5.6 seconds or 4.9 seconds (between magic bullet and head shot)?

[Thomas Graves]

Well, if you’re going to play the “could have” game, then the throat shot could have hit the asphalt and disappeared.

John "Where The Hell Did My Baby Go?" Iacoletti,

Well, didn't Governor Connally and some other witnesses say in so many words that they heard a shot (or a "backfire" or a "firecracker") ring out when the limo had just come out of the infamous Elm Street turn?

John Connally: “We had just made the turn [onto Elm Street], well, when I heard what I thought was a shot. I heard this noise which I immediately
took to be a rifle shot.” (4/21/64)

George Hickey, a Secret Service agent in the follow-up car: “After a very short distance I heard a loud report which sounded like a firecracker. It appeared to come from the right and rear and seemed to me to be at ground level. I stood up and looked to my right and rear in an attempt to identify it. Nothing caught my attention except people shouting and cheering. (11/30/63)

etc.

Edit:  I deleted what Howard Brennan said, because he obviously meant to say 30 feet instead of yards.  LOL

--  MWT   

[John Iacoletti]

Well, didn't Governor Connally and some other witnesses say in so many words that they heard a shot (or a "backfire" or a "firecracker") ring out when the limo had just come out of the infamous Elm Street turn?

And the reason for thinking that this was a first shot that missed and then disintegrated into the asphalt would be . . .  ?

Connally thought the first shot hit Kennedy.

[Charles Collins]

Or it could be hype to help sell his slide set.

Willis thought his fifth slide corresponded to Z226 and that it showed what his slide didn't: that Kennedy "had already grabbed his throat". He testified at the Shaw Trail: "I cocked my camera for another picture and this loud shot went off ...  so I became alarmed". He then added: " I was trying to take a picture at the moment and the reflex from the shot caused me to take one of these pictures." It was the "reflex from the shot" (shot reverberations?) that caused him to take his fifth slide.

" I was trying to take a picture at the moment and the reflex from the shot caused me to take one of these pictures."

By the time of the Shaw trial, I believe that Willis had realized that his fifth slide didn’t correspond with the timing of any of the shots. Therefore he testified “one of these pictures,” instead of specifying the fifth slide. Human memory is a reconstruction that typically uses associations. It appears to me that he did associate taking one of the pictures as a result of the first shot; however, it appears to me that it was his fourth slide. It seems to be out of focus and/or motion blurred. This would be explained by his inadvertently taking the picture before he was fully ready (due to the sound of the first shot). I believe that the bullet missed, potentially because of interference from either the Rolling Reader box or the pipe closest to the window, and possibly hit the pavement behind the limousine, or the curb near Tague.

[Thomas Graves]

And the reason for thinking that this was a first shot that missed and then disintegrated into the asphalt would be . . .  ?

Connally thought the first shot hit Kennedy.

John "I Always Throw The Baby Out With The Bathwater" Iacoletti,

Sure, the first shot that hit anyone.

--  MWT   

[John Mytton]

And the reason for thinking that this was a first shot that missed and then disintegrated into the asphalt would be . . .  ?

Mr. LIEBELER. So, you were standing directly in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building and on the same side of Elm Street that the Texas School Book Depository is located?
Mrs. BAKER. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me what you saw?
Mrs. BAKER. Well, after he passed us, then we heard a noise and I thought it was firecrackers, because I saw a shot or something hit the pavement.

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

Mr. LIEBELER. As you went down Elm Street that you saw this thing hit the street--what did it look like when you saw it?
Mrs. BAKER. Well, as I said, I thought it was a firecracker. It looked just like you could see the sparks from it and I just thought it was a firecracker and I was thinking that there was somebody was fixing to get in a lot of trouble and we thought the kids or whoever threw it were down below or standing near the underpass or back up here by the sign.


Another mistaken eyewitness?

JohnM

[Jack Nessan]

Mr. LIEBELER. So, you were standing directly in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building and on the same side of Elm Street that the Texas School Book Depository is located?
Mrs. BAKER. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me what you saw?
Mrs. BAKER. Well, after he passed us, then we heard a noise and I thought it was firecrackers, because I saw a shot or something hit the pavement.

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

Mr. LIEBELER. As you went down Elm Street that you saw this thing hit the street--what did it look like when you saw it?
Mrs. BAKER. Well, as I said, I thought it was a firecracker. It looked just like you could see the sparks from it and I just thought it was a firecracker and I was thinking that there was somebody was fixing to get in a lot of trouble and we thought the kids or whoever threw it were down below or standing near the underpass or back up here by the sign.


Another mistaken eyewitness?

JohnM

''.....kids or whoever threw it were down below or standing near the underpass or back up here by the sign. "

Throwing from the underpass? That is a long way from the Z160 location.

Standing by the sign? Funny that is where the firt shot, supported by all the eyewitness testimony, took place.

[John Iacoletti]

First of all, it’s the LNers who have all the “mistaken” (or “lying”) witnesses.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,100.0.html

Second of all, since when do you base a conclusion on what a single witness said? Only when it’s something that incriminates Oswald.

[John Mytton]

Second of all, since when do you base a conclusion on what a single witness said? Only when it’s something that incriminates Oswald.

What has non directional sparks have specifically to do with Oswald?

Btw, we get it "Iacoletti", we really do, you think that there is no evidence against Oswald, but how is your obsession of inserting Oswald into almost everyone of your posts going to help you solve this crime, or are you just happy being clueless?

JohnM