The Shot That Missed

[Charles Collins]

As I'm sure you're aware, there is not even the slightest hint of any evidence to support your belief. It is completely a matter of faith.
It makes sense (to me at least) that the assassin would want to get off a shot far earlier than my proposal of z223. I also accept that, for some reason, the assassin chose an unnecessarily cramped spot to take the shot from (he had the whole sixth floor to choose from). What you propose is not beyond the realms of possibility.
My first problem is the difference between the position of the limo in the z130's and the manhole area. Was Qswald swinging the rifle round in a big arc in order to take aim? The difference between the two positions is radical and I cannot envisage how he can be holding the rifle in such a position as to accidentally shoot so far off the mark.
Obviously, my second problem with a shot so early has been discussed elsewhere in depth.

Your theory would also work for the manhole cover strike scenario if the third shot was the one that missed. However, if that were the case, I believe that more witnesses would have described a shot after the headshot in their accounts. Most witnesses seem to believe that the headshot was the last one.

My first problem is the difference between the position of the limo in the z130's and the manhole area. Was Qswald swinging the rifle round in a big arc in order to take aim? The difference between the two positions is radical and I cannot envisage how he can be holding the rifle in such a position as to accidentally shoot so far off the mark.

No, I believe that he likely wanted to have the rifle semi-aimed (or at least on his shoulder and pointed toward the vicinity of the area where the limo would emerge on the other side of the tree limbs) ahead of the time when it actually would get there. We see skeet shooters do something similar before they yell “pull” for the release of the target. And, that while in the process of trying to quickly pre-position the rifle he could have had his finger on the trigger and inadvertently fired a shot before he meant to.

I believe that there must be a good reason for that bullet to miss the entire limo. Other potential reasons include Max Holland’s theory that it hit the traffic signal, plus another possibility is that the top box on the window sill interfered with an intended early shot. If he had been sitting on the box and tracking the limo with the rifle in the period immediately before Z133, when it reached the Z133 area the top outer corner of the box was in a position to interfere and the end of the barrel might have hit the box and caused a shot to miss the limo. In this case, it would likely have hit the asphalt and disintegrated similar to Haags’ demonstration posted earlier in this thread.

[Charles Collins]

"He had one cartridge in the chamber ready, so he only had two more to put in to fire"

Drain is stating a two shot scenario. The math is off for a three shot scenario. He states there was a total of three bullets in the gun. The last bullet in the gun was unfired and ejected by Fritz, leaving two shots total having been fired by LHO according to Drain. CE 543, which lacks the indentation from the chamber of the rifle,  was ejected prior to the first shot.

That’s probably the reason (NOT) why most witnesses heard three shots.

[Dan O'meara]

That’s probably why most witnesses heard three shots (NOT).

The overwhelming majority of "ear-witnesses" heard three shots only.
That is a fact.

[Charles Collins]

The overwhelming majority of "ear-witnesses" heard three shots only.
That is a fact.

Yes, I agree. I might should have worded my sentence differently. I think I will edit it accordingly.

[Dan O'meara]

Yes, I agree. I might should have worded my sentence differently. I think I will edit it accordingly.

This raises the other problem for your scenario - the timing of the shots.
In your scenario (assuming a first shot at z133) the gap between the first shot and the headshot is 10 seconds.
There is only one witness (as far as I'm aware) that proposes such a time gap (Connally)
One witness.
Many describe a pattern where the second two shots are quite close together.
You are proposing - first shot then a gap of 5 seconds, second shot then another gap of 5 seconds to the headshot.
I can't find a single witness proposing such a thing.

[Charles Collins]

This raises the other problem for your scenario - the timing of the shots.
In your scenario (assuming a first shot at z133) the gap between the first shot and the headshot is 10 seconds.
There is only one witness (as far as I'm aware) that proposes such a time gap (Connally)
One witness.
Many describe a pattern where the second two shots are quite close together.
You are proposing - first shot then a gap of 5 seconds, second shot then another gap of 5 seconds to the headshot.
I can't find a single witness proposing such a thing.

There are quite a few witnesses who said the shots were evenly spaced. One that I recently came across and took note of (for another reason) was the radio dispatcher for the Sheriff’s office named Watson. He said in his report to the Sheriff dated 11/22/63:

...about that time I heard three loud reports evenly spaced which I presumed to be rifle or shotgun blast. I looked at the time on the radio panel and it was about 40-seconds after 12:30pm...

There are other similar accounts from some of the witnesses.

[Jack Nessan]

That’s probably the reason (NOT) why most witnesses heard three shots.

You were discussing Drain's testimony which is obviously a two shot scenario. Apparently now you are discussing your opinion. Drain tried to explain there was not a missed shot. In fact he explains there was only two shots.

[Jack Nessan]

The overwhelming majority of "ear-witnesses" heard three shots only.
That is a fact.

The overwhelming majority of "eye" witnesses describe two shots or second shot as being headshot. All five people just in JFK's car.

Interesting that you would place more emphasis on the opinions of witnesses who did not know what was happening as opposed to those who did.

[Charles Collins]

You were discussing Drain's testimony which is obviously a two shot scenario. Apparently now you are discussing your opinion. Drain tried to explain there was not a missed shot. In fact he explains there was only two shots.

Read it again. He most certainly does not.

[Dan O'meara]

The overwhelming majority of "eye" witnesses describe two shots or second shot as being headshot. All five people just in JFK's car.

Interesting that you would place more emphasis on the opinions of witnesses who did not know what was happening as opposed to those who did.

What are you talking about?
Are you saying the people in the limo were the only ones who knew the limo was being fired on?
Are you saying people outside the limo didn't see JFK being shot?
Are you saying more than 150 witnesses who heard 3 shots only were wrong?