Oswald took 10.2 seconds to fire all three shots.

[Tom Mahon]

The study by Roselle and Scearce is pure nonsense. The very worst metric, by a country mile, for establishing whether a shot was fired is looking at people turning their heads in a motorcade. It is utterly futile. It's a motorcade!! Examining the completely normal head turns of a tiny fraction of the people that can be seen in the Z-film is weak sauce indeed.

Regarding nonsense, futility and sauce, you're full of the full variety, you're utterly futile, and if you've been hitting the sauce harder than usual, you'd better cut back before you totally flip out.

[Dan O'meara]

You're full of high-fructose beans and pure nonsense, you're utterly futile, and if you've been hitting the sauce harder than usual, you'd better cut back before you totally flip out.

 
What a fantastic analysis of the evidence I've presented.
You are clearly a free-thinking, common sense kind of guy 
Such a rational and reasonable response.
God bless ya.

[Royell Storing]

2.3 seconds is not enough time? The FBI did it.

Although witnesses said they were in rapid succession they also said that the relative spacing was about 2:1.  Besides JBC was hit in the back by it.  We can see he was hit before z280.

        "They" being who specifically? The eyewitnesses I am familiar with did Not say anything about the spacing between shots 2 and 3 being "2:1".  And I'm guessing you are dumping Max Holland's scenario where the shooter was standing when firing Shot #1 and then sat down for shots #2 & #3?

[Royell Storing]

  We see on the NBC Darnell Film that Camera Car #1 and #2 are at a Dead Stop when both are at the turn onto Elm St. That "CARTOON OF CARS" shows No Stop. That's a "Fractured Flicker"! It holds No Value what-so-ever.

[Andrew Mason]

        "They" being who specifically? The eyewitnesses I am familiar with did Not say anything about the spacing between shots 2 and 3 being "2:1".

"They" being specifically: Senator Ralph Yarborough, Forrest Sorrels, Robert Jackson and Mayor Earle Cabell.

Yarborough:	"After what I took to be about three seconds, another shot boomed out, and after what I took to be one-half the time between the first and second shots (calculated now, this would have put the third shot about one and one-half seconds after the second shot--by my estimate--to me there seemed to be a long time between the first and second shots, a much shorter time between the second and third shots--these were my impressions that day), a third shot was fired. After the third shot was fired, but only after the third shot was fired, the cavalcade speeded up, gained speed rapidly, and roared away to the Parkland Hospital." (7 H 439 - affidavit that was sworn July 10, 1964)
Sorrels:	Mr. STERN. Can you you tell us anything about the spacing of these reports? Mr. SORRELS. Yes. There was to me about twice as much time between the first and second shots as there was between the second and third shots. Mr. STERN. Can you estimate the overall time from the first shot to the third shot? Mr. SORRELS. Yes. I have called it out to myself, I have timed it, and I would say it was very, very close to 6 seconds.7 H 345.
Jackson:	I would say to me it seemed like 3 or 4 seconds between the first and the second, and between the second and third, well, I guess 2 seconds, they were very close together. It could have been more time between the first and second. I really can't be sure 2 H 160
Cabell:	Mr. HUBERT. Could you estimate the number of seconds, say, between the flrst and second shots, as related to the number of seconds between the second and third shots? Perhaps doing it on the basis of a ratio? Mr. CABELL. Well, I would put it this way. That approximately 10 seconds elapsed between the first and second shots, with not more than 5 seconds having elapsed until the third one. Mr. HUBERT. Two to one ratio? Mr. CABELL. Approximately that. And again I say that, as you mentioned, as a matter of being relative. I couldn’t tell you the exact seconds because they were not counted. 7 H 478 And I'm guessing you are dumping Max Holland's scenario where the shooter was standing when firing Shot #1 and then sat down for shots #2 & #3? Good guess.

[Royell Storing]

"They" being specifically: Senator Ralph Yarborough, Forrest Sorrels, Robert Jackson and Mayor Earle Cabell.

Yarborough:	"After what I took to be about three seconds, another shot boomed out, and after what I took to be one-half the time between the first and second shots (calculated now, this would have put the third shot about one and one-half seconds after the second shot--by my estimate--to me there seemed to be a long time between the first and second shots, a much shorter time between the second and third shots--these were my impressions that day), a third shot was fired. After the third shot was fired, but only after the third shot was fired, the cavalcade speeded up, gained speed rapidly, and roared away to the Parkland Hospital." (7 H 439 - affidavit that was sworn July 10, 1964)
Sorrels:	Mr. STERN. Can you you tell us anything about the spacing of these reports? Mr. SORRELS. Yes. There was to me about twice as much time between the first and second shots as there was between the second and third shots. Mr. STERN. Can you estimate the overall time from the first shot to the third shot? Mr. SORRELS. Yes. I have called it out to myself, I have timed it, and I would say it was very, very close to 6 seconds.7 H 345.
Jackson:	I would say to me it seemed like 3 or 4 seconds between the first and the second, and between the second and third, well, I guess 2 seconds, they were very close together. It could have been more time between the first and second. I really can't be sure 2 H 160
Cabell:	Mr. HUBERT. Could you estimate the number of seconds, say, between the flrst and second shots, as related to the number of seconds between the second and third shots? Perhaps doing it on the basis of a ratio? Mr. CABELL. Well, I would put it this way. That approximately 10 seconds elapsed between the first and second shots, with not more than 5 seconds having elapsed until the third one. Mr. HUBERT. Two to one ratio? Mr. CABELL. Approximately that. And again I say that, as you mentioned, as a matter of being relative. I couldn’t tell you the exact seconds because they were not counted. 7 H 478 Good guess.

   You're gonna trot Cabell out there? 15 Seconds TOTAL for all 3 shots?  So we go from 6 seconds to Holland's 10+ Seconds and Now, YOU, want us to buy into Cabell's elapsed time of 15 Seconds Total? The more guys like this that you produce, the closer we get to there being a Limo STOP!

[Andrew Mason]

Way before Z-280.

Like at Z-222 as indicated by his lapel flap at Z-224 and the bulging out of his jacket the frame before that.

Or do you think those things were caused by a gust of wind?

I don't see a bulge on JBC's chest.  How does the jacket bulge from a bullet but not the shirt? And we can see that the shirt doesn't move because if it did the tie would move. It doesn't budge:



What we see is a change in the amount of visible white shirt.  That can be due to the jacket moving because his right arm is moving as we see happening in subsequent frames.

JBC is definitely reacting to the shot that struck JFK in the neck.  But, as Dan has shown, that was the first shot.   So either JBC and Nellie were very mistaken that JBC was hit in the back by the second shot, or JBC was not yet hit in the back then.

[Andrew Mason]

   You're gonna trot Cabell out there? 15 Seconds TOTAL for all 3 shots?  So we go from 6 seconds to Holland's 10+ Seconds and Now, YOU, want us to buy into Cabell's elapsed time of 15 Seconds Total? The more guys like this that you produce, the closer we get to there being a Limo STOP!

You need to read all of what he said.  He was specifically asked for a ratio and he gave 10:5 which is 2:1.  He specifically said that he used 10 and 5 seconds to show the relative spacing not the actual seconds.  He specifically said that he did not count the seconds.