Author Topic: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?  (Read 11971 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gary Craig

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4706
  • "The human mind is our fundamental resource." JFK
Re: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?
« Reply #133 on: April 20, 2017, 04:09:13 PM »
Mr. SPECTER. As you are positioning yourself in the witness chair, your right hand is up with the finger at the ear
level as if clutching from the right of the head; would that be an accurate description of the position you pictured there?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes. Good. There was enough for me to verify that the man was hit. So, in the same motion I come right
back and grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, "Let's get out of here; we are hit," and grabbed the mike and I
said, "Lawson, this is Kellerman,"--this is Lawson, who is in the front car. "We are hit; get us to the hospital
immediately." Now, in the seconds that I talked just now, a flurry of shells come into the car. I then looked back and
this time Mr. Hill, who was riding on the left front bumper of our followup car, was on the back trunk of that car; the
President was sideways down into. the back seat.

~snip~

Mr. SPECTER. Now, in your prior testimony you described a flurry of shells into the car. How many shots did you hear
after the first noise which you described as sounding like a firecracker?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Mr. Specter, these shells came in all together.
Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to say how many you heard?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say two, and it was like a double bang--bang, bang.
Mr. SPECTER. You mean now two shots in addition to the first noise?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir; yes, sir; at least.
Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate of the time, in seconds, from the first noise sounding like a firecracker until
the second noise which you heard?
Mr. KELLERMAN. This was instantaneous

~snip~

Mr. SPECTER. Can you describe the sound of the flurry of shots by way of distinction with the way you have described the
sound of the first shot?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Well, having heard all types of guns fired, most of them, rather, if I recall correctly these were two
sharp reports, sir. Again, I am going to refer to it as like a plane going through a sound barrier; bang, bang.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, you are referring to the flurry?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. Did it sound differently from the first noise you have described as being a firecracker?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes; definitely; very much so.

~snip~

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Kellerman, you said earlier that there were at least two additional shots. Is there any area in your
mind or possibility, as you recollect that situation, that there could have been more than two shots, or are you able
to say with any certainty?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say that I have, from the firecracker report and the two other shots that I know, those
were three shots. But, Mr. Specter, if President Kennedy had from all reports four wounds, Governor Connally three,
there have got to be more than three shots, gentlemen.

Senator COOPER. What is that answer? What did he say?
Mr. SPECTER. Will you repeat that, Mr. Kellerman?
Mr. KELLERMAN.President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and shoulder and the neck. Governor Connally, from our
reports, had three. There have got to be more than three shots.

Representative FORD. Is that why you have described--
Mr. KELLERMAN. The flurry.
Representative FORD. The noise as a flurry?

Online Bill Chapman

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3377
  • A View to a Kill
Re: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?
« Reply #134 on: April 20, 2017, 04:37:35 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Says you.  People see what they expect to see.

Says you
« Last Edit: April 20, 2017, 09:48:21 PM
by Bill Chapman
»

Online Bill Chapman

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3377
  • A View to a Kill
Re: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?
« Reply #135 on: April 20, 2017, 04:50:42 PM »
"Now, in the seconds that I talked just now, a flurry of shells come into the car."

Bonnie and Clyde, I suppose lol. Or Sonny (James Caan) at the toll booth in The Godfather

The 'flurry' shooters were invisible apparently and no snowflakes were found in the limo


 :grin:
« Last Edit: April 20, 2017, 10:03:21 PM
by Bill Chapman
»

Offline Bob Prudhomme

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Re: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?
« Reply #136 on: April 20, 2017, 06:04:45 PM »


"And how many of the 1........2....3 shot witnesses could have been wrong?"

Why is it only the witnesses that disagree with your mistaken theories that have the potential of being wrong?
"Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car." WC testimony of SA Clint Hill

Offline Andrew Mason

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
Re: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?
« Reply #137 on: April 21, 2017, 05:31:28 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

"And how many of the 1........2....3 shot witnesses could have been wrong?"

Why is it only the witnesses that disagree with your mistaken theories that have the potential of being wrong?
Each individual witness could have been wrong.  Let's start out by making no assumption that the witnesses are accurate or even telling the truth.  We will just assume that they were, for the most part, independent.  Let's suppose that they are all terrible witnesses and have only a 50% chance of correctly remembering the shot pattern.  The problem is that the distribution of witness recollections as to the shot pattern looks like You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login.  See You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login for all the evidence.   That distribution or anything like it is statistically highly unlikely to occur if the witnesses were just guessing.  Some non-random factor was driving the choice of the 1...........2.....3 shot pattern.  All I am saying is that there only things that could have caused such a high proportion to agree: either that is what they heard or they were not independent.   In the absence of evidence that they were colluding with each other to lie or being driven by some factor to believe they heard a pattern that was the exact opposite to what they heard, we can reliably conclude that the shot pattern heard was 1...........2.....3.

And that fits with:  the witnesses putting the first shot after z186; the witnesses seeing JFK react to the first shot; Greer's evidence; Nellie's evidence; the hair flip etc.  In fact, iif these shot pattern witnesses were wrong and the shot pattern was 1....2.......3, as the second shot SBT requires,  then the witnesses putting the first shot after z186; the witnesses seeing JFK react to the first shot; Greer's evidence; Nellie's evidence; etc are all independently completely wrong as well.  The probability that JFK was shot by the Pope is higher than the probability of that happening.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 06:47:10 PM
by Andrew Mason
»

Offline Bob Prudhomme

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Re: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?
« Reply #138 on: April 21, 2017, 05:59:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Each individual witness could have been wrong.  Let's start out by making no assumption that the witnesses are accurate or even telling the truth.  We will just assume that they were, for the most part, independent.  Let's suppose that they are all terrible witnesses and have only a 50% chance of correctly remembering the shot pattern.  The problem is that the distribution of witness recollections as to the shot pattern looks like You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login.  See You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login for all the evidence.   That distribution or anything like it is statistically highly unlikely to occur if the witnesses were just guessing.  Some non-random factor was driving the choice of the 1...........2.....3 shot pattern.  All I am saying is that there only things that could have caused such a high proportion to agree: either that is what they heard or they were not independent.   In the absence of evidence that they were colluding with each other or being driven by some factor to believe they heard a pattern that was the exact opposite to what they heard, we can reliably conclude that the shot pattern heard was 1...........2.....3.

And that fits with:  the witnesses putting the first shot after z186; the witnesses seeing JFK react to the first shot; Greer's evidence; Nellie's evidence; the hair flip etc.

Is this similar to the majority of medical witnesses at Parkland seeing a big hole in the back of JFK's head, but all being mistaken, too?
"Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car." WC testimony of SA Clint Hill

Offline Dillon Rankine

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 771
Re: Who Can Explain Connally’s Contradiction?
« Reply #139 on: April 21, 2017, 06:08:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Each individual witness could have been wrong.  Let's start out by making no assumption that the witnesses are accurate or even telling the truth.  We will just assume that they were, for the most part, independent.  Let's suppose that they are all terrible witnesses and have only a 50% chance of correctly remembering the shot pattern.  The problem is that the distribution of witness recollections as to the shot pattern looks like You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login.  See You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login for all the evidence.   That distribution or anything like it is statistically highly unlikely to occur if the witnesses were just guessing.  Some non-random factor was driving the choice of the 1...........2.....3 shot pattern.  All I am saying is that there only things that could have caused such a high proportion to agree: either that is what they heard or they were not independent.   In the absence of evidence that they were colluding with each other or being driven by some factor to believe they heard a pattern that was the exact opposite to what they heard, we can reliably conclude that the shot pattern heard was 1...........2.....3.

And that fits with:  the witnesses putting the first shot after z186; the witnesses seeing JFK react to the first shot; Greer's evidence; Nellie's evidence; the hair flip etc.

If I could ask again for you to elucidate on the following:

-Which Z-frames (approx.) were the shots fired at
-When do we see impact (if at all)
-Where the associated 'jiggle' episodes for shot are (Z-frame)
-What other non-witness evidence exists to corroborate this