Question about Dealey Plaza Witnesses.

[Andrew Mason]

Depending on which reports people were listening to they would most likely believe what they were being told.

Would you report what you were told or would you report what you recalled hearing?

[Joe Elliott]

Depending on which reports people were listening to they would most likely believe what they were being told.

Would you report what you were told or would you report what you recalled hearing?

Witnesses are supposed to report what they saw, not what they were told, or “know”. But they commonly don’t do that.

People’s memories are affected by what they are told, or learn. We edit our memories without being aware of that. That is how, even after more than fifty years, I can still remember hitting 400-foot home runs while in little league. Actually, I don’t, but my memory may be off.

Based on my memory, which I think is accurate (but might not be) a motorcycle policeman, following up about 100 yards behind the president, reported in 1976 (?) that he remembered seeing Jackie climbing out onto the trunk of the limousine. However, he made no such claim in 1963. Plus, at the time Jackie was climbing onto the trunk, he was just turning onto Elm Street. So, because of the slope of the street, it would be difficult for him to see the limousine. Plus, there would many vehicles in the way, blocking his view.

So, what is more likely, is that the officer saw the Zapruder film, and incorporated his memory of this film into his memory. He ‘edited’ his memory. And now remembered seeing, in person, in real time, Jackie climbing out onto the trunk of the limousine, while he was riding his motorcycle.

[Rick Plant]

Would you report what you were told or would you report what you recalled hearing?

Wouldn't you want to report accurate information? 

[Bill Chapman]

Witnesses are supposed to report what they saw, not what they were told, or “know”. But they commonly don’t do that.

People’s memories are affected by what they are told, or learn. We edit our memories without being aware of that. That is how, even after more than fifty years, I can still remember hitting 400-foot home runs while in little league. Actually, I don’t, but my memory may be off.

Based on my memory, which I think is accurate (but might not be) a motorcycle policeman, following up about 100 yards behind the president, reported in 1976 (?) that he remembered seeing Jackie climbing out onto the trunk of the limousine. However, he made no such claim in 1963. Plus, at the time Jackie was climbing onto the trunk, he was just turning onto Elm Street. So, because of the slope of the street, it would be difficult for him to see the limousine. Plus, there would many vehicles in the way, blocking his view.

So, what is more likely, is that the officer saw the Zapruder film, and incorporated his memory of this film into his memory. He ‘edited’ his memory. And now remembered seeing, in person, in real time, Jackie climbing out onto the trunk of the limousine, while he was riding his motorcycle.

People’s memories are affected by what they are told, or learn. We edit our memories without being aware of that. That is how, even after more than fifty years, I can still remember hitting 400-foot home runs while in little league. Actually, I don’t, but my memory may be off.
_I regularly hit the ball 400 feet, I like to tell people.
  Yep... 200 feet up, 200 feet down: I popped out a lot.

[Joe Elliott]

People’s memories are affected by what they are told, or learn. We edit our memories without being aware of that. That is how, even after more than fifty years, I can still remember hitting 400-foot home runs while in little league. Actually, I don’t, but my memory may be off.
_I regularly hit the ball 400 feet, I like to tell people.
  Yep... 200 feet up, 200 feet down: I popped out a lot.

Wow. You weren't very good. Still, a hell of a lot stronger than I was back then. Or ever was. I don't imagine the other kids every wanted to mess with you.


On the second thought, in the little league, every time the ball landed in fair territory, you must of got on base with a double. The ball would be in the air for over seven seconds. Maybe held to a single if a runner was on first.

If you have any video of this, you should share it with us. If not, I trust your memory.

[Andrew Mason]

Witnesses are supposed to report what they saw, not what they were told, or “know”. But they commonly don’t do that.

People’s memories are affected by what they are told, or learn. We edit our memories without being aware of that. That is how, even after more than fifty years, I can still remember hitting 400-foot home runs while in little league. Actually, I don’t, but my memory may be off.

Based on my memory, which I think is accurate (but might not be) a motorcycle policeman, following up about 100 yards behind the president, reported in 1976 (?) that he remembered seeing Jackie climbing out onto the trunk of the limousine. However, he made no such claim in 1963. Plus, at the time Jackie was climbing onto the trunk, he was just turning onto Elm Street. So, because of the slope of the street, it would be difficult for him to see the limousine. Plus, there would many vehicles in the way, blocking his view.

So, what is more likely, is that the officer saw the Zapruder film, and incorporated his memory of this film into his memory. He ‘edited’ his memory. And now remembered seeing, in person, in real time, Jackie climbing out onto the trunk of the limousine, while he was riding his motorcycle.

So why are the witnesses who reported 3 shots from the TSBD right despite all the news media, but the witnesses who reported the 1......2...3 pattern to the shots wrong despite virtually no media reports about that pattern?

[John Iacoletti]

There apparently is no way to get the reported dates from Galanor’s list without going though each name one by one. But I note that even in Andrew’s small sample, 3 of the 15 are many months later.

[Andrew Mason]

There apparently is no way to get the reported dates from Galanor’s list without going though each name one by one.

Is there any other way to do it?  At least with Stuart Galanor's list you can see the original statements with the click of a button.

But I note that even in Andrew’s small sample, 3 of the 15 are many months later.

So ignore those. Just look at the ones taken on 22Nov63.  86% of those (6/7) in the A-B sample said there were 3 shots.  (Altgens was somewhat ambiguous about the number of shots - he reported two bursts of sound. Given that many reported the last two in rapid succession it is not clear whether he was reporting the bursts (esp. the second burst, which he said struck JFK in the head) as one or more shots.

Ques: How did that happen if there were really other than 3 shots?