Perception of Reality

[Andrew Mason]

Then we heard-then we were obstructed from the
view.
Mr. BELIN. By what?
Miss ADAMS. A tree. And we heard a shot, and it was a pause, and then a
second shot, and then a third shot."

If taken verbatim, she says that “we heard-then we were obstructed…

Of course, that interpretation conflicts with Dorothy Garner, who said that the tree obstructed their view of the President at the time of the shots.

You conveniently ignore Adams' recollection of the 1.......2....3 shot pattern, which puts the second shot after the midpoint between the first and last shots.  Even if you put the first shot as early as z133, then the second shot would be a perceptible time after z223 if the last shot was at z313.  That means the President was hit by the first shot, just as at least 22 witnesses recalled.

[Charles Collins]

Of course, that interpretation conflicts with Dorothy Garner, who said that the tree obstructed their view of the President at the time of the shots.

You conveniently ignore Adams' recollection of the 1.......2....3 shot pattern, which puts the second shot after the midpoint between the first and last shots.  Even if you put the first shot as early as z133, then the second shot would be a perceptible time after z223 if the last shot was at z313.  That means the President was hit by the first shot, just as at least 22 witnesses recalled.

No matter what kind of spin anyone wants to apply to Adams’ accounts, she clearly associates the time of the turn of JFK (before he went behind the tree) and the time of the tree becoming obstructive to her view of JFK with the timing of the first shot. When Adams’ account is combined with (and supported by) the other items that the photographic records very clearly show occurred during that time period (Hughes film very brief 6-frames stoppage, Towner’s account of the first shot timing, Dorman’s film stoppage, Willis’ blurred photo, traffic cop in Hughes’ film suddenly turning away from his intersection to look intently and walk towards the limo, and the shortly thereafter actions of the limo occupants (stopping the waving and smiling to quickly and almost simultaneously jerk their heads to look from side to side). It is abundantly clear to me that the first shot occurred in the neighborhood of z133.

Belin: Where was their car as you got this good view, had it come directly opposite your window? Had it come to that point on Elm, or not, if you can remember?
Miss Adams: I believe it was prior, just a second or so prior to that.
Belin: All right.
Miss Adams: And from our vantage point we were able to see what the President’s wife was wearing, the roses in the car, and things that would attract women’s attention. Then we heard—then we were obstructed from the view.
Belin: By what?
Miss Adams: A tree, and we heard a shot, and it was a pause, and then a second shot, and then a third shot.


Adams’ account, as it was apparently told to Leavelle, confirms what she told Belin.

When the President got in front of us I heard someone call him, and he turned. That is when I heard the first shot. I thought it was a firecracker. Then the second shot I saw the Secret Service man run to the back of the President’s car. After the third shot I went out the back door.

Adams really doesn’t explicitly say in her testimony to Belin that there was a lengthier pause between the first and second shots than between the second and third shots. I can see how one might assume that, but she doesn’t really come out and definitively say it. Your spin is an example of how accounts are interpreted to fit one’s already formed opinions (confirmation bias). The photographic record is less ambiguous and requires less interpretation.

[Andrew Mason]

No matter what kind of spin anyone wants to apply to Adams’ accounts, she clearly associates the time of the turn of JFK (before he went behind the tree) and the time of the tree becoming obstructive to her view of JFK with the timing of the first shot.

It is not putting "spin" on it to say that she associates the time of the first shot with a time when her view of JFK was obstructed by the tree. That is what she said in her first statement (FBI - 24Nov63): "She had not been able to fully observe the President at the exact moment he was shot, inasmuch as her view was partially obstructed".
and this also fits with her WC statement and with the account provided by the person standing beside her, Dorothy Garner. 

When Adams’ account is combined with (and supported by) the other items that the photographic records very clearly show occurred during that time period (Hughes film very brief 6-frames stoppage, Towner’s account of the first shot timing, Dorman’s film stoppage, Willis’ blurred photo, traffic cop in Hughes’ film suddenly turning away from his intersection to look intently and walk towards the limo, and the shortly thereafter actions of the limo occupants (stopping the waving and smiling to quickly and almost simultaneously jerk their heads to look from side to side). It is abundantly clear to me that the first shot occurred in the neighborhood of z133.

Let's be clear: your interpretation that Adams' account supports a z133 shot is supported by your interpretation of Towner's account, your interpretation of why Hughes allegedly stopped his film for 6 frames, and your interpretation of why Dorman's film may have stopped and by you completely ignoring contrary evidence (that Towner stated that the first shot occurred 4-6 seconds after she stopped filming and as she was preparing to leave; that Hughes said he stopped filming - which occurs at about Zapruder frame 182 - BEFORE the first shot; that Willis said his z202 photo was taken an instant after the first shot).

Adams really doesn’t explicitly say in her testimony to Belin that there was a lengthier pause between the first and second shots than between the second and third shots. I can see how one might assume that, but she doesn’t really come out and definitively say it. Your spin is an example of how accounts are interpreted to fit one’s already formed opinions (confirmation bias). The photographic record is less ambiguous and requires less interpretation.

You are right.  Although Adams mentions a pause between shots 1 and 2 but does not mention a pause between 2 and 3, she does not explicitly say that there was no similar pause between 2 and 3.  She could have just mentioned a pause between one and two because she remembered a pause there but did not remember a pause between 2 and 3. 

One has to look at all the evidence and there is no question that dozens of witnesses explicitly recalled that pattern and that the last two shots were in rapid succession.  Adams' description fits that pattern. It does not fit the other patterns but I would agree, in itself it does not clearly exclude them.

[Charles Collins]

It is not putting "spin" on it to say that she associates the time of the first shot with a time when her view of JFK was obstructed by the tree. That is what she said in her first statement (FBI - 24Nov63): "She had not been able to fully observe the President at the exact moment he was shot, inasmuch as her view was partially obstructed".
and this also fits with her WC statement and with the account provided by the person standing beside her, Dorothy Garner. 
Let's be clear: your interpretation that Adams' account supports a z133 shot is supported by your interpretation of Towner's account, your interpretation of why Hughes allegedly stopped his film for 6 frames, and your interpretation of why Dorman's film may have stopped and by you completely ignoring contrary evidence (that Towner stated that the first shot occurred 4-6 seconds after she stopped filming and as she was preparing to leave; that Hughes said he stopped filming - which occurs at about Zapruder frame 182 - BEFORE the first shot; that Willis said his z202 photo was taken an instant after the first shot).
You are right.  Although Adams mentions a pause between shots 1 and 2 but does not mention a pause between 2 and 3, she does not explicitly say that there was no similar pause between 2 and 3.  She could have just mentioned a pause between one and two because she remembered a pause there but did not remember a pause between 2 and 3. 

One has to look at all the evidence and there is no question that dozens of witnesses explicitly recalled that pattern and that the last two shots were in rapid succession.  Adams' description fits that pattern. It does not fit the other patterns but I would agree, in itself it does not clearly exclude them.

You can interpret whatever accounts you want to interpret any freaking way you want to interpret them. And there will be some conflicting accounts that some freaking body will argue with you about. In some cases there are inconsistencies by the same freaking witnesses. You can argue about them until the end of time. And all the “he said/she said arguments will get you no closer to the truth. I will stand by what I have said that the photographic record clearly shows.

[Andrew Mason]

You can interpret whatever accounts you want to interpret any freaking way you want to interpret them.

Not if you are trying to determine what really happened.  If you are just trying to confirm a predetermined conclusion, that's fine.  But if you are trying to find what happened, you have to look at all the evidence and fit it together.  You ignore vast bodies of consistent, independent evidence.  No interpretation - just their words taken as they are given.  When 80% of the witnesses who gave evidence as to the shot pattern and said the last two were close together, closer than 1 and 2, and when another several dozen describe the shots as 1+ 2 more or 1 + a pause + 2 more you AND another 2 dozen say that JFK reacted to the first shot AND at least 18 others say that the first shot was after z186, that evidence cannot be ignored if you want to discover what really occurred.  You are ignoring that evidence.

And there will be some conflicting accounts that some freaking body will argue with you about. In some cases there are inconsistencies by the same freaking witnesses. You can argue about them until the end of time. And all the “he said/she said arguments will get you no closer to the truth. I will stand by what I have said that the photographic record clearly shows.

Again, you are not standing by what the photographic record clearly shows. You are going by the evidence of one witness and interpreting the photographic record in a way that suits your conclusion.  Your confirmation bias is creating your perception of reality!

[Charles Collins]

Not if you are trying to determine what really happened.  If you are just trying to confirm a predetermined conclusion, that's fine.  But if you are trying to find what happened, you have to look at all the evidence and fit it together.  You ignore vast bodies of consistent, independent evidence.  No interpretation - just their words taken as they are given.  When 80% of the witnesses who gave evidence as to the shot pattern and said the last two were close together, closer than 1 and 2, and when another several dozen describe the shots as 1+ 2 more or 1 + a pause + 2 more you AND another 2 dozen say that JFK reacted to the first shot AND at least 18 others say that the first shot was after z186, that evidence cannot be ignored if you want to discover what really occurred.  You are ignoring that evidence.
Again, you are not standing by what the photographic record clearly shows. You are going by the evidence of one witness and interpreting the photographic record in a way that suits your conclusion.  Your confirmation bias is creating your perception of reality!

I am not ignoring, just discounting. The photographic record is what it is, period. You can try to counter with all the he said/she said stuff you can find. And it doesn’t change the photographic record.

[Charles Collins]

Hughes stopped filming a few times but the one you refer to (Myers places the stop at Z185) doesn't relate well to your Theory's first shot in the Z190s because Hughes wrote in a letter to his parents: "about five seconds after I quit taking pictures we heard the shots".

If Willis took his Z202 slide between shots 1 and 2 (say, Z155 and Z222), then it was taken in the midst of shots and echoing, so it could be said his slide was "simultaneous" with the shots, but not the precise moment of the first shot.

As I've explained countless times, Willis himself defined the first shot having occurred before his Z202 slide:

    "Mrs. Kennedy was likewise smiling and facing more to my side of
     the street. When the first shot was fired, her head seemed to just
     snap in that direction"

    "she was looking more to the left, which would be my side of the street.
     Then when the first shot was fired, she turned to the right toward him"


The Zapruder film shows Mrs. Kennedy turning her head to her right within one second of Z155. Willis was nearby enough to observe this (his legs are at the extreme right edge of the Z167 crop.

Amazing. Mason has built his Baloney Theory on cherry-picks that he presents as having God-like clear perception of the shot spanning in the midst of major distraction, shocking violence and an unprecedented historical event. And that the subsequent reconstruction in their memory is equally flawless. The same guy who's argued in a court of law on numerous occasions that eyewitness reconstruction is the most unreliable form of evidence.

Mason's confirmation bias /cherry-pick method only works with one part of the data (the part that helps his Ash Heap Theory) and fails the other witnesses (as well as the Zapruder film which show no bullet strikes in the Z190s and Z270s, where Mason's Theory places wounding "shots"). The shot spanning for, say, Z155-to-Z222-to-Z313 is 1.....2.......3. More evenly-spaced. Better accommodates the witnesses who said the shot spanning was more closer for the first two shots, was more closer for the last two, and all shots evenly-spaced.

“Mrs. Kennedy was likewise smiling and facing more to my side of
     the street. When the first shot was fired, her head seemed to just
     snap in that direction"

"she was looking more to the left, which would be my side of the street.
     Then when the first shot was fired, she turned to the right toward him"


If I remember correctly, Willis 4 was taken in the neighborhood of z133. Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Dan O'meara]

Then we heard-then we were obstructed from the
view.
Mr. BELIN. By what?
Miss ADAMS. A tree. And we heard a shot, and it was a pause, and then a
second shot, and then a third shot."

If taken verbatim, she says that “we heard-then we were obstructed…

You are so desperate.

It's clear from her WC testimony that Adams is about to talk about the shots but remembers the detail about the limo passing behind the tree, so she interrupts herself to include this detail:

"Then we heard—then we were obstructed from the view…A tree. And we heard a shot, and it was a pause, and then a second shot, and then a third shot."

This interpretation of Adams' account of the assassination is confirmed elsewhere:

2-2-02 interview with Barry Ernest recounted in The Girl On The Stairs, published 2011) "As they rounded the corner, they turned toward our building, waving and smiling. The car continued moving slowly and a tree obstructed my view. That is when I heard what I thought was a firecracker go off. As the car came back into view I saw that something was wrong and watched as Mrs. Kennedy appeared to be trying to climb out of the car. I saw a Secret Service man jump in and the car began speeding toward the triple underpass. Before it reached that I turned to Sandra and I said, 'I want to see what is going on.' [patspeer.com]

There is no doubt the limo was behind the tree for all three shots. This recieves further corroboration from Dorothy Garner:

"I recall that moments following the passing of the Presidential car I heard three loud reports which I first thought to be fireworks but only seconds later realized something had happened on the street below although at the time of the shots, the Presidential car was out of view behind a tree.
"

All we can learn from Adams' various statements is that her view of the limo was obscured for all three shots.
This covers a period of around z130 - z330.
It can tell us nothing about when the first shot occurred.