The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?

[Jack Nessan]

I struggled with the early missed shot. To miss the car entirely and also miss the spectators seems like a huge stretch especially if it was early and pretty close range. As a former Infantry soldier it had me really curious so I looked at it hard for a long time.

Connolly's statement works for an early missed shot as does Jackie Kennedy's and Nellie Connolly (sort of). Also Robert croft who took a photo prior to any shots. There are others I don't remember who. At least one claims to have seen something hit the road.

The car occupants testimonies matched with their movements in the Z film, together with Robert croft's statement would make the shot somewhere in the z150's in the Z film.

So realising it was maybe might be kinda possible left the question...how the hell could he miss??? Beats me. Maybe he was nervous and had an accidental discharge across the city who knows. Maybe there's a bullet hole somewhere in the 6th floor or he hit the tree. Who knows. Maybe the scope was way way off. It would have to be really off to miss the whole car at that range.

Someone who armour plated the limo after the assassination said there was a hole somewhere in the floor pan of the car, only visible with the seats and carpets removed. He didn't photograph it though so no corroborating support and it seems it was never investigated. Missed shot? Who knows.

Based on all that pondering and I wouldn't bet my life on it, but It does seem to me the first shot was early in the Z150's and he missed by a country mile for reasons unknown. Took me a while to come to it because I didn't want to believe it somehow but that's where I'm at. Oswald had that rifle lying around and being transported about in cars with luggage and furniture. Who knows if he ever even zeroed it. Seems unlikely to me he wouldn't but again who knows.

No different than a shot hitting the pole at Z132 or where ever that was proposed by Max Holland, an early missed shot was proposed solely as a way to explain the cycle time of the carcano, the problem is it never happened either.

[John Anderson]

So who to believe? Those who say two shots or those who say three shots?

[Gary Craig]

"Little Rosemary Willis running alongside JFK's Limo as the first shot rang out."

Willis family: Head shot came from right front

Willis photo #5 coincides with Z-205.

Mr. WILLIS. No, sir; I took that picture just seconds before the first shot was fired, to get back close up. Then I started down the street, and the regular weekly edition of Life magazine came out and shows me in about three different pictures going down the street. Then my next shot was taken at the very--in fact, the shot caused me to squeeze the camera shutter, and I got a picture of the President as he was hit with the first shot. So instantaneous, in fact, that the crowd hadn't had time to react.

[John Anderson]

And yet Willis also says...

Mr. LIEBELER. You couldn't tell whether he was hit by the first shot? You couldn't tell whether he had been hit by the first shot or the second shot or the third shot, or by how many shots he had been hit?
Mr. WILLIS. No, sir; except this one thing might be worthy of mention. When I took slide No. 4, the President was smiling and waving and looking straight ahead, and 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, and he more or less faced the other side of the street and leaned forward, which caused me to wonder, although I could not see anything positively. It did cause me to wonder.
Mr. LIEBELER. You say that the President looked toward his left; is that correct? Toward the side of Elm Street that you are standing on, or which way?
Mr. WILLIS. In slide No. 4 he was looking pretty much toward--straight ahead, and 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 and he more or less slumped forward, and it caused me to wonder if he were hit, although I couldn't say.

And that's the thing. He says he heard three shots. He says the first shot happened at the Stemmons sign as he took slide 5, yet he says Jackie snapped her head in JFK's direction at the first shot. She can be seen clearly doing that at late z160's and continues looking at him until the throat shot happens. His (Willis) recollections don't match the Z film, or Jackie and Connolys statements.

The evidence is conflicting all round as we all know. What we must do at some point is decide which is reliable. Is the Z film accurate? If so who's testimonies can be corroborated by the film and testimony of others.

[Joe Elliott]

This brings me to Robert Croft. Croft's famous photo was taken at Z-160. He never said anything to indicate this photo was taken after the first shot. He made a point, however, of stating that his fourth and final photo (which didn't come out) was taken simultaneously with the fatal shot. This suggests, then, that he would have said something if his third photo was taken less than a half second after the first shot. And yet he said nothing. Near him, moreover, were two other photographers, Betzner and Willis. Betzner's photo was taken at Z-186. He said the first shot came just after. And Willis' photo was taken at Z-202. He said the first shot led him to click the camera. This is one of the many reasons some believe the first shot was fired circa Z-190.

Which brings me to Ike Altgens.

It?s funny. Whenever CTers wish to establish support for a later first shot, they site Hugh Betzner, or Philip Willis, or both, but never Ike Altgens.



Hugh Betzner took a photograph at z186, which he said was taken just before the first shot.

Phillip Willis took a photograph at z303, which he said was taken just after the first shot.

Taken together, Betzner?s and Willis?s memories mean a shot between z186 and z202.

However, Ike Altgens took a photograph at z255, which he said was taken just a fraction after the first shot. By which I believe he meant, a fraction of a second after the first shot, and not a fraction of a minute or a fraction of a fortnight.



Quote from Mr. Altgens of part of his testimony to the Warren Commission:

I made one picture at the time I heard a noise that sounded like a firecracker--I did not know it was a shot, but evidently my picture, as I recall, and it was almost simultaneously with the shot--the shot was just a fraction ahead of my picture, but that much---of course at that time I figured it was nothing more than a firecracker, because from my position down here the sound was not of such volume that it would indicate to me it was a high-velocity rifle.



Taken all three witnesses together, this means the first shot must have occurred:

** after frame 186

** and before frame 202

** and after frame 236

Clearly at least one of the witnesses has to be wrong. Perhaps all three witnesses are wrong.



What I believe the testimony of these three witnesses most strongly support is not when the first shot occurred, but the strong desire for the photographers to believe that their photograph was taken at a historically significant moment, if not at the time the President was struck in the head than as close as possible to the very moment the first shot was fired.

[Ray Mitcham]

The evidence is conflicting all round as we all know. What we must do at some point is decide which is reliable. Is the Z film accurate? If so who's testimonies can be corroborated by the film and testimony of others.

You're starting  to understand, John.

[Walt Cakebread]

You're starting  to understand, John.

There are some honest researchers who have done magnificent jobs of exposing some aspect of the case...but instead of accepting the hard work of those individuals many CT's refuse to open their eyes and accept the information provided because it clashes with some pet theory.  Far too many CT's would rather play "who done it" than face the facts....

[John Anderson]

You're starting  to understand, John.

I've always understood.