What?s the best evidence of a second shooter?

[John Iacoletti]

All scientific analyses of the film show clear evidence of JBC being struck at Z224.

 

These "scientific" analyses amount to "looks like he's reacting to a bullet strike".  Other people make the exact same arguments about different frames.

[Jerry Organ]

When you look at JFK BEFORE he is hidden behind the Stemmon's sign, he has his right hand raised almost to the top of his head.  When he emerges from behind the sign he has quickly lowered his right hand towards his throat and quickly raised his left hand up from his lap towards his throat.

Seems to me he's just waving with his right hand as he goes behind the sign. He got that hand up by about Z180, about one-and-a-half second before Z207, the last frame before a splice.

During that same interval, Connally is looking to his right at frame 193, frame 200 and frame 224.  Connally does NOT appear to make any reaction to a shot until (starting at) frame 224.



SUMMARY:

1.  Kennedy reacts to a shot (probably to his neck) between frames 200 and frame 224.  Because he has to move his arms so far, it had to have been several tenths of a second before frame 224.  It looks like it was closer to at least a second for him to react like he did.

2.  Connally makes no reaction (especially NOT a serious wound) until AFTER he has emerged from behind the sign

3. Because JFK moves both his hands towards his throat, it is reasonable to assume that JFK's first wound was to his throat.

4,  A reasonable conclusion based on the reactions that can be seen in the Zapruder film is that

     a.  First JFK was wounded in the neck

     b.  The next shot (about a second after the first that hit JFK) wounded Connally for the first time.

5. If thwo shots really are closer together than about 3 seconds, it suggests that there were multiple shooters and that means a conspiracy killed JFK.

I see no reason to believe Kennedy was reacting to a shot in Z225. To me, he first reacts to being shot at Z226. In Z225, he seems to me to be still lowering his hand towards the car rail, maybe to unite it at the car rail with the left hand that was being raised. Similar to how he had his hands near the car rail in the Z160s.

[John Mytton]

These "scientific" analyses amount to "looks like he's reacting to a bullet strike".  Other people make the exact same arguments about different frames.

At the same time;
Kennedy violently reacts.
Connally violently reacts.
Connally's jacket violently reacts.

Both men's wounds line up and can be traced back to the floor with Oswald's rifle was, geez what are the chances?



JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

At the same time;
Kennedy violently reacts.
Connally violently reacts.
Connally's jacket violently reacts.

Like I said, the "analysis" is "looks to me like they are reacting to a bullet strike".  You see what you expect to see.

Both men's wounds line up

LOL

and can be traced back to the floor with Oswald's rifle was, geez what are the chances?

"Oswald's rifle".  LOL.

[Bill Chapman]

Like I said, the "analysis" is "looks to me like they are reacting to a bullet strike".  You see what you expect to see

Nah.. Kennedy suddenly decided to straighten his tie, and Connally swatted at a bee, by coincidence at the same time.

[John Mytton]

Like I said, the "analysis" is "looks to me like they are reacting to a bullet strike".  You see what you expect to see.

LOL

"Oswald's rifle".  LOL.

Like I said, the "analysis" is "looks to me like they are reacting to a bullet strike".  You see what you expect to see.

The advanced cgi computer analysis and the physical evidence is that the men were lined up, their wounds were line up back towards Oswald's rifle and they violently react simultaneously, whereas your team reckons there was a dozen keystone kop snipers, nice comeback.

LOL

Nice, when you got nothing you start laughing like an idiot.

"Oswald's rifle".  LOL.

See above.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

The advanced cgi computer analysis

LOL

and the physical evidence is that the men were lined up, their wounds were line up back towards Oswald's rifle and they violently react simultaneously,

LOL

Nice, when you got nothing you start laughing like an idiot.

You know what's idiotic?  Parroting "Oswald's rifle", "Oswald's window", "Oswald's shells", "Oswald's clip" over and over again like it proves anything.

Or thinking that stating a conclusion with confidence is somehow the same thing as evidence.

[Bill Chapman]

You know what's idiotic?  Parroting "Oswald's rifle", "Oswald's window", "Oswald's shells", "Oswald's clip" over and over again like it proves anything.

I prefer 'Dirty Harvey'
As in Smith, Wesson.. and Lee