The First Shot

[Dan O'meara]

[Jack Nessan]

Again, nothing but unsupported opinion.

It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

What evidence leads you to this opinion?

If it's just a case of "it looks that way to me", you needn't respond.

It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

What evidence leads you to this opinion?

Your "evidence". No other conclusion can be reached. It was all just your opinion.

[Dan O'meara]

It will always be just a guess and nothing more because the sign obscured the moment it took place.

What evidence leads you to this opinion?

Your "evidence". No other conclusion can be reached. It was all just your opinion.

Your "evidence". No other conclusion can be reached.

??
WTF is that supposed to mean??


You've stated you believe the first shot happened between z210 and z214, when JBC and JFK were behind the Stemmons sign.
You say you know this "based on Zapruder frames". Obviously this is utter nonsense and I keep asking you to clarify this statement
This will be the fourth time I've asked you to provide some kind of evidence to support this incredibly weak proposal.
Rather than do that [and I'm not saying you're a lazy researcher] you say it's the evidence I have provided for a first shot at z222/z223 that has led you to this 'revelation' and that "no other conclusion can be reached",

Really?

You made this statement:

"...I think it was a little earlier [than z222/z223] because you can use the Zapruder film with the aid of a few pieces of information and the witness statements to clarify where it actually took place."


I've asked you what in the Z-film are you using to come to this watery opinion?
What "few pieces of information" are you using?
What witness statements have you re-interpreted to reach this bogus conclusion?
Instead of providing one tiny scrap of evidence to support any of this [and, again, I'm not saying you're a lazy researcher], you simply say it's the evidence I have provided that demonstrates the first shot was at z222/z223.
And that there's no other way this evidence can be interpreted.
Even though it clearly demonstrates the first shot was around z222/z223.

I get the impression you're not going to do any work regarding the subject of this thread - when the first shot occurred.
You're just spouting some silly opinions based on nothing.
Maybe you've got nothing better to do and that's fair enough.
Or, and I think this is far more likely, you're completely out of your depth here and shouldn't really have stuck your beak in.

Get out of bed and start your own thread about how many shots there were.
It's not a massive effort and you might even enjoy it.
If you do, my first questions would be - why did the conspirators need to fake three shots? Why not just have two shots?

[Andrew Mason]

The positions are virtually the same as shown on my previous post.  The sight line from the left edge of the right hand-hold to the corner of the glass side panel passes through the front 1/4 to 1/3 of JFK's head.  The sight line from the edge of JFK's left shoulder passes to the left side of JBC's head and intersects the right sunvisor just a tad right of its centre:

This shows that Jerry's positions of both men are wrong. They are in very similar positions shown in the Sisco photo on Main Street. Here is the difference:

[Andrew Mason]

Just Mason strapping on his defense attorney cowboys and misrepresenting everything. How can my 3D model be "wrong" when it's not meant to show how the men were seated in the Sisco Photo or a still from the Powers film?



In this one Powers still, Kennedy is leaning towards his left (as in the Sisco Photo). Notice how high up his right shoulder is.



Now compare the angle of the President's shoulders in the Altgens05 Photo when Kennedy is seated upright, seconds before the turn onto Elm.

ok.  How is this for the positions of the men in Altgens #5 on Houston:

You have JFK a bit too far forward.  You can see that all but the cervical spine is pressed into the seatback.  The yellow lines show the sightlines for JFK's shoulders and turned head. The blue lines show the sight lines for JBC's head only since we cannot see his shoulders.

Does Mason not know the President was assassinated on Elm Street, and not Main?

He wasn't assassinated on Houston either.  Houston is just around the corner from Main.

[Jack Nessan]

Your "evidence". No other conclusion can be reached.

??
WTF is that supposed to mean??


You've stated you believe the first shot happened between z210 and z214, when JBC and JFK were behind the Stemmons sign.
You say you know this "based on Zapruder frames". Obviously this is utter nonsense and I keep asking you to clarify this statement
This will be the fourth time I've asked you to provide some kind of evidence to support this incredibly weak proposal.
Rather than do that [and I'm not saying you're a lazy researcher] you say it's the evidence I have provided for a first shot at z222/z223 that has led you to this 'revelation' and that "no other conclusion can be reached",

Really?

You made this statement:

"...I think it was a little earlier [than z222/z223] because you can use the Zapruder film with the aid of a few pieces of information and the witness statements to clarify where it actually took place."


I've asked you what in the Z-film are you using to come to this watery opinion?
What "few pieces of information" are you using?
What witness statements have you re-interpreted to reach this bogus conclusion?
Instead of providing one tiny scrap of evidence to support any of this [and, again, I'm not saying you're a lazy researcher], you simply say it's the evidence I have provided that demonstrates the first shot was at z222/z223.
And that there's no other way this evidence can be interpreted.
Even though it clearly demonstrates the first shot was around z222/z223.

I get the impression you're not going to do any work regarding the subject of this thread - when the first shot occurred.
You're just spouting some silly opinions based on nothing.
Maybe you've got nothing better to do and that's fair enough.
Or, and I think this is far more likely, you're completely out of your depth here and shouldn't really have stuck your beak in.

Get out of bed and start your own thread about how many shots there were.
It's not a massive effort and you might even enjoy it.
If you do, my first questions would be - why did the conspirators need to fake three shots? Why not just have two shots?

It took 2 1/2 years to grasp the concept of what did the witnesses state happened. Will it be 2 ½ more years to grasp how to view the other info and locate JFK’s position on Elm Street. Somewhere in less than a second and 12 feet it took place. Very interesting. 

Good question did the conspirators fake three shots vs two shots. Did they? Maybe it would be better to stick to the extremely challenging location of the first shot. 

[Andrew Mason]

I would allow a small margin of error when using sightlines involving the handrails on my model; I have not been able to measure them at the Henry Ford Museum.

Your hand-holds are 11 inches wide by my measurement, based on the full width of the car being 76.8 inches as set out in the H&E drawing.  The actual hand-holds are 10 inches as I measure them in various photos.

We also have to be careful in using old photos of the limo because it appears that the side window varied in width in different versions of the car. Yours appears to be accurate.

[Andrew Mason]

Well done. I tend to believe the measurements are probably correct. I used to draw mechanical drawings as part of my work. And I began doing this (by hand) well before computer aided design became common. Drawings are an important form of communication for all parties involved in a project. I can only guess that this drawing was used to communicate the dimensions which the investigators of the assassination requested. It doesn’t seem to me to be the type of drawing that the actual workers who built the limo would need or use. And I can only guess that whoever created this drawing for the assassination investigators might have taken an early version of their design drawings and placed some requested measurements on it for those investigators while not being concerned that the actual drawing scales off accurately to those dimensions. I believe that H&E was in the process of reworking that limo during the WC investigation. Therefore someone at H&E might have taken those measurements from the actual limo. I think that the reworked limo is at the Ford Museum in Michigan now. And I wonder what some actual measurements of the limo might tell us now.

Thanks for your revisions to the dimensions on the H&E drawing.  I did check the width of a 1961 Lincoln Continental here and the width is 78.6 inches. So much for the drawings!

I have done a comparison of my model vs. Jerry's and they are very close.  My side window back edge is correct but the window should be wider.  But Jerry's comparison is bogus. He has the arrow on my model going back to the back of the rear seat whereas on his it goes to about JFK's upper back. Here is the corrected comparison: