The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?

[John Iacoletti]

Had the Zapruder film recorded sound, we would likely know the bulk of the witnesses were wrong on the shot sequence as well.

Wherein we see once again that whatever Joe thinks happened is automatically "likely".

In any case, we should not trust witnesses. Not as individuals. Not as a group based on the idea ?Well, they couldn?t have all made the same mistake?.

You mean like the 10th and Patton witnesses?

[John Iacoletti]

And I question that notion that ?Psychologists have long noted that our sense of time slows as a traumatic event unfolds?. Playing NFL football is pretty stressful. Rookies commonly find the game too fast for them. If they can stay in the league for a while, they may be able to calm down and find that the game is no longer too fast for them.

Playing football is a traumatic event?

[John Iacoletti]

Kellerman said the first shot sounded different then the rest, followed by a flurry of shots.

By "flurry" he meant two.   

[Zeon Wasinsky]

Closest ear witnesses:

1,Harold Norman. 5th floor, right beneath SE corner 6th floor. Heard 3 shots, all 3 fired in a span of approx. 5 secs, given Normans interviews replicating the sequence with his "boom clack clack" description.

2.Amos Euins: Only approximately 30 yds away on the elm st corner looking up at the SE 6th story window. Saw a rifle and man holding it. Heard FOUR shots fired.

3.Majority of other earwitness heard 3 shots, 1st shot, then a few seconds, then 2 shots back to back, and in Lee Bowers example, the last 2 shots within about 1 sec apart, given his rapping his hand on the desk to replicate the timing (filmed interview with Mark Lane).

Conclusion: Low probability all shots were fired by an MC rifle, if these witness observation are correct.

[Joe Elliott]

Had the Zapruder film recorded sound, we would likely know the bulk of the witnesses were wrong on the shot sequence as well.

Wherein we see once again that whatever Joe thinks happened is automatically "likely".

 

I said ?likely happened?. Not ?absolutely happened?. Nothing in this world is absolutely certain.

In any case, we should not trust witnesses. Not as individuals. Not as a group based on the idea ?Well, they couldn?t have all made the same mistake?.

You mean like the 10th and Patton witnesses?


 

Absolutely. The best quality evidence is the ballistic evidence. The shells matching the gun he was found carrying. And what the hell was he doing carrying a gun, let alone trying to shoot an officer with it.

The 10th and Patton witnesses are less reliable evidence.


And do you feel your remarks are so clever you have to give yourself a thumbs up?

[Joe Elliott]

Closest ear witnesses:

1,Harold Norman. 5th floor, right beneath SE corner 6th floor. Heard 3 shots, all 3 fired in a span of approx. 5 secs, given Normans interviews replicating the sequence with his "boom clack clack" description.

2.Amos Euins: Only approximately 30 yds away on the elm st corner looking up at the SE 6th story window. Saw a rifle and man holding it. Heard FOUR shots fired.

3.Majority of other earwitness heard 3 shots, 1st shot, then a few seconds, then 2 shots back to back, and in Lee Bowers example, the last 2 shots within about 1 sec apart, given his rapping his hand on the desk to replicate the timing (filmed interview with Mark Lane).

Conclusion: Low probability all shots were fired by an MC rifle, if these witness observation are correct.

You wish to rely on what the bulk of the witnesses say about the shot spacing. Even though the bulk of the witnesses were wrong about the limousine stopping.


Why?

[Pat Speer]

The "limo stop" was not observed by the majority of the witnesses and is, in any event, nonsense. This was demonstrated years ago by researchers such as Tony Marsh and then again in a monster Education Forum thread in which Dr. James Fetzer pushed that it stopped and was challenged by Tink Thompson and myself. People desperate to believe the Zapruder film fake misunderstood or misrepresented the recollections of witnesses holding that the "motorcade" stopped--which it did, just after the shots, when some of the press vehicles stopped to unload reporters--and/or that the limo slowed---which it did, as proven by the photographic evidence--and presented this as evidence the limo stopped. It didn't.

I, myself, have spoken to witnesses such as Mary Moorman and she was quite clear in that the limo slowed but did not stop.

As far as the reliability of witnesses in general... I read dozens of articles and books on the reliability of eyewitness recollections before coming to the conclusion its possible the Parkland witnesses were wrong when they recalled the large head wound as being on the back of the head. So, no, I don't think the majority of witnesses believing the last two shots were closer together than the first two "proves" that's how the shots were fired.

But it is what the evidence suggests. And therein lies my beef with so many single-assassin theorists. They push that the theories pushed by the likes of Bugliosi and Myers are totally in keeping with the evidence, when they are not.

[John Agee]

Not sure what the point of this thread is.
Most LNs claim the first two shots were closer together than the last two, while the majority of those interviewed who noted a pattern claimed the last two were closer together than the first two, and a great number of these witnesses claimed the last two were bang bang, right after each other. This is a huge problem for those claiming the first shot was heard at Z-160, the second at Z-224, and the third at Z-313.

There's just no getting around that. The fact that some witnesses recalled there being a 3 second or more gap between the last two shots does little to explain why so many more thought the last two shots were closer together than the first two. Psychologists have long noted that our sense of time slows as a traumatic event unfolds. If the shots were evenly spaced, or spaced like most LNs claim, the vast majority of witnesses would think the first two shots were closer together, and that the final shot was delayed. But the reverse is true. The appropriate conclusion then is that the 160, 224, 313 scenario is at odds with the collective statements of the witnesses.

Pat, going with the collective statements from the witnesses, there were 3 shots. Do you agree that Kennedy is hit at Z313 and Z225, and those 2 frames (or very close), account for 2 of the 3 shots?