WC Member's Views Confirmed By HSCA

[Jack Nessan]

"Proof" of a fact is determined by the trier of fact - it is whatever evidence that is considered by the trier of fact to be sufficient to establish a fact. You obviously do not consider the abundant evidence of 3 shots to be sufficient to convince you that there were 3 shots.  Others do, including all the members of the WC, HSCA. You appear to think that all that evidence is somehow wrong.
JBC did not say he was struck almost simultaneously with a second shot. He said he heard the first shot, realized it was a rifle shot and turned around to try to see JFK but could not as he had moved. As he turned back to turn to his left he said he felt being struck forcefully in the back by another shot. He says that as he lay back onto his wife he heard a third shot and felt the spray of brain matter over him.  Even though he did not hear three shots, he observed three shots.
It is certainly possible that JBC's back wound was caused by a bullet that had not passed through JFK. In fact, one can make a reasonable case that in order for the bullet to have missed his right lung as it did, it had to have been travelling at a very small angle to the direction of the car - almost from directly behind.  That means it struck him when the car was farther down Elm when the angle to the SN was very small.

Interesting, instead of just posting the proof for all to see this is what you decided was better information,  which is basically nothing more than an unfounded fervent belief. The WC was not certain about the number of shots and stated the reasons in their conclusions.

---------------------------------------

As usual you are quoting what a witness stated at a later time. Seems simple enough immediately after hearing the shot he just starts to make the turn he knows he is wounded.
JBC Hospital Interview 11/27
"I was sitting in the jump seat. I turned to my left to look in the back seat ? the president had slumped. He had said nothing. Almost simultaneously, as I turned, I was hit and I knew I had been hit badly."

In his statements JBC always thought the rifle shots were very close together
"were very, very brief span of time"
"Immediately after he heard the first shot"
"someone was shooting with an automatic rifle"
"rapidity of these two, of the first shot plus the blow that I took"

The only problem with father down the road, JBC was already wounded.

[Jack Nessan]

You have offered nothing that trumps what JBC and his wife said.

The question that was asked was answered.
R Caprio: "So you can't quote her saying that the same bullet hit both JFK and JBC. Got it."
-----------------------------------
What JBC stated was he cried Oh no no no after he was wounded.

What Nelly and Jackie stated was he cried out Oh no no no after the first shot and before the second. JBC never heard an additional shot just felt the pain. Where is the confusion. What more proof do you need.
----------------------------
The thread is about Sen Russell and three distinct shots. Prove the three shots. From where I stand if there is a difference between yourself , Chapman, and Mason only you three know what it is. Nothing but pure blind faith. Each with his own placement of a shot that never happened. If there was a third shot there would be no argument over where it happened, let alone being placed at all times and locations in the shooting sequence.

[Bill Chapman]

You're the one ignoring it as it is NOT meant to explode upon impact, but the head shot did. Russell was right not to believe in the SBT since it is fictitious.

The twofer hit heavy rib bone only at a glance, not nose first.

[Alan Hardaker]

I want to be clear that I am not in any way endorsing your general view that Oswald did not fire all the shots.  But your points about the SBT are valid. The SBT was a theory that legal counsel to the WC developed to explain where the bullet that passed through JFK went.  There was never any actual evidence that it occurred and a great deal of evidence that conflicted with it.  There is even more conflict between the "second bullet SBT" that is now popular and the evidence - particularly the "first bullet hit JFK" evidence, the evidence that the first shot was after z186, and the overwhelming evidence that the last two shots were closer together.

" overwhelming evidence that the last two shots were closer together"...so when JFK reacts and his hands go up towards his throat after being hit and some 4/5 seconds later is hit by the fatal head shot...that time span has somehow shrunk over the years has it.

 

[Alan Hardaker]

Far as the shot that hit JFK, the one he reacts to when he emerges from behind the sign, about frame 225 in the Zapruder film, is concerned, I think Dale Myers nails it with his computer analysis. I'm sure everyone is aware of this body of work. Pinpoints the trajectory, seat positions, height of seats, reactions by JFK and Gov.Connally. Explains everything more or less relating to that shot.

[Oscar Navarro]

I am not sure what your definition of evidence is. 

Over 20 witnesses recalled that JFK reacted immediately as if hit by the first shot. See this list of witnesses and their statements.  Not a single witness said that JFK smiled and waved after the first shot, let alone for 3 seconds.  So that is evidence that the first shot, not the second, struck JFK.  That evidence is also inconsistent with a first shot before z186 (Betzner, motorcade witnesses, witnesses along Elm).
The problem is that there is a great deal of evidence that conflicts with a first shot before z186. There is no evidence that conflicts with a first shot after z186.

According to the evidence, all three shots struck either JFK or JBC. None missed................

I am not sure what your definition of evidence is.



I responded to your claim that all three shots found their mark. There's no evidence for that. In fact, it would be impossible. Less than a second passes between the time JFK is blocked by the Stemmons Freeway sign and when JBC is hit.

1) What the evidence shows is that JFK shows no signs of distress before the Stemmons Freeway Sign blocks him form the view of Zapruder at frame 208.

2) What the evidence shows is that by Frame 224 JBC suit lapel makes a rapid move forward indicating a bullet has passed through his body.

3) What the evidence shows is that by Frame 225 JFK is reacting to the automatic reflex known as the Thorburn position.

4) What the evidence shows is that the third shot hit JFK in the head and that either the first or second shot hit both JFK and JBC.

 I have no problem with a claim that the second shot missed as LHO could still have had enough time to have fired a third shot, let's say first shot Frame 223, second shot missed around frame 250 (corresponds with Altgens testimony as to when he heard the first shot), third shot hit Frame 312. It's entirely possible, even probable, that Oswald was only using the iron sight for the first two shots and that would decrease the amount of time it takes to reload and fire by about 3/4 to a full second (12-18 frames). For the third and fatal head shot Oswald could have reaquired the target and fired in 3.3 seconds (62 frames).


While I agree there's earwitness testimony that places the first shot later than frame 186 I disagree there's no evidence of a shot before frame 186. The best evidence is the combination of the Zapruder film and the testimony of several witnesses plus Rosemary Willis can be seen on the Zapruder film running beside the presidential limo until she begins to slow down and turn her head to the left at frame 161. She later gave an interview in which she stated her reaction was due to a loud noise. This is in part why I agree with Gerald Posner that the sequence of shots were as follows;


1) Frame 160 missed

2) Frame 223 SB C-399 passes through JFK and JBC until it falls from his thigh and lands inside the pant cuff.


3) Frame 312 Fatal Head Shot

[Oscar Navarro]

The question that was asked was answered.
R Caprio: "So you can't quote her saying that the same bullet hit both JFK and JBC. Got it."
-----------------------------------
What JBC stated was he cried Oh no no no after he was wounded.

What Nelly and Jackie stated was he cried out Oh no no no after the first shot and before the second. JBC never heard an additional shot just felt the pain. Where is the confusion. What more proof do you need.
----------------------------
The thread is about Sen Russell and three distinct shots. Prove the three shots. From where I stand if there is a difference between yourself , Chapman, and Mason only you three know what it is. Nothing but pure blind faith. Each with his own placement of a shot that never happened. If there was a third shot there would be no argument over where it happened, let alone being placed at all times and locations in the shooting sequence.

Harold Norman Affidavit 12/4/1963

Just after the President passed by, I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots. I knew that the shots had come from directly above me, and I could hear the expended cartridges fall to the floor. I also could here the bolt action of the rifle. I saw some dust fall from the ceiling of the fifth floor and I felt sure that whoever had fired the shots was directly above me.


B. R. Williams and Junior Jarman back him up and all three were a floor directly below the snipers nest. What more do you need?

[Oscar Navarro]

"Proof" of a fact is determined by the trier of fact - it is whatever evidence that is considered by the trier of fact to be sufficient to establish a fact. You obviously do not consider the abundant evidence of 3 shots to be sufficient to convince you that there were 3 shots.  Others do, including all the members of the WC, HSCA. You appear to think that all that evidence is somehow wrong.
JBC did not say he was struck almost simultaneously with a second shot. He said he heard the first shot, realized it was a rifle shot and turned around to try to see JFK but could not as he had moved. As he turned back to turn to his left he said he felt being struck forcefully in the back by another shot. He says that as he lay back onto his wife he heard a third shot and felt the spray of brain matter over him.  Even though he did not hear three shots, he observed three shots.
It is certainly possible that JBC's back wound was caused by a bullet that had not passed through JFK. In fact, one can make a reasonable case that in order for the bullet to have missed his right lung as it did, it had to have been travelling at a very small angle to the direction of the car - almost from directly behind.  That means it struck him when the car was farther down Elm when the angle to the SN was very small.

It is certainly possible that JBC's back wound was caused by a bullet that had not passed through JFK. In fact, one can make a reasonable case that in order for the bullet to have missed his right lung as it did, it had to have been travelling at a very small angle to the direction of the car - almost from directly behind.  That means it struck him when the car was farther down Elm when the angle to the SN was very small.




No, it's not possible. First of all JFK was blocking JBC. Second, the bullet that hit JBC was not a pristine bullet but was jawing. Third, were did the bullet go after going through JBC? Fourth, by frame 238 JBC lung has collapsed.