Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
Tom Graves, Jarrett Smith, David Halley, Andrew Mason

Author Topic: The First Shot  (Read 187746 times)

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #776 on: February 14, 2022, 12:35:07 PM »
Advertisement
Rowland first said the guy in the SW window was about 12-15 ft back of the window, then changed that to about 3-5 ft because, he said, no one would be able to see the figure so far back from the window

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #776 on: February 14, 2022, 12:35:07 PM »


Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3277
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #777 on: February 14, 2022, 12:56:14 PM »
Rowland first said the guy in the SW window was about 12-15 ft back of the window, then changed that to about 3-5 ft because, he said, no one would be able to see the figure so far back from the window

Does that mean he didn't see a man with a rifle or that he just guessed at how far back in the room the guy was?

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1499
    • SPMLaw
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #778 on: February 14, 2022, 04:57:47 PM »
So you missed the class in law school about the unreliability of witnesses to unexpected events?
No. But you seem to have.  Elizabeth Loftus, whose work in assessing eye-witness reliability is often referred to by courts, reports that witnesses are consistently more than 50% accurate on observations. If the observation is one made by more than 50% of the witnesses, the reliability approaches 98%. See Loftus, Eyewitness Testimony, p. 27:

Some of the witnesses were incorrect, but they are in the minority.  They are the two shorter bars on my chart.

Quote
Did the WC say the photo was taken at exactly Z210 or did they say "approximately" Z210? Does one-half second (Z202 to Z210) fall into an approximation?
They said:

"Another photographer, Phillip L. Willis, snapped a picture at a time which he also asserts was simultaneous with the first shot. Analysis of his photograph revealed that it was taken at approximately frame 210 of the Zapruder film, which was the approximate time of the shot that probably hit the President and the Governor." (WR 112).

Quote
My map shows where Z195 was in relation to the Thornton sign and the tree-trunk to signpost line, and it has the President behind foliage.

It doesn't accord with your lack of skill at photogrammetry when it comes to the SS reenactment film.
All I am concerned about is finding the frame in which JFK is between the lamp post and the Thornton sign.  So I put him there on a scale drawing of DP and extended a line from Zapruder past that point to see where it intersected.  It appears to make a tangent to the rounded wall of the north reflecting pool.  So I looked in the zframes to see where JFK was on a line between Zapruder and the rounded edge of the cement wall of the north reflecting pool. 


Quote
"6 feet shorter"? Sounds like one of your porkies.
Not a guess. But you decide.  The President's car was 256 inches or 21 feet long. The car used in the SS film looks like a Ford Mercury Comet convertible (modified from original post):

which has an overall length of 194.5 inches.  That is 61.5 inches less than the President's car, so a tad more than 5 feet.  I had based the 6 feet on a Ford Falcon which is 181 inches long.  But it appears to be a Mercury Comet - the same car that the Cabell's rode in the motorcade. The Comet is 13.5 inches longer than the Falcon.

Quote
What's wrong with using where the rear bumper is? And comparing on a map where the tree-trunk to lamp-post line is to where it is in the SS reenactment film? We then position the President on the map where he is in the Zapruder film and see where he is relative to the tree-trunk to lamp-post line which in turn show us where he is in the SS reenactment film.

What you did was just arbitrarily pick a film capture showing Kennedy clear of the foliage and associate it with Z195. You cherry-pick everything because of your Ash Heap Pet Theory.
I don't know what scale you are using or how big you think the car is or where you got your map.  You can provide all those details and you can show us what frame you think corresponds to the position of JFK as seen in the SS film:

I might be able to show where you have gone wrong.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2022, 08:31:35 PM by Andrew Mason »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #778 on: February 14, 2022, 04:57:47 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #779 on: February 14, 2022, 06:36:45 PM »

Does that mean he didn't see a man with a rifle or that he just guessed at how far back in the room the guy was?

The statement I made was simple enough...

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3277
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #780 on: February 14, 2022, 07:27:44 PM »
The statement I made was simple enough...

It certainly was, as was my question.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #780 on: February 14, 2022, 07:27:44 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #781 on: February 15, 2022, 01:26:29 AM »
It certainly was, as was my question.

Why the need for your question in the first place..

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3277
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #782 on: February 15, 2022, 01:52:34 AM »
Why the need for your question in the first place..

To clarify the intention of your post.

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #783 on: February 15, 2022, 11:03:07 AM »
To clarify the intention of your post.

The post is self-explanatory

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #783 on: February 15, 2022, 11:03:07 AM »