The First Shot

[Andrew Mason]

Just look at the "mountain" of evidence he presents - a couple of cherry-picked eyewitness statements.

You seem to have difficulty reading what I wrote. I agreed  with you that there is a "mountain of evidence" (your term) that the first shot was after z190 and that JFK was struck by it.  I said "there was consistent evidence" that it was earlier than z222/z223.  That is not a theory nor an exaggeration. It is a fact that there is consistent evidence that it was earlier than z222/z223.

One of the other members of the forum nicely summed up this disingenuous approach:

You remind me of a certain person who, unable to provide an intelligent response when confronted with evidence,  simply dismisses it as fake.

As for your shot in the mid z190's.
As everyone knows this would require the assassin to shoot through the oak tree, something that has similarly been dissected in this thread.

Yet, you have been unable to explain why the Secret Service film made in early December 1963 showing JFK to be clear of the tree when he was between the lamppost and the Thornton Freeway sign is not accurate. That puts JFK clear of the tree between z190 and z200.

I know.
That's why I posted it. 

You did post it. You said that was the only point where they turn to look to their right and wave.  The problem is that we can't see Jackie's face and can't tell where she is looking or whether she is waving.  My comment was to point out another way to verify that this was the turn descibed by Woodward based on them being the last people JFK acknowledged.

[Jerry Organ]

Here he comes again.
Andrew and his dead theory like some kind of zombie, but not the quick, dangerous ones you have nowadays, more like the ones from the '70's that you could get away from with a brisk walk..
Just look at the "mountain" of evidence he presents - a couple of cherry-picked eyewitness statements. One of the other members of the forum nicely summed up this disingenuous approach:

"Andrew, I've been reading your stuff since you started this theory in the early 2000's at John McAdams newsgroup, and it still makes me shake my head in dismay that you are still arguing about this.   You should know by now that eyewitness accounts aren't always accurate, and this is why police officers do not rely totally on eyewitness accounts.   This seems to be all that you use are eyewitness accounts to attempt making a case.  I stopped relying on the eyewitness accounts years ago when I saw for myself that they're totally unreliable..."

This thread is the final resting place for your dead theory, which has been utterly torn to shreds.
Your argument that the bullet exited Connally's chest around z271 has been completely destroyed in this thread.
Your absolutely fantastical notion that the bullet passed through JFK and stuck in Connally's leg, without going through his torso, has been similarly destroyed.

Mason's Bizarre Pet Theory only has troll-value. But hey, the poor schmuck gotta take what the good Lord laid out for him.

All of the "mountain" of evidence you present here has been dealt with numerous times in this thread with the possible exception of T E Moore, and I have no doubt that closer scrutiny of that evidence will reveal the usual sketchy eyewitness testimony that is your bread and butter.

Nah. We've been doing the Moore thing with Mason for years now. Here's one from 2021.


"I don't think Moore could see to the President slumping Z228ff. His statement says he saw the President "slump" on the first shot. Kennedy leans forward in the Z170s, within a second of the Connally's rightward head-turns, which they said occurred when they heard the first shot. Moore wasn't side-to the limousine (he was almost directly behind) so his impression of Kennedy having "reached the Thornton Freeway sign" seems not based on anything comparative."

Mason's more Energizer Bunny than Zombie.

[Andrew Mason]

Mason's Bizarre Pet Theory only has troll-value. But hey, the poor schmuck gotta take what the good Lord laid out for him.

Nah. We've been doing the Moore thing with Mason for years now. Here's one from 2021.

My "Bizarre Pet Theory" is nothing more than the FBI and WC's view until March 1964.  It is also Dan's "theory" that the first shot struck JFK. If you combine that with the generally accepted view that the head shot was the third and last shot you get this:


So you appear to be using some Bizarre Pet Definition of the word "bizarre"...

"I don't think Moore could see to the President slumping Z228ff. His statement says he saw the President "slump" on the first shot. Kennedy leans forward in the Z170s, within a second of the Connally's rightward head-turns, which they said occurred when they heard the first shot. Moore wasn't side-to the limousine (he was almost directly behind) so his impression of Kennedy having "reached the Thornton Freeway sign" seems not based on anything comparative."

Mason's more Energizer Bunny than Zombie.

So your Bizzare Pet Theory is that Moore was wrong, along with about 20 others who said that JFK reacted to the first shot as he is seen after frame z224?

[Jerry Organ]

My "Bizarre Pet Theory" is nothing more than the FBI and WC's view until March 1964.  It is also Dan's "theory" that the first shot struck JFK.

You think you're getting through to Dan more than I am?

    "This thread is the final resting place for your dead theory,
     which has been utterly torn to shreds.
     Your argument that the bullet exited Connally's chest around
     z271 has been completely destroyed in this thread.
     Your absolutely fantastical notion that the bullet passed
     through JFK and stuck in Connally's leg, without going
     through his torso, has been similarly destroyed."

If you combine that with the generally accepted view that the head shot was the third and last shot you get this:

Gee, Andrew, if you're going to hitch your pony to the FBI "String Theory" than you have to acknowledge the strings represent (by my rough figuring) ~Z200, ~Z310 and ~Z340. Unless you're now in accord with these frames for your three shots, I would say the model isn't corresponding well with your Weirdo Theory. Of course, no official Commission, Committee or panel of experts would ever agree to a single thing about your Shots One and Two. You can't even get a Conspiracy Kook onboard; I remember years ago a troll friend-of-yours joined with you for awhile.

So you appear to be using some Bizarre Pet Definition of the word "bizarre"...
So your Bizzare Pet Theory is that Moore was wrong, along with about 20 others who said that JFK reacted to the first shot as he is seen after frame z224?

I'm pointing out that your use of Moore doesn't address that he's standing far back from the President, is not side-to the limousine when it nears the sign, and that as the car goes further downhill from Moore, the "Queen Mary" and agents standing on it are going to increasingly obscure any view he has of the president.

Now a witness who was more sideways-to the limousine and the Thornton sign was Jeanette Hooker, who "estimated that the President's car was almost to the R. L. THORNTON Freeway when she heard three gunshots." The front of the car is roughly perpendicular to the Thornton sign by Z190.

[Andrew Mason]

You think you're getting through to Dan more than I am?
Gee, Andrew, if you're going to hitch your pony to the FBI "String Theory" than you have to acknowledge the strings represent (by my rough figuring) ~Z200, ~Z310 and ~Z340. Unless you're now in accord with these frames for your three shots, I would say the model isn't corresponding well with your Weirdo Theory.

The location for shot #1 is with JFK between the lamppost and the Thornton sign.  The Thornton sign was z200, so a bit less. The other two are shown in that photo a bit too far ahead.  Here is another configuration for the same model:


That shows the limo at about z320 for the third shot and at about z280 for the second.  A bit off if one goes by the evidence. The point is that I am not the only one who has thought the evidence put the shots in that pattern starting with the first shot hitting JFK.

I'm pointing out that your use of Moore doesn't address that he's standing far back from the President, is not side-to the limousine when it nears the sign, and that as the car goes further downhill from Moore, the "Queen Mary" and agents standing on it are going to increasingly obscure any view he has of the president.

Now a witness who was more sideways-to the limousine and the Thornton sign was Jeanette Hooker, who "estimated that the President's car was almost to the R. L. THORNTON Freeway when she heard three gunshots." The front of the car is roughly perpendicular to the Thornton sign by Z190.

Right. You are not quibbling about the point that Moore says JFK had reached by the time of the first shot.  You are saying he could not have seen what he said he observed.

[Dan O'meara]

You seem to have difficulty reading what I wrote. I agreed  with you that there is a "mountain of evidence" (your term) that the first shot was after z190 and that JFK was struck by it.  I said "there was consistent evidence" that it was earlier than z222/z223.  That is not a theory nor an exaggeration. It is a fact that there is consistent evidence that it was earlier than z222/z223.

Your idea of "consistent evidence" for a shot earlier than z222/z223 is a handful of sketchy eyewitness statements that you've scraped together.
My idea of "consistent evidence" is presented in this thread and it overwhelmingly supports a shot at z222/z223.
I am more than comfortable to have the weight of evidence I've gathered in this thread to be measured against your own paltry efforts.

You remind me of a certain person who, unable to provide an intelligent response when confronted with evidence,  simply dismisses it as fake.

You remind me of a certain person who is unable to provide an intelligent response when confronted with evidence.

Yet, you have been unable to explain why the Secret Service film made in early December 1963 showing JFK to be clear of the tree when he was between the lamppost and the Thornton Freeway sign is not accurate. That puts JFK clear of the tree between z190 and z200.

Jerry has already put this nonsense to bed.
Just to put it in context. The FBI reenactment painstakingly moved a limo down Elm Street replicating JFK's position as shown in certain Zapruder frames. When they were happy with the positioning a picture was taken from the SN window to show what the assassin would have been looking at.
Not every frame was covered, the one closest to Andrew's suggestion of a first shot between z190 and z200 was the one below - z207



As can clearly be seen, the assassin would be taking a shot through the oak tree at this point. It is important to realise that this is taken a few frames after Andrew's proposed first shot, so the limo would have been even more obscured by the oak tree for Andrew's shot.
Note in the picture above, it shows the relevant z-frame, the replication of that frame and the corresponding view from the SN window.
There can be no doubt a shot between z190 and z200 would have been taken through the oak tree.
The picture below shows what the assassin was "visualising" moments before he took his shot.



There would be no need to fire through the tree, common sense dictates the first shot would've been taken after the limo cleared the oak tree.
This would be another nail in the coffin for Andrew's dead theory but, unfortunately, there's no more room for any more nails.

[Andrew Mason]

Your idea of "consistent evidence" for a shot earlier than z222/z223 is a handful of sketchy eyewitness statements that you've scraped together.
My idea of "consistent evidence" is presented in this thread and it overwhelmingly supports a shot at z222/z223.
I am more than comfortable to have the weight of evidence I've gathered in this thread to be measured against your own paltry efforts.

Suggesting that the first shot occurred at z222/223 is just an attempt to make the SBT look plausible. If it was much earlier, it is difficult to explain the delay in JBC's reaction if he was hit by the same bullet. So you have convinced yourself that it must be true.

The first rule of fact-finding is: don't fool yourself.  This is also an important rule that scientists follow. It is easy to do if you want a particular result.

The second rule of fact-finding is, after making preliminary findings, test them. This means you must fit your findings with the rest of the evidence.

If you test the z222/223 first shot hypothesis against the evidence that: 1.the head shot was the third and last shot and 2. the last two shots were closer together, it does not fit at all.  It also doesn't fit with the evidence of Phil Willis or Linda Willis.

There can be no doubt a shot between z190 and z200 would have been taken through the oak tree.
The picture below shows what the assassin was "visualising" moments before he took his shot.

Why do you think the assassin would not have been able to fire and hit JFK before the position shown in that photo?.  JFK has moved about 15 feet past the point where he was in the clear.

[Dan O'meara]

I've discovered a way in which we are the same, yet opposite...

Suggesting that the first shot occurred at z222/223 is just an attempt to make the SBT look plausible. If it was much earlier, it is difficult to explain the delay in JBC's reaction if he was hit by the same bullet. So you have convinced yourself that it must be true.

I am not "suggesting" the first shot occurred at z222/z223.
I have provided a mountain of evidence in this thread demonstrating that it is indeed the case.
I became interested in the JFK case during the first lockdown after randomly coming across Ant Davison's version of the Zapruder film.
It's quite a stunning thing. I watched over and over again on a very large screen at super slo-mo and couldn't help but notice both JFK and Connally violently reacting at exactly the same moment.

I didn't know Connally's name at the time and had never heard of the Single Bullet Theory or Magic Bullet Theory.
Apart from the headshot, two things really stood out - how much the limo slowed down before the headshot and that both men reacted violently, presumably to being shot, at exactly the same moment.
It's so obvious I still can't believe people deny it. Rather than view the evidence with their own eyes they just hide behind arguments like "Oh, Specter just invented it because he had to".
In this thread I've presented an incredibly detailed analysis of the Z-film regarding this aspect and it has merely confirmed my original observation - both men were shot through, by the same bullet.
[Note - I'm not referring to CE399 as the bullet. I don't believe that had anything to do with the actual shooting. I strongly suspect the bullet that exited Connaly's chest shattered on impact with his wrist bone and that the main bullet fragments found in the limo are the bullet in question.]

Which brings us to how we're the same yet opposite.
Because I have allowed the evidence to inform how I look at this aspect of the case I find I'm the only CTer who accepts that both men were shot through at the same time, by the same bullet.
Because how you have allowed how you look at this aspect of the case to inform the evidence you choose, you find you are the only LNer who doesn't accept both men were shot through at the same time, by the same bullet.
Both of us standing alone in our respective camps.

The first rule of fact-finding is: don't fool yourself.  This is also an important rule that scientists follow. It is easy to do if you want a particular result.

The second rule of fact-finding is, after making preliminary findings, test them. This means you must fit your findings with the rest of the evidence.

"The Book of Fact Finding", by Andrew Mason.
 
The only book that consists solely of it's title and the name of it's author!!
That you have the audacity to write this sentence - "This means you must fit your findings with the rest of the evidence." - says it all.

If you test the z222/223 first shot hypothesis against the evidence that: 1.the head shot was the third and last shot and 2. the last two shots were closer together, it does not fit at all.  It also doesn't fit with the evidence of Phil Willis or Linda Willis.

The mass of evidence I have presented in this thread weighed against the testimony of Phil Willis. Really?
Phil Willis, the man who created Phil Willis Enterprises with the express intent of cashing in on the assassination by copyrighting his poorly taken photos. Photos he gave grandiose titles to in order to enhance their value. The man who had a financial incentive to convince everyone he had taken a photo of the moment of the first shot.
That Phil Willis?

Why do you think the assassin would not have been able to fire and hit JFK before the position shown in that photo?.  JFK has moved about 15 feet past the point where he was in the clear.

The first shot took place just as the limo cleared the oak tree, just slightly further down the road than the white vehicle in the picture above.
Below is a pic from the moment the first shot occurred:



At the bottom of the view from the SN we can see the limo has just cleared the oak tree.
This is the moment the assassin "visualised" his first shot.
There was no need to fire through the oak tree.