This is all a classic example of seeing things you want to see.
Have a theory when the first shot was then examine the Z-film at the moment you have chosen to see if there's anything that might support your theory.
The number one observation is 'head turns'. Anyone who turns their heads is reacting to the loud, explosive noise of a shot.
The very first thing to notice about the clip Jerry posted is that there are about 20 to 25 people WHO DON'T REACT IN ANY WAY. This is surely the real take away from this clip. Apart from two clear head turns, everyone else appears to be focussed on the limo. The vast majority of people in the clip show absolutely no reaction to a supposed loud, explosive sound at this moment. As usual, it is necessary to ignore the vast majority of evidence, in this instance, to come up with an interpretation which suits a pre-existing conclusion.
The question is - why, out of the dozens of people shown in this clip, do only two people turn their heads, if there has been a loud, explosive noise?
I would like to take a closer look at Charles' analysis of this clip:
I came to this forum many years ago with one of my main goals being to seek confirmation, or contrary evidence, regarding the conclusion by the HSCA of a missed first shot around the Z160 time frame. The photographic record is one of the primary areas that I have focused on. Jerry’s post, along with the other evidence, has me convinced that the HSCA got this aspect right.
Firstly, I would have to dispute Charles' assertion that he has sought out "contrary evidence, regarding the conclusion by the HSCA of a missed first shot around the Z160 time frame." This is not the case. In "The First Shot" thread, a mountain of evidence has been produced refuting such an early shot which Charles has disputed with the zeal of someone with a theory to defend. This evidence has not been embraced, it has been rejected out of hand as it refutes his own theory about when the first shot occurred.
I want to point out four other witness reactions in Jerry’s post that appear to me to be reactions to a loud, unexpected, explosive noise (aka: a missed first shot). In this frame from Jerry’s clip I have circled a woman (blue circle) with a gold or yellow garment that appears to jump just as she enters the frame and then immediately covers her mouth with her right hand. I drew two red marks showing how high it appears to me that she jumped at the sound of the shot. There is also a man (yellow circle) right behind the woman that Jerry circled who appears to suddenly snap his head from looking down and to his left to looking towards the limo/Zapruder camera and then he appears to stand on his toes to get a better view. Additionally, I have circled in green two men who suddenly swap positions to get a better view. One of these men steps in front of Betzner (who has his camera to his face). This man’s back appears to the camera left in Betzner’s photo. Here’s the marked up frame from Jerry Organ’s clip:
The first point to make is about the two men circled in green. As Charles points out, both men are focused on seeing the limo, they never stop looking in that direction and both make an effort to get a better view (one moving forward to the road and one moving backward to get a better view around the woman stood in front of him). What these two men have to do with a sudden reaction is a mystery and it is baffling why they have been mentioned.
Next is the man circled in yellow who appears to stand on his tiptoes to get a better view. Charles believes he sees him "suddenly snap his head from looking down and to his left to looking towards the limo/Zapruder camera". Personally, I see nothing of the sort. The man is constantly looking in the direction of the limo and, like the two men circled in green, adjusts his position to get a better view as the limo moves away. Let's not forget, everyone is there to see JFK and Jackie. Once again, there is no reason to bring this man into the discussion.
Lastly is the woman circled in blue who "appears to jump just as she enters the frame". It is my opinion that any fair-minded person would see that she is actually running as she enters the clip and does not suddenly jump. She, too, can be taken out of the discussion.
As I said, this is a classic example of seeing what you want to see and making the most strained interpretation of what is taking place.
When we add these reactions to the reactions in the limo and Rosemary Willis’ reactions it seems very obvious to that this closer look at the Zapruder film is groundbreaking.
This brings me to one of the most tiresome aspects of JFK research. Presenting evidence that refutes a particular claim over and over and over again with no effect. It just baffles me.
The "reactions in the limo" Charles is referring to is when JFK, Jackie, JBC and Nellie all look to their right at more or less the same time. This is often held up as strong evidence they were all reacting to a loud, explosive noise (even though Jackie specifically stated she never heard such a noise). But there is another reason they all turned to look to their right at this point. It is a really well documented reason. It is a reason that everyone peddling this nonsense is aware of but they wilfully choose to ignore. Even those who claim to be looking for "contrary evidence".
This is from an article Mary Woodward had published the day after the assassination:
The President was looking straight ahead and we were afraid we would not get to see his face. But we started clapping and cheering and both he and Mrs. Kennedy turned, and smiled and waved, directly at us, it seemed. Jackie was wearing a beautiful pink suit with beret to match. Two of us, who had seen the President last during the final weeks of the 1960 campaign, remarked almost simultaneously how relaxed and robust he looked. As it turned out, we were almost certainly the last faces he noticed in the crowd. After acknowledging our cheers, he faced forward again and suddenly there was a horrible, ear-shattering noise coming from behind us and a little to the right. Here we have a first-hand eye-witness account by a reporter. She wrote up this account shortly after the assassination and it was published the next day. There can not be a shred of doubt that she is describing the moment JFK and Jackie turn to their right around the z160's. There is zero doubt about this.
Yet some researchers, as Charles is doing in this thread, promote the idea that the head turns are in response to the sound of the shot. Even though Woodward's explanation of their head turns is well known.
This is solid evidence from a credible witness explaining the head turns of JFK and Jackie at this point yet it is ignored in favour of just making up a story that has no basis in fact.
I really don't get it.
To imagine that JFK responds to hearing a loud explosive noise by waving and smiling at people stood on Elm Street hurts my head.
We can safely assume that JBC and Nellie also turn to their right at this time due to the same stimulus - Woodward and her friends calling out to JFK and Jackie.
And now we come to, what I find to be, the most tiresome use of eye-witness testimony that there is in this whole case - Rosemary Willis.
Her first statement about the shooting was made 15 years after the event and at no point does she mention that she stopped running because she heard a shot:
"The committee interviewed Willis' daughter. Rose Mary Willis, on November 8, 1978 at her home in Dallas. Ms Willis stated that she was present with her father and a sister in the area of the grass section of the plaza at the time of the Presidential motorcade on November 22, 1963. Ms Willis explained that as the President's car approached she ran alongside the limousine almost to the triple underpass.
Ms Willis stated that during that time she noticed two persons who looked "conspicuous". One was a man near the curb holding an umbrella, who seemed to be more concerned with opening or closing the umbrella than dropping to the ground like everyone else at the time of the shots. The other was a person who was standing just behind the concrete wall near the triple underpass. That person appeared to "disappear the next instant". Ms Willis further described the location as the corner of the section of the white concrete wall between the area of Abraham Zapruder's right side and the top of the concrete stairway leading up to the center of the grassy knoll.
Ms Willis said she was aware of three shots being fired. She gave no information on the direction or location of the shots, but stated that her father became upset when the policemen in the area appeared to run away from where he thought the shots came from, that is, they were running away from the grassy knoll."https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/html/HSCA_Vol12_0006a.htmThis is Rosemary's full contribution to the HSCA investigation and her first word about the shooting.
She never stopped because she heard a shot and she certainly never looked in the direction of the TSBD because she heard a shot coming from there as she didn't have an opinion on where the shots came from or what the direction was.
Yet, in the very same report, specifically an analysis of the Z-film to determine when the first shot occurred, we find this:
"During the period of Connally's initial rapid movement, however, no one else shows a comparable reaction. The President does not appear to react to anything unusual prior to Zapruder frame 190. The Panel observed, however, that at approximately this time, a young girl who had been running along the grass, beyond the far curb of the street where the limousine was traveling, suddenly began to stop and turn sharply to her right, looking up the street in a direction behind the limousine."So, the idea that little Rosemary stopped running because she heard a shot was never Rosemary's idea -
it was the HSCA's photographic expert panel!Let that sink in for a moment.
Needless to say, Rosemary jumped all over this. Suddenly she was confirming that she had indeed stopped because she heard a shot. She suddenly knew which direction the shots were coming from. She saw Oswald in the SN. She saw a shooter in the storm drain. She saw smoke coming from the grassy knoll. She heard four shots. She heard six shots...hmmmmm.
All of this pales into insignificance when we realise that, as little Rosemary grinds to a halt, no-one in the car full of SS agents, traveling just a few feet away, makes any kind of significant move. Not a single one shows any kind of reaction that can be interpreted as a reaction to a gun shot. Little Rosemary hears the shot, recognises it as a shot, stops and turns to look in the direction the shots are coming from. Yet a car full of SS agents are blissfully unaware....hmmmm.
The title of this thread is "A Closer Look".
There are a few researchers who could have a closer look at what they are willing to ignore in order to make their preconceived conclusions work.
