Emmet Hudson never dropped to the ground!

[John Mytton]

This possibility was also recognized by the Warren Commission in its discussion of the number of shots that were fired (Warren Report, p. 111). The testimony of Emmett Joseph Hudson may illustrate the difficulty of finding facts based on the recollections of witnesses, especially these who have had the opportunity to read about the events in newspapers or who may have been led to change their testimony by the manner in which they were questioned at the time of the assassination. Hudson was located in front of the stockade fence on the grassy knoll, in a position where he may have been expected to have heard distinctly any shot fired from the knoll. (See JFK exhibit F-129 I, HSCA-JFK hearings, 109). Hudson gave as sworn statement to the Sheriff's Department of Dallas County on November 22, 1963. He said he was in Dealey Plaza, sitting on the steps in front of the stockade fence, facing Elm Street, during the time of the assassination. He heard three shots. They came "from behind and above me." (Emphasis added.) (XIX Warren hearings, 481.)
Hudson's testimony would seem to mean "from behind the fence," and his statement has been so understood (J. Thompson, "Six Seconds in Dallas" (Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Medallion Books, 1976), appendix A, witness No. 75.
Hudson gave a depositon to the Warren Commission on July 22, 1964; he told counsel the third "shot was coming from above and kind of behind." (VII Warren hearings, 560.) Counsel then asked: "You heard it come from sort of behind the motorcade and then above?" (Emphasis added.) Hudson answered, "Yes." (Ibid.) Hudson answered, "Well, it sounded like it was high, you know, from above and kind of behind like--in other words, to the left" (Ibid.) Counsel asked, "And that would have fit in with the Texas School Book Depository, wouldn't it?" (Ibid.) Hudson replied, "Yes." (Ibid.)
Hudson also indicated that he saw the second shot hit the President in the head "a little bit behind the ear and a little bit above the ear" on the right side. (Id. at 560.) According to his testimony, he was lying on the ground facing Elm when the third shot was fired. (Ibid.) He also felt that the first shot was fired shortly after the motorcade had turned off Houston onto Elm at about the first lightpost on Elm on the right (id. at 559); the second--that hit the President in the head--came a little later, near the second lightpost on Elm on the right (id. at 560); and the third occurred at about the steps leading down to Elm Street that he was standing on (id. at 561). According to Hudson, the third shot must have hit the President in the neck. (Ibid.)
If the scientific evidence summarized in the text is correct, Hudson must be wrong in some aspects of his testimony. According to the scientific evidence, the first shot missed, and it was fired shortly after the President's limousine turned onto Elm. The scientific evidence indicated, moreover, that the second shot hit
Page 606
the President in the neck, not the head, when the limousine was between the first and second lightposts; it also indicated the President was hit in the head not by the second, but by the fourth shot, at the point when the limousine was between the third and fourth shots, Hudson is seen still standing, not lying down as he remembers.
In summary, Hudson was wrong about which shots hit the President in the head and neck, the location of the limousine at each shot and his own body position at the time of the shooting.
It may will be that Hudson's understanding of what happened was influenced by the newspapers after he had given his November statement to the Sheriff's Department. At two points during the July deposition, he indicated in answers that he had read newspapers that said that the President had been hit twice (id. at 561) and that had carried Hudson's pictures in them (id. at 563).
He may also have been led to alter his first statement by the way in which he was questioned by counsel, who have him an interpretation of his prior statement to the Sheriff's Department and of his own testimony in the deposition that led him to testify in a fashion consistent with what was then generally will known: Oswald had fired three shots from the depository. When Hudson was contacted by the committee, he told his story in words virtually identical to those he had used in his deposition 15 years ago. He added, "Everything I told the Warren Commission was correct." (Outside contact report with Emmett Joseph Hudson, Feb. 3, 1979, House Select Committee on Assassinations (JFK Document 014458).) Hudson, now 71, had heard for years about the controversy about a shot from the knoll; he does not think that one was fired from behind the stockade fence. (Ibid.)
Hudson himself also recognized the other key factor that affects most of the testimony of the witnesses in Dealey Plaza-he noted that "it was just such an exciting time...", Warren hearings, VII p. 465.
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/references1-jfk.html

JohnM

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

I think that Hoffman & Co usually reckon that the paling-fence-shooter was about 12 ft from the corner, in which case the headshot would have missed Hudson's left earhole by less than 8 ft.
Anyhow, Hudson said that there was no shot from the fence.

Nearly forgot, this here pix shows that there is no shooter behind the fence, or, the shooter was hidden by that tree (in which case he could not have fired the headshot at Z313).
Hmmmm -- i suppose that he could have fired at Z313, if the slug grazed the bark on the lhs of the tree (his lhs, our rhs).

[Chris Bristow]

I think that Hoffman & Co usually reckon that the paling-fence-shooter was about 12 ft from the corner, in which case the headshot would have missed Hudson's left earhole by less than 8 ft.
Anyhow, Hudson said that there was no shot from the fence.

Nearly forgot, this here pix shows that there is no shooter behind the fence, or, the shooter was hidden by that tree (in which case he could not have fired the headshot at Z313).
Hmmmm -- i suppose that he could have fired at Z313, if the slug grazed the bark on the lhs of the tree (his lhs, our rhs).

Hoffman put the shooter way down near the west end of the fence. The more common knoll shooter location is 15 ft west of the east end of the fence. Your red arrow on the right is accurate for that. The tree does not get in the way for that knoll position.
  The fence is 5ft tall and the branches are only 8 inches above the fence. Only 8 inches of the shooter would be visible. Actually there was a branch hanging down right there so the shooter would be almost completely hidden. That fuzzy photo does not allow us to see if those 8" dark images above the fence and below the branches are people or not.
  I think it would be possible for the gunman to step back and retract his rifle in 2 seconds while everyone was still stunned by what they saw. I think almost every single person would have their eyes on the president at the moment of the head shot. So I also don't buy the popular argument of a knoll shooter being too visible.
 On the other hand I think the sound would be an issue as Husdon and Mudd  should hear it clearer than almost anyone. A shooter 15 ft from the east end would still pass close, about 7 feet from Hoffman, and 9 ft from Mudd. Mudd is the guy on the left in the Moorman photo.
I consider each different part of the knoll shooter theory and let them stand or fall on their own merit. Visiblity, rifle sound, egress, trajectory/wounds, I do not argue any single point as a final conclusion.
 Prior to seeing how inconsistent Hudson's recounting of events was I thought his testimony carried some weight. The only possible reasons he would miss a shot from that close is the last two shots being very close together with the TSB shot being first  and the knoll shot overlapping and sounding like reverberation from the first shot which he would recognize as coming from the TSB, imo.
 
In another thread you claimed the knoll smoke seen from by RR guys was actually Oswald's smoke from the 6th floor. You claimed that the knoll position was on higher ground as Oswald was as if the two locations would line up vertically. You provided no math to prove it and it turns out it is very wrong. Ground level at the fence and at the overpass when standing next to the hand rail is within one foot of the fence ground level. Oswald's perch was about 50 feet higher!. The RR guys were looking about level to the top of the fence and Oswald's smoke was nowhere near it. Oswald was also 10 degrees away from the fence laterally. Below is a clip of Holland and Mark lane on the overpass and looking to the fence, go to 1:57. Even if you consider the smoke extended maybe 10 feet out laterally it is very far from Oswald's position. Holland and the others could never have made such a huge mistake.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Hoffman put the shooter way down near the west end of the fence. The more common knoll shooter location is 15 ft west of the east end of the fence. Your red arrow on the right is accurate for that. The tree does not get in the way for that knoll position.
  The fence is 5ft tall and the branches are only 8 inches above the fence. Only 8 inches of the shooter would be visible. Actually there was a branch hanging down right there so the shooter would be almost completely hidden. That fuzzy photo does not allow us to see if those 8" dark images above the fence and below the branches are people or not.
  I think it would be possible for the gunman to step back and retract his rifle in 2 seconds while everyone was still stunned by what they saw. I think almost every single person would have their eyes on the president at the moment of the head shot. So I also don't buy the popular argument of a knoll shooter being too visible.
 On the other hand I think the sound would be an issue as Husdon and Mudd  should hear it clearer than almost anyone. A shooter 15 ft from the east end would still pass close, about 7 feet from Hoffman, and 9 ft from Mudd. Mudd is the guy on the left in the Moorman photo.
I consider each different part of the knoll shooter theory and let them stand or fall on their own merit. Visiblity, rifle sound, egress, trajectory/wounds, I do not argue any single point as a final conclusion.
 Prior to seeing how inconsistent Hudson's recounting of events was I thought his testimony carried some weight. The only possible reasons he would miss a shot from that close is the last two shots being very close together with the TSB shot being first  and the knoll shot overlapping and sounding like reverberation from the first shot which he would recognize as coming from the TSB, imo.
 
In another thread you claimed the knoll smoke seen from by RR guys was actually Oswald's smoke from the 6th floor. You claimed that the knoll position was on higher ground as Oswald was as if the two locations would line up vertically. You provided no math to prove it and it turns out it is very wrong. Ground level at the fence and at the overpass when standing next to the hand rail is within one foot of the fence ground level. Oswald's perch was about 50 feet higher!. The RR guys were looking about level to the top of the fence and Oswald's smoke was nowhere near it. Oswald was also 10 degrees away from the fence laterally. Below is a clip of Holland and Mark lane on the overpass and looking to the fence, go to 1:57. Even if you consider the smoke extended maybe 10 feet out laterally it is very far from Oswald's position. Holland and the others could never have made such a huge mistake.

Yes it seems i have stuffed up the names of the 3 guys on the steps.
In another thread here i did mention/show that Holland's line to the smoke from Oswald's 2 shots wasn’t a million miles from/above that fence, but i was just saying.
I reckon that the supposed smoke near the fence was never near the fence, it was the smoke from Hickey's 6 shot burst (the smoke would have been in & behind the Queen Mary).
On the other hand an earlier comment of mine said that the shots (6 ovem) & echos might have shaken some dust offa the leaves on the lower branches (the carpark was gravelled & dust would have built up over the years).
I will bump my thread re smoke.
And i will bump my thread re Hoffman & his view of the smoke.

[Chris Bristow]

Yes it seems i have stuffed up the names of the 3 guys on the steps.
In another thread here i did mention/show that Holland's line to the smoke from Oswald's 2 shots wasn’t a million miles from/above that fence, but i was just saying.
I reckon that the supposed smoke near the fence was never near the fence, it was the smoke from Hickey's 6 shot burst (the smoke would have been in & behind the Queen Mary).
On the other hand an earlier comment of mine said that the shots (6 ovem) & echos might have shaken some dust offa the leaves on the lower branches (the carpark was gravelled & dust would have built up over the years).
I will bump my thread re smoke.
And i will bump my thread re Hoffman & his view of the smoke.

They were looking straight towards the limo then looked 20 degrees to the left to see the smoke. No way they thought smoke from the follow up car was from the knoll.  Another claim is they just saw smoke from Heygood's bike when he dumped it but he did not show up till the RR guys were already running to the knoll, way after the head shot. Also film footage shows his bike did not put out visible smoke which is the more common result if you don't tip it a full 90 degrees or more.
   No way dust was shaken off the leaves. It had just rained that morning and there were blustery winds moving the trees around. Not to mention the shot would have been 70 ft away from the trees.
 You seem to be throwing up far out explanations up to see what sticks. If you give a credible explanation I will respond but this is getting too far fetched for me.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

They were looking straight towards the limo then looked 20 degrees to the left to see the smoke. No way they thought smoke from the follow up car was from the knoll.  Another claim is they just saw smoke from Heygood's bike when he dumped it but he did not show up till the RR guys were already running to the knoll, way after the head shot. Also film footage shows his bike did not put out visible smoke which is the more common result if you don't tip it a full 90 degrees or more.
   No way dust was shaken off the leaves. It had just rained that morning and there were blustery winds moving the trees around. Not to mention the shot would have been 70 ft away from the trees.
 You seem to be throwing up far out explanations up to see what sticks. If you give a credible explanation I will respond but this is getting too far fetched for me.

Yes it had rained.
One of the RR guys on the triple underpass said that there was no smoke near the fence, & that the other RR guys were crazy.  He said that there was smoke down at the road.
There is no factual record of any RR guys running to the carpark at an early time.
But there is factual evidence that they were all fixed until a very very very very very late time.
There were 10 RR gawkers on the triple underpass, plus 2 police. And 3 RR gawkers on the abutment of the triple underpass. Making 15 witnesses in all in that area. Plus whathisname in the RR building. None of them saw any activity in the carpark.