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

[John Iacoletti]

No. I don?t have extensive knowledge of Carcano rifle and 1960 motorcycle sounds. It is the CTers who argue that we can tell what happened from what the witnesses reported they heard, not I.

No, it's you who argues that you can tell what happened by selectively interpreting jiggles and a little girl who stopped running.

[Joe Elliott]

No, it's you who argues that you can tell what happened by selectively interpreting jiggles and a little girl who stopped running.

A shot at z153 is based on:

** One of the three strongest camera jiggles before z318.

**** Not counting the camera jiggles which occurred while JFK disappeared behind the sign. Having the subject disappear behind an object in the foreground has been found to cause camera jiggles, just like loud noises can. This is not subjective.

** Connally turning to his right in the z160?s.

** JFK suddenly turning to his right, in the z160?s.

** Rosemary Willis starting to slowdown and stare in the direction of the TSBD in the z160s.

Oh, yes, and Connally saying he heard a gunshot and he turned to his right but could not see the rifle. And then was shot a few seconds later. This indicates a shot just before the z160?s.



Does this make use of an eyewitness? Yes. But it is an eyewitness supported by the Zapruder film. It does show him turning to his right just before he is clearly shot. And further supported by a camera jiggle that occurs about a quarter second before Connally starts his turn to the right.


Could this all be coincidences? Connally thought he heard a shot causing him to turn to the right, but he really didn?t hear anything? A totally fortuitous strong camera jiggle just before Connally starts his turn? JFK turning as well? A girl starts to slow down to stop and stares at the TSBD?

Yes. But I don?t believe in coincidences.

[Jack Nessan]

No, it's you who argues that you can tell what happened by selectively interpreting jiggles and a little girl who stopped running.

Exactly John, why let a little thing like reality, evidence, or corroboration of a single adult eyewitness standing along Elm street  get in the way of wanting there to be a shot at Z152. Just pretend there is a shot dismiss the lack of evidence and statements of everyone and go with it. Make it up as you go.

The guy (Zapruder) being studied for Jiggle Analysis said there was just two shots. The guy (DR Hartman) doing the study with Jiggle Analysis concluded there was just two shots but ignore that and all the eyewitness statements and claim they are all wrong because they must be deaf and believe there was a shot at a location where there wasn't one.

[Joe Elliott]

Exactly John, why let a little thing like reality, evidence, or corroboration of a single adult eyewitness standing along Elm street  get in the way of wanting there to be a shot at Z152. Just pretend there is a shot dismiss the lack of evidence and statements of everyone and go with it. Make it up as you go.

The guy (Zapruder) being studied for Jiggle Analysis said there was just two shots. The guy (DR Hartman) doing the study with Jiggle Analysis concluded there was just two shots but ignore that and all the eyewitness statements and claim they are all wrong because they must be deaf and believe there was a shot at a location where there wasn't one.

The eyewitnesses are unreliable. It should not even be up for debate. They are unreliable because they disagree with each other.

Many say there were only two shots. Many say there were three shots. Many say all the shots came from the front. Many say all the shots came from the back. Many say the shots were evenly spaced. Many say the first two shots were closer to each other. Many say the last two shots were closer to each other.

And a clear majority said the limousine stopped (the most popular view) or almost came to a stop (the second most popular view). Which differs from the Zapruder film, which clearly shows the limousine slowing from 13 mph to 8 mph. With no stop.

[Zeon Wasinsky]

Mr. NORMAN. I believe it was his right arm, and I can't remember what the exact time was but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard the shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something, and then another shot and I believe Jarman or someone told me, he said, "I believe someone is shooting at the President," and I think I made a statement "It is someone shooting at the President, and I believe it came from up above us."
Well, I couldn't see at all during the time but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle, it sounded as though it was to me.
Mr. BALL. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. NORMAN. Three.

Heard 1st shot. Saw President "slump" Heard 2 more shots. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

demonstrates shot timing of 3 shots fired in less than 5 seconds. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

Guess Norman must be mistaken on BOTH his observation AND his  memory of the shot spacing, according to WC since if the 1st shot caused the "slumping" then the 1st shot was at Z223 and that would mean Normans other observation, of hearing 3 shots in less than 5 seconds is also correct, since Z223 to Z313 is 4.8 seconds. That would make it not probable that the MC rifle was used.

So the WC must reject most of Normans observation except for hearing 3 shots and hearing shells hit the floor.




 

[Jack Nessan]

There's a slump-like movement here:



From behind, as Norman was, one would not be aware of the President smiling, so it might appear to be something unusual.

Regarding the severe slumping at Z226-228 with the arms springing up, I think Norman would have said the President was hit. "Slumped or something" seems inadequate.

This is just desperate. So the people alongside the car and in front of the car would not have thought there was a shot and they state where the first shot took place.

[Andrew Mason]

Mr. NORMAN. I believe it was his right arm, and I can't remember what the exact time was but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard the shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something, and then another shot and I believe Jarman or someone told me, he said, "I believe someone is shooting at the President," and I think I made a statement "It is someone shooting at the President, and I believe it came from up above us."
Well, I couldn't see at all during the time but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle, it sounded as though it was to me.
Mr. BALL. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. NORMAN. Three.

Heard 1st shot. Saw President "slump" Heard 2 more shots. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

demonstrates shot timing of 3 shots fired in less than 5 seconds. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

Guess Norman must be mistaken on BOTH his observation AND his  memory of the shot spacing, according to WC since if the 1st shot caused the "slumping" then the 1st shot was at Z223 and that would mean Normans other observation, of hearing 3 shots in less than 5 seconds is also correct, since Z223 to Z313 is 4.8 seconds. That would make it not probable that the MC rifle was used.

So the WC must reject most of Normans observation except for hearing 3 shots and hearing shells hit the floor.

That is only a problem if the first shot was at z223. There is a great deal of consistent evidence that it was before z200.  JFK became clear of any visual obstruction from the SN when JFK was halfway between the lamppost on Elm and the Thornton Freeway sign, which is about z195.  Phil Willis took his photo at z202 which he said was a very short time after the first shot.  Betzner said he took his z186 photo just before the first shot.  Jack Ready said he turned to the rear in immediately in response to the first shot. He begins to turn at z199.  Rosemary Willis turns her head sharply to the rear between z202-204.  She said she looked back at that TSBD and saw pigeons flying from the roof.   

If the first shot was around z195 and the second shot at z271-272 (there is evidence of this as well), then there is no problem with Oswald firing all shots i.e. z195 + 4.2 seconds -> z271 + 2.3 seconds -> z313. 

[Joe Elliott]

Looks like one more example of the witnesses being wrong.  In this case these are people specifically placed there to observe the sounds and note them. Under what circumstances are witnesses correct?

Obviously with your extensive knowledge of a carcano rifle and 1960 motorcycle sounds you know what the witnesses hear.

No. The HSCA 1970?s ?witnesses? didn?t compare the muzzle blast of a Carcano with the backfires commonly produced by early 1960?s motorcycles travelling at slow speeds. They didn?t compare the muzzle blast with the fireworks one could legally buy in 1963 set off from various distances from the observer.

They only tested the loudness of a Carcano rifle. And assumed a motorcycle backfire could not be as loud. And assumed a 1963 firecracker could not be loud enough to be as loud, even if it was set off much closer than the rifle was.

If the HSCA observers were wrong, this isn?t a case of mishearing rifles, backfires and firecrackers. This was a case of not testing backfires and firecrackers at all and making assumptions that backfires and firecrackers could not be loud enough. Not errors of observations, but much more fundamental errors of judgment. Making unwarranted assumptions that scientist should never do. If they want to argue that rifle fire cannot be mistaken for backfires or firecrackers, they need to first run an experiment involving rifles, backfires and firecrackers, not just rifles.

However, looking up charts on how loud rifles, backfires and firecrackers really are, and noting that the loudness of a sound is greatly effected by the distance from the sound source, it is possible to estimate that a rifle 90 yards away, pointed in the general direction of the observer, would sound about as loud as a firecracker from 20 yards away. Making it plausible that a distracted witness, hearing a rifle from 90 yards away, might mistake it for something much more commonplace, a firecracker that is 20 yards away. Or a nearby motorcycle. And continue enjoying their brief close up view of the President and First Lady.