I believe the experiment with a revolver/pistol usually has one shot fired or none fired. No shot spanning to be recreated in the mind.
Ever heard tell of the Innocence Project?
The Innocence Project was established in the wake of a study
by the United States Department of Justice and United States
Senate, in conjunction with the Jewish Yeshiva University's
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, which claimed that
incorrect identification by eyewitnesses was a factor in over
70% of wrongful convictions.
There are many reasons why wrongful convictions occur.
The most common reason is false eyewitness identification,
which played a role in more than 75% of wrongful convictions
overturned by the Innocence Project. Often assumed to be
incontrovertible, a growing body of evidence suggests that
eyewitness identifications are unreliable.
-- Wikipedia
I think they're right about generalities, like the number of shots and seeing Kennedy struck in the head and the left-behind motorcade pausing at the top of Elm and on Houston. But shot spanning strikes me as a non-priority detail and for some an afterthought; I doubt any of the witnesses were prepared to or thought to assess shot spanning in real time.I think they're right about generalities, like the number of shots and seeing Kennedy struck in the head and the left-behind motorcade pausing at the top of Elm and on Houston. But shot spanning strikes me as a non-priority detail and for some an afterthought; I doubt any of the witnesses were prepared to or thought to assess shot spanning in real time.
A review of the student responses apparently reveals that most
of the students got the prominent facts right, but varied on lots of
subsidiary details, and that they omitted important facts.
( Link )
So you think the witness record supports the last two shots occurred within a second of each other, which I guess would be shots that struck near Z295-onward and at Z313.
It that's not right, then 75% of the 75% actually did get it wrong.
Seems like apples and oranges the classroom experiment compared to the assassination.
The innocence project is a completely inappropriate comparison. The strength of the testimony of the Dealey witnesses is in the majority giving the same description of the shots fired. When a large number of witnesses give the same version of the event you can assume it is unlikely they all made the same mistake. You don't have to take it as a fact but it lends credence to a particular theory and illuminates a path to further investigation.
The innocence project dealt with convictions based on as little as one eye witness not a majority of witnesses. Also in a court of law a single witness who gives a 'positive" id can be made to outweigh 2 witnesses who could not positively identify a suspect.
The innocence project often deals with eyewitnesses who attempt to identify a suspect by looking at their face and demeanor and comparing that with their memory. Well identifying peoples faces by memory is worlds apart from a memory of the spacing between shots heard. Remembering a face is hugely subjective while the time between shots is far less subjective.
You say "you think" they are right about the generalities but wrong about things you don't agree with. It sure sounds likes confirmation bias to me.
It is plausible that after hearing the first shot witnesses became alert and keen to the next two sounds. Many people heard the first shot and were not sure, but fearful that they just heard a shot and became immediately concerned. They likely paid close attention to the last two shots.
You stated that many of the students got smaller details wrong and omitted some facts entirely. I think this argument reflects a misunderstanding of the point made in the consistency of the Dealey witness testimony. It has nothing to do with who got details wrong or who omitted details. The strength of witness testimony is when a large majority AGREE on the facts. When witness just pull it out of their arse they don't agree! you don't get 75% of the witnesses giving the same story when the story is an incorrect memory!
"So you think the witness record supports the last two shots happened within a second of each other?"
I think the witnesses location affected the timing they heard. If the shots happened 1/4 sec apart a witnesses next to the TSB would hear and additional 1/4 second delay. Then consider a witnesses memory could be less than accurate and you may expect them to vary some. But the 2.3 seconds needed to fire the Carcano seems very inconsistent with the majority of the witness statements.
Some of the most qualified testimony comes from Greer and Kellerman because they were seated inches from where the rounds were landing and of course they said the last rounds "Came in as a flurry of shells" and the Last shots were "Almost simultaneous".
The classroom experiments may seem like apples and oranges to you but I think that argument applies well to the innocence project too.
I brought up the classroom experiment because skeptics use it to argue that witness testimony is unreliable. My point to that is when 75% of the witnesses are consistent you can't claim it proves witness testimony as unreliable or completely unreliable as they tend to claim. The fact is that modern defectives still use the consistency of witness testimony to solve cases. When the majority of witnesses give consistent accounts it most likely due to their accounts being correct for the most part.
