The First Shot

[Dan O'meara]

No the 1st shot was at Z123(say).
The head angles in Altgens-6/Z207 are 140deg/45deg -- 110deg/40deg --40deg/20deg -- 55deg/??deg (blurred).
Hence Altgens-6 could be as soon as say Z217.  Has anyone proven that it is near Z255?
But in any case the problem with a later 1st shot is that yes it accords better with the supposedly very slow Agent's reactions (Z123 to Z203 is 80 frames at 18.3 fps or 4.4 sec). But equally a later 1st shot requires that Oswald had a shorter time tween shot-1 (at say Z237) & shot-2 (at say Z218)(ie say minus 19 frames or minus 1.0 sec), which i suppose means that shot-2 (the magic bullet) then becomes shot-1.

"Hence Altgens-6 could be as soon as say Z217.  Has anyone proven that it is near Z255?"

Yes, it has been proven that Altgens 6 is near z255.
All you need is a good copy of Altgens 6 and a good copy of the Z-film and you can work it out yourself.
The SS agents do not react slowly, they react straight away. The reason they don't react in the Z-film is because there has been no shot for them to react to.
The Z-film proves there was no 'early' shot. It's clear evidence but you don't seem interested. I find that very strange.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

"Hence Altgens-6 could be as soon as say Z217.  Has anyone proven that it is near Z255?"

Yes, it has been proven that Altgens 6 is near z255.
All you need is a good copy of Altgens 6 and a good copy of the Z-film and you can work it out yourself.
The SS agents do not react slowly, they react straight away. The reason they don't react in the Z-film is because there has been no shot for them to react to.
The Z-film proves there was no 'early' shot. It's clear evidence but you don't seem interested. I find that very strange.

I am very interested in where was Altgens-6, but Zapruder doesnt show the QM after Z207, so what was the proof for Z255? 

If Z255 is simultaneous with Altgens-6 then i can live with that, offhand i cant see that that would sink any of my theory (which is other's theory mostly) that......
Z123 -- Oswald fired at Z123(say)(if Z123 existed)(hitting the signals & road) a fragment glancing JFK's head,
Z218 -- Oswald fired at Z218 (or Z223 if u like, duzzenmadder)(the magic bullet)
Z313 -- Oswald possibly fired near Z313 (hitting Tague)(if indeed Oswald fired 3 times, which is unlikely), which by memory gives a gap of 5.2  sec then 5.2  sec totalling 10.4 sec (Connally said 10 sec to 12 sec)
Z313 -- Hickey fired the accidental fatal AR15 headshot at Z313 (hitting Tague).

[Dan O'meara]

I am very interested in where was Altgens-6, but Zapruder doesnt show the QM after Z207, so what was the proof for Z255? 

If Z255 is simultaneous with Altgens-6 then i can live with that, offhand i cant see that that would sink any of my theory (which is other's theory mostly) that......
Z123 -- Oswald fired at Z123(say)(if Z123 existed)(hitting the signals & road) a fragment glancing JFK's head,
Z218 -- Oswald fired at Z218 (or Z223 if u like, duzzenmadder)(the magic bullet)
Z313 -- Oswald possibly fired near Z313 (hitting Tague)(if indeed Oswald fired 3 times, which is unlikely), which by memory gives a gap of 5.2  sec then 5.2  sec totalling 10.4 sec (Connally said 10 sec to 12 sec)
Z313 -- Hickey fired the accidental fatal AR15 headshot at Z313 (hitting Tague).

"I am very interested in where was Altgens-6, but Zapruder doesnt show the QM after Z207, so what was the proof for Z255?"

The proof comes from an analysis of the occupants of the presidential limo shown in Altgens 6

"Z123 -- Oswald fired at Z123(say)(if Z123 existed)(hitting the signals & road) a fragment glancing JFK's head"

There is no shot at this time. We know this because the SS agents, who we can see until z207, do not react to any shot.
Also, you seem to think JFK is hit by a bullet fragment but in the Z-film he is seen smiling and waving to the crowd. He would not be doing this if he had been hit in the head.

"Z313 -- Hickey fired the accidental fatal AR15 headshot at Z313 (hitting Tague)."

 

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

"I am very interested in where was Altgens-6, but Zapruder doesnt show the QM after Z207, so what was the proof for Z255?"

The proof comes from an analysis of the occupants of the presidential limo shown in Altgens 6

"Z123 -- Oswald fired at Z123(say)(if Z123 existed)(hitting the signals & road) a fragment glancing JFK's head"

There is no shot at this time. We know this because the SS agents, who we can see until z207, do not react to any shot.
Also, you seem to think JFK is hit by a bullet fragment but in the Z-film he is seen smiling and waving to the crowd. He would not be doing this if he had been hit in the head.

"Z313 -- Hickey fired the accidental fatal AR15 headshot at Z313 (hitting Tague)."

 

Yes i had a look & Z255 is nearnuff Altgens-6.
Re a fragment glancing JFK's head, thats my guess, based on JFK saying my god i have been hit or similar according to Kellerman. I dont think that JFK said anything when hit at Z218-Z224, so it had to be in response to the Z123 shot.  Some small lead fragments would be enuff to initially worry JFK & make JFK react at Z143 but not enough to make JFK go into orbit. I doubt that a fragment of signal or paint etc hit JFK (they would have found it)(except that a small piece might have stayed in JFK's hair)(& later lost).

[Andrew Mason]

When I say it takes courage to change firmly held beliefs in the face of evidence that refutes those beliefs, that wasn't anything to do with an ad hominem argument. It's the truth. But it doesn't matter.

I wouldn't say it takes courage.  I know you honestly believe that the third shot was after z313.  It just requires examining the evidence and keeping an open mind. The problem with your approach is that by using a lot of ad hominem attacks, as you and Jerry tend to do, the tendency is for you to tune out the other side because of who is making the argument rather than seriously considering the arguments based on evidence.

The problems that I have with the evidence are not because you and Jerry are making the arguments. It is because they do not fit the fundamental facts.  They are built on speculation and discarding vast amounts of consistent and independent evidence. In the end, they really do not make sense either, but that is a relatively minor point. 

The fundamental facts for which there is abundant cogent evidence are:

1.  the shot pattern was 1........2....3 with the last two shots perceptibly closer together, in "rapid succession". 
2.  there were 3 shots.

We all agree on point 2.

Point 1. tells us that JFK was hit on the first shot. This is well supported by the evidence as you have pointed out.

These two fundamental facts do not establish that there was a shot around z270.  That is established in two ways:

a) JBC being wounded on the second shot or
b) the headshot being the last shot.

There is strong evidence for a) and really no evidence that he was hit on any other shot.  There is also strong evidence for b) but some evidence that may suggest it is not correct.

Regarding the evidence that the last shot was the head shot:  Everyone in the president's car and in the QM including Clint Hill who was between the cars said that the headshot was the last shot. (Clint Hill did not recall a second shot but he accepts from what others in the QM told him that there was a shot while he was running toward the car before the one that he saw hit the president.  This is set out in Gerald Blaines book "The Kennedy Detail").

I accept, based on all the evidence, that the head shot was the last shot not only because of this evidence but also because of the evidence that JBC was hit in the back on the second shot.  There is consistent evidence that the second shot struck JBC in the back (from Powers, JBC, Nellie, Newman, Hickey, Greer etc) and no evidence that it did not.   This necessarily means the headshot was the last. 

So this leads inescapably to the conclusion that there was a shot just before the headshot. 

In trying to pinpoint when the shot occurred I noticed a number of anomalous little details in the zfilm. Maybe I am wrong.  Maybe the second shot occurred at z268 or z273 but I do not think so for many reasons which I have given. I believe the evidence indicates that the shot - which other evidence says must have occurred around 2 seconds before the head shot - occurred between z271 and z272.  I am not persuaded of that because of those anomalous details seen in the zfilm. I am persuaded because of the fundamental facts and the third shot being the last shot. 

So, I am not going to be persuaded by some argument based on interpretation of the zfilm around z270.  I am only going to be persuaded by evidence that the third shot was after z313 and missed that is so strong that it outweighs the clear and consistent evidence that we do have that the headshot was the last shot.  So, you see, it has nothing to do with courage.

[Dan O'meara]

I wouldn't say it takes courage.  I know you honestly believe that the third shot was after z313.  It just requires examining the evidence and keeping an open mind. The problem with your approach is that by using a lot of ad hominem attacks, as you and Jerry tend to do, the tendency is for you to tune out the other side because of who is making the argument rather than seriously considering the arguments based on evidence.

The problems that I have with the evidence are not because you and Jerry are making the arguments. It is because they do not fit the fundamental facts.  They are built on speculation and discarding vast amounts of consistent and independent evidence. In the end, they really do not make sense either, but that is a relatively minor point. 

The fundamental facts for which there is abundant cogent evidence are:

1.  the shot pattern was 1........2....3 with the last two shots perceptibly closer together, in "rapid succession". 
2.  there were 3 shots.

We all agree on point 2.

Point 1. tells us that JFK was hit on the first shot. This is well supported by the evidence as you have pointed out.

These two fundamental facts do not establish that there was a shot around z270.  That is established in two ways:

a) JBC being wounded on the second shot or
b) the headshot being the last shot.

There is strong evidence for a) and really no evidence that he was hit on any other shot.  There is also strong evidence for b) but some evidence that may suggest it is not correct.

Regarding the evidence that the last shot was the head shot:  Everyone in the president's car and in the QM including Clint Hill who was between the cars said that the headshot was the last shot. (Clint Hill did not recall a second shot but he accepts from what others in the QM told him that there was a shot while he was running toward the car before the one that he saw hit the president.  This is set out in Gerald Blaines book "The Kennedy Detail").

I accept, based on all the evidence, that the head shot was the last shot not only because of this evidence but also because of the evidence that JBC was hit in the back on the second shot.  There is consistent evidence that the second shot struck JBC in the back (from Powers, JBC, Nellie, Newman, Hickey, Greer etc) and no evidence that it did not.   This necessarily means the headshot was the last. 

So this leads inescapably to the conclusion that there was a shot just before the headshot. 

In trying to pinpoint when the shot occurred I noticed a number of anomalous little details in the zfilm. Maybe I am wrong.  Maybe the second shot occurred at z268 or z273 but I do not think so for many reasons which I have given. I believe the evidence indicates that the shot - which other evidence says must have occurred around 2 seconds before the head shot - occurred between z271 and z272.  I am not persuaded of that because of those anomalous details seen in the zfilm. I am persuaded because of the fundamental facts and the third shot being the last shot. 

So, I am not going to be persuaded by some argument based on interpretation of the zfilm around z270.  I am only going to be persuaded by evidence that the third shot was after z313 and missed that is so strong that it outweighs the clear and consistent evidence that we do have that the headshot was the last shot.  So, you see, it has nothing to do with courage.

This is your "convenient misremembering" strategy. You just pretend all the arguments that have demolished your model in the previous  pages simply haven't happened. To be honest, I prefer it to the lying.

The Gif below shows z271 and z272. You say, " I am not going to be persuaded by some argument based on interpretation of the zfilm around z270". But this isn't 'some interpretation', this is your interpretation:
This is the moment the bullet exits JBC's chest and shatters his wrist. The bullet fragments on contact, one passes through his wrist causing a small slit-like wound near the crease of his wrist, some metallic fragments are embedded in his wrist and some fragments deflect off his wrist and still have enough energy to crack the windshield and dent the chrome trim.
If I've got anything wrong here please correct it.
You expect people to believe a bullet shattering his wrist and then fragmenting off to cause the chrome and windshield damage does not have enough force to move his wrist one inch.
You are asking people to accept a physical impossibility.
That you don't acknowledge this obvious fact says a lot about you and how unreasonable you are.

[Andrew Mason]

This is your "convenient misremembering" strategy. You just pretend all the arguments that have demolished your model in the previous  pages simply haven't happened. To be honest, I prefer it to the lying.

You don't seem to have grasped the concept of an ad hominem argument and why it is a poor debate tactic. I say that because you insist that you are not taking an ad hominem approach but still keep making ad hominem remarks.

The first rule of good debate is that you never resort to the ad hominem accusation that someone is lying. If they have contradicted themselves, you point out the contradiction.  You never conclude someone is not being honest simply because they do not agree with your argument.  For some reason you still persist in taking this approach. 

The Gif below shows z271band z272. You say, " I am not going to be persuaded by some argument based on interpretation of the zfilm around z270". But this isn't 'some interpretation', this is your interpretation:
This is the moment the bullet exits JBC's chest and shatters his wrist. The bullet fragments on contact, one passes through his wrist causing a small slit-like wound near the crease of his wrist, some metallic fragments are embedded in his wrist and some fragments deflect off his wrist and still have enough energy to crack the windshield and dent the chrome trim.
If I've got anything wrong here please correct it.

I am saying to you that no amount of argument about what you think z271-272 would look like if a bullet struck JBC in the back and wrist there will persuade me that any of the following are false:

1. the shot pattern was 1.......2....3 with the last two in rapid succession.
2. there were exactly 3 shots
3. the head shot was the last shot and (equivalently)
4. JBC was hit in the back on the second shot.

That is because I honestly believe those four facts are established on all the evidence on an overwhelming balance of probabilities.  Those four facts mean there WAS a shot at z270 or so AND it struck JBC. 

If you cannot accept that the details seen in the zfilm are consistent with that (particularly the sudden forward movement of JBC relative to JFK and Kellerman beginning at z271, Greer's turn at z281-287, JFK's hair at z273-276, the visor movement at z271-272, the alignment of the hole in the jacket sleeve with the hole in the jacket pocket and the jagged aperture in the french cuff at z271) then they are remarkably coincidental.

Now you will not find many LNers on this board who would disagree with 2, 3 and 4.  But they do disagree with 1.  You, on the other hand, agree with 1 and 2 but not with 3 and 4.  You have persuaded yourself that the last shot was not the head shot.  This means you must also persuade yourself that JBC was not hit on the second shot. I understand why you think that. I am just not persuaded that you are correct.   Most LNers on this board would also disagree with you on that.

The bottom line is that there is abundant support for each of those four facts. That means there was a shot around z270.  It is just that there is no one except me and the Secret Service, it appears, who is persuaded by the evidence that all four are correct.

You expect people to believe a bullet shattering his wrist and then fragmenting off to cause the chrome and windshield damage does not have enough force to move his wrist one inch.
You are asking people to accept a physical impossibility.

It is not a matter of the force applied by the bullet. It is the net force that matters.  The integral of the net force over time applied to the wrist determines that. That tells you how much momentum is imparted to the wrist.  Are you suggesting that the wrist would move visibly if it was pinned against his chest with sufficient force for sufficient time to negate any momentum imparted by the bullet?  How is that impossible?

[Dan O'meara]

You don't seem to have grasped the concept of an ad hominem argument and why it is a poor debate tactic. I say that because you insist that you are not taking an ad hominem approach but still keep making ad hominem remarks.

The first rule of good debate is that you never resort to the ad hominem accusation that someone is lying. If they have contradicted themselves, you point out the contradiction.  You never conclude someone is not being honest simply because they do not agree with your argument.  For some reason you still persist in taking this approach. 

They are not ad hominem remarks. They are labels I've given to the various strategies you use regularly to avoid reasonable debate.
If you'd contradicted yourself I would have pointed that out. But you didn't and the word I've given to what you did is "lying" which is the most accurate word I can find for it.
You try to present yourself as a reasonable person but this thread is a record of how you've really approached this debate.

I am saying to you that no amount of argument about what you think z271-272 would look like if a bullet struck JBC in the back and wrist there will persuade me that any of the following are false:

1. the shot pattern was 1.......2....3 with the last two in rapid succession.
2. there were exactly 3 shots
3. the head shot was the last shot and (equivalently)
4. JBC was hit in the back on the second shot.

That is because I honestly believe those four facts are established on all the evidence on an overwhelming balance of probabilities.  Those four facts mean there WAS a shot at z270 or so AND it struck JBC. 

None of these are "facts", as well you know. We may agree on certain interpretations of the evidence but it doesn't make them facts.
Point 4. is nothing more than your own interpretation of very selective scraps of evidence picked specifically to 'confirm' what you already believe about the shots.

If you cannot accept that the details seen in the zfilm are consistent with that (particularly the sudden forward movement of JBC relative to JFK and Kellerman beginning at z271, Greer's turn at z281-287, JFK's hair at z273-276, the visor movement at z271-272, the alignment of the hole in the jacket sleeve with the hole in the jacket pocket and the jagged aperture in the french cuff at z271) then they are remarkably coincidental.

These are the few scraps of evidence you hang onto to promote your theory. There is nothing coincidental about any of it. You have looked at the Z-film around the z270's and picked out anything you see and tried to create a narrative out of it.

Now you will not find many LNers on this board who would disagree with 2, 3 and 4.  But they do disagree with 1.  You, on the other hand, agree with 1 and 2 but not with 3 and 4.

Really, I was under the impression that LNers thought the single bullet theory was correct. Where have you got your information from?

You have persuaded yourself that the last shot was not the head shot.  This means you must also persuade yourself that JBC was not hit on the second shot.

Unlike you I let the evidence inform my opinion. You use the evidence to prop up your preconceived notions.
This thread is full of the evidence that has informed my opinion.

The bottom line is that there is abundant support for each of those four facts. That means there was a shot around z270.  It is just that there is no one except me and the Secret Service, it appears, who is persuaded by the evidence that all four are correct.
It is not a matter of the force applied. It is the net force multiplied by the time over which it is applied that matters. That tells you how much momentum is imparted to the wrist.  Are you suggesting that the wrist would move if it was pinned against his chest with sufficient force for sufficient time to absorb any momentum imparted by the bullet?  How is that impossible?

"The bottom line is that there is abundant support for each of those four facts"

There is very little evidence to support the "fact" ( ) that JBC is shot in the back around z271 and irrefutable evidence against it. Your inability to accept that evidence is indicative of your genuine approach to evidence. It should inform your opinions.

"It is not a matter of the force applied. It is the net force multiplied by the time over which it is applied that matters. That tells you how much momentum is imparted to the wrist."

This is utter  and reveals your desperation to avoid the overwhelming evidence that refutes your model.

"Are you suggesting that the wrist would move if it was pinned against his chest with sufficient force for sufficient time to absorb any momentum imparted by the bullet?"

I'm suggesting that a bullet fragmenting on contact with his wrist would subject his wrist to the same force it takes to fragment a bullet.
Newton's laws of motion still apply (for most of us anyway)