The First Shot

[John Corbett]

Not theoretical.  That is exactly what witnesses said occurred: “ 'just about as fast as you could expect a man to operate a bolt action rifle” (Emmett Hudson).

I didn't know Emmett Hudson was timing the shooter.

Most witnesses described the last two shots as being in rapid succession and several estimated the time between them to be no more than two seconds.

If those witnesses were correct, those two shots couldn't have been fired by Oswald. Some of these witnesses said they thought the last two shots sounded like they came one on top of the other. That doesn't fit your sill scenario of a Z270 shot followed by the Z313 head shot. The likelihood is that those witnesses heard two reports from the same shot. There are several possible explanations for hearing the muzzle blast and one other sound. It could have been and echo. It could have been the sound of the impact on JFK's skull. It could have been the sound a supersonic bullet will make when it passes near someone. I have personally experienced that third one. I have a neighbor who sometimes take target practice with his muzzle loading rifle. I have heard the double sound that rifle makes when he fires that rifle. A muzzle loader can't possibly fire two shots closely spaced. Therefore, it had to be two distinct sounds from the same shot.

You prefer your reasoning. But your reasoning is not evidence.

 

Nor is yours. My reasoning actually makes sense.

I prefer to base conclusions on evidence. Courts do too.
I would suggest it is ridiculous to suggest that your reasoning should supplant the evidence of 45+ witnesses who described the last two as being in rapid succession, real quick, etc.  Besides, reasoning could also work the other way: it makes sense that he would want to get the last shots off quickly as the car was getting farther away.

It doesn't matter if your reasoning is based on evidence if your reasoning is hair brained.

[Andrew Mason]

w

I didn't know Emmett Hudson was timing the shooter.

Charles Brehm and Marrion Baker also offered the same opinon (London ABA trial - see Bugliosi at 492 and 494)

If those witnesses were correct, those two shots couldn't have been fired by Oswald. Some of these witnesses said they thought the last two shots sounded like they came one on top of the other. That doesn't fit your sill scenario of a Z270 shot followed by the Z313 head shot.

Mary Woodward said that the sound of the second had not died out before the third shot sounded.  That may be what they were referring to as one on top of the other. The reverberation in Dealey plaza would have lasted more than 2 seconds given the distances between reflecting surfaces (Houston St buildings on the east, Post office on the south, railway berm and overpass on the south, west and north and the structures on the north part of DP as well as the TSBD on the north).

[John Corbett]

wCharles Brehm and Marrion Baker also offered the same opinon (London ABA trial - see Bugliosi at 492 and 494)

So were Brehm or Baker timing the shooting?

Mary Woodward said that the sound of the second had not died out before the third shot sounded.

That pretty much shoots down your theory of JBC being shot at Z270. The sound of a gunshot doesn't last 2.35 seconds. What Woodward is describing is a double sound from a single shot.

 

That may be what they were referring to as one on top of the other. The reverberation in Dealey plaza would have lasted more than 2 seconds given the distances between reflecting surfaces (Houston St buildings on the east, Post office on the south, railway berm and overpass on the south, west and north and the structures on the north part of DP as well as the TSBD on the north).

You pulled this one out of your ass. Sound travels at a bit over 1100 fps. None of the objects you mentioned were 1100 feet from the earwitnesses so no one would have been hearing an echo of a gunshot from 2.35 seconds earlier.

[Andrew Mason]

So were Brehm or Baker timing the shooting? That pretty much shoots down your theory of JBC being shot at Z270. The sound of a gunshot doesn't last 2.35 seconds. What Woodward is describing is a double sound from a single shot.
You pulled this one out of your ass. Sound travels at a bit over 1100 fps. None of the objects you mentioned were 1100 feet from the earwitnesses so no one would have been hearing an echo of a gunshot from 2.35 seconds earlier.

One would have to test it.  The reverberations take some time to die out.  The distance from the TSBD to the Post office building south of Commerce St was 200 yards so the first bounce back would take a bit more than 1 second. A second one arrives a bit more than 2 seconds afterward. Are you saying that all the sound is fully absorbed after the first reflection?  There are other surfaces farther south.  During the acoustic experiments set up for the HSCA witnesses to see if they could distinguish distinct rifle shots or if they might be fooled by echos and reverberation.  The witneses reported hearing reverberations some seconds afterward but weren't fooled by them (Report No. 4034, Analysis of Earwitness Reports Relating to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, D.M. Green, January 1979):

"From near the TSBD, a listener would hear a strong echo from the general vicinity of the railway overpass. However, since the initial disturbance, the shock wave from the bullet, would be almost directly overhead -- an anomalous locus, especially if the rifle had been fired from well within the TSBD - this echo would cause some confusion. The general area of the knoll, to the right of the bridge, would then be a prime candidate as the locus of the source. Even though this echo occurs 0.8 sec after the shock wave, it is the first sound that would make sense to the listener. On the other hand, listeners located near the railroad overpass would react to the very strong reflections from along Houston St.

For listeners in the Plaza area, the location of the rifle muzzle relative to the window opening is a critical determiner of the perceived sound. The further inside the building the muzzle is located, the greater the potential for the shock wave to dominate perception. If the muzzle of the rifle had been withdrawn and, therefore, little or no blast were present for one or more of the shots in 1963, the localization judgments of people in the Plaza would have been based primarily on the shock wave, creating much uncertainty and lack of agreement.

During the reconstruction, echoes were heard from the new hotel, but they arrived some seconds after the primary sound and long after the earlier echoes from structures bordering the Plaza. The hotel echoes, therefore, did not interfere with the subjective evaluations in any way. "

[John Corbett]

One would have to test it.  The reverberations take some time to die out.

So you admit you have no basis for your suggestion that the sound of the second shot could reverberate for over 2 seconds. Pretty much what I thought.

The distance from the TSBD to the Post office building south of Commerce St was 200 yards so the first bounce back would take a bit more than 1 second. A second one arrives a bit more than 2 seconds afterward.

So what are you suggesting? That there was an echo of an echo? [qiote]

Are you saying that all the sound is fully absorbed after the first reflection?  There are other surfaces farther south.  During the acoustic experiments set up for the HSCA witnesses to see if they could distinguish distinct rifle shots or if they might be fooled by echos and reverberation.  The witneses reported hearing reverberations some seconds afterward but weren't fooled by them (Report No. 4034, Analysis of Earwitness Reports Relating to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, D.M. Green, January 1979):

"From near the TSBD, a listener would hear a strong echo from the general vicinity of the railway overpass. However, since the initial disturbance, the shock wave from the bullet, would be almost directly overhead -- an anomalous locus, especially if the rifle had been fired from well within the TSBD - this echo would cause some confusion. The general area of the knoll, to the right of the bridge, would then be a prime candidate as the locus of the source. Even though this echo occurs 0.8 sec after the shock wave, it is the first sound that would make sense to the listener. On the other hand, listeners located near the railroad overpass would react to the very strong reflections from along Houston St.

For listeners in the Plaza area, the location of the rifle muzzle relative to the window opening is a critical determiner of the perceived sound. The further inside the building the muzzle is located, the greater the potential for the shock wave to dominate perception. If the muzzle of the rifle had been withdrawn and, therefore, little or no blast were present for one or more of the shots in 1963, the localization judgments of people in the Plaza would have been based primarily on the shock wave, creating much uncertainty and lack of agreement. [/quote]

The muzzle of the rifle was not inside the building when the shots were fired.

During the reconstruction, echoes were heard from the new hotel, but they arrived some seconds after the primary sound and long after the earlier echoes from structures bordering the Plaza. The hotel echoes, therefore, did not interfere with the subjective evaluations in any way. "

This would explain witnesses hearing multiple sounds from the third shot. What you are suggesting is entirely different.