, Robert Harrison, worked at the Dearborn plant at the time and who told his family he saw a hole in the windshield. We have the fact that the logs for the White House garage show that no one came to see the limo on 11/25/63, whereas the logs show that people came before and after that date to see the limo. It would have been an easy operation to fly the limo to the Dearborn plant, have the windshield removed, and then fly the limo back to the White House garage in one day.

I guess that explanation makes sense to MTG. Of course it does. It feeds his wacky mindset.

You couldn't ask for a more credible, solid witness than George Whitaker. Doug Weldon spends nearly three pages in his chapter on the limo talking about why Whitaker was a credible witness. Anyone who listens to Whitaker's 1993 recorded interview can't help but be struck by his sincerity and clarity. Whitaker never sought publicity, had no interest in the JFK case, and spoke on the record reluctantly and only at the urging of his oldest son.

Like MTG, Weldon finds Whitaker credible solely because his story conflicts with the WCR.

Whitaker's account explains why the windshield in the limo on display at the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn has no hole in it.

This is comical. Does he think they would have put the limo on display with the bullet hole still in it. I guess MTG isn't aware that the limo was completely reconfigured, converted to a hardtop, and put back into service. Does he think they would have done all that and not replaced the windshield?  I doubt he knows that the Ford Motor company owned the vehicle throughout its service life and leased it to the government at a nominal cost. 

Whitaker's account shows that all those witnesses who reported seeing a hole in the windshield were not "mistaken." The windshield in evidence is not the original windshield. It was replaced on 11/25/63. It was replaced (1) because the Secret Service was aware that many witnesses had seen the windshield hole while the limo was parked outside the ER entrance at Parkland Hospital, and (2) because the Secret Service knew that if any independent experts examined the original windshield, they would realize the hole was made by a missile that entered from the front.

All Whitaker did was show he got the same mistaken impression of the damaged windshield as the people who saw it at Parkland. It's understandable why those people would have gotten that impression since they knew JFK had been shot while riding in that limo and when they saw the crack in the windshield, they would have jumped to the conclusion a shot was fired through the windshield. At the time those witnesses saw the windshield, they would have had no idea of where the limo was when the shots were fired or from where the shots were fired. MTG never bothers to consider how silly it would have been to fire a shot at JFK through the windshield from a frontal position. The shooter would have been right out in the open for all to see. The witnesses on the bridge would have easily seen such a shooter and heard the shot. That shooter would have had to thread the needle to get a shot past Kellerman and JBC. Really neat trick given that Kellerman was in the front passenger seat and JBC's jump seat was offset to the inside. A bullet fired from the bridge striking low on the windshield where MTG claims it did, would never have been on a trajectory to reach JFK. Considering all those factors would have required MTG to apply critical thinking to the situation. Critical thinking is a trait rarely displayed by JFKA conspiracy fanatics.....like MTG.

1)  I don't need to show Calvery & Reed in Wiegman because the logic of locating both of them in Zapruder and Couch/Darnell trumps any other excuse-making claims...Film evidence that you can see with your own eyes trumps all other disingenuous, inferior claims and dispenses with the need to regress to them...Those making such regressive arguments can be legitimately dismissed and considered as losing their arguments and not answering to the better evidence...They are not to be taken seriously...

2)   Wiegman, as he runs down to the motorcade spectators, is a blurry mess with the camera being swung back and forth...It is not really honest to contend the running women could be seen in that clip...

 

Dear Mr Graves...You have quoted me saying something I never said above...

By the way, Calvery was wearing a short-length sweater that was noticeable in the motorcade spectators and on the steps as the same short-length sweater and proves the woman was Calvery...Royell seems to be having trouble computing the basic logic that if Calvery is seen in the motorcade spectators on Elm in Zapruder, and is then seen climbing the steps in Couch/Darnell, that she had to have run between those two points in the interim...Karan Hicks is almost certainly the running woman in the Black Skirt and White Blouse whom Shelley pulls up and talks to as she runs by in the slow motion Gerda Dunkel clip...Hicks was standing with Calvery and Reed and followed their adrenaline-fueled dash to the Depository...The timing of all this forces the two men fast-walking up the extension to be Lovelady & Shelley, which in turn forces the man facing Calvery on the steps to be Molina...

The 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell needs to be obtained and professionally enhanced...Not only will it show all the above more clearly but it will also show Sarah Stanton's dress neckline on Prayer Man more clearly...The Hughes Film also needs to be obtained and professionally enhanced in order to show big fat Sarah Stanton standing up behind Lovelady in the Prayer Man spot right where Lovelady put her...THIS is intelligent, on-point, skilled research that goes right to solving the issue...The instruction on how to put people on ignore is Bush League, Mickey Mouse clique gangsterism designed to fan-boy for DiEugenio and rig the forum in his favor with Iler serving as his sycophantic servant...Not only is Iler not correcting the moderator corruption he promised to correct but he is making it worse while flagrantly teaming up with DiEugenio under the guise of moderation...

     You continue making a case for changing the :20 seconds after the kill shot timestamp. You basically are claiming that these 2 women were ahead of Officer Baker as Baker also ran up the sidewalk toward the TSBD. If you do Not have the stones to do change this :20 second timestamp, you should drop your entire case. There is absolutely No Way those 2 women could go running up the Elm St Sidewalk, to the TSBD, and Not appear on the Wiegman Film. Wiegman jumped out of camera car #1 as it was turning onto Elm St. His camera was rolling this entire time. You are changing the timelines of many people.