ROLL UP ROLL UP BOYS AND GIRLS
PICK A Z-FRAME, ANY Z-FRAME(https://i.postimg.cc/446tFwtR/JFK-JBC-react-2.gif) (https://postimages.org/)USE THE FRAME COUNT TO PICK WHICH FRAME YOU THINK CONNALLY STARTS TO REACT.
To me, he appears to be reacting to being shot by 224, if not before.
I would certainly have to agree with this assessment.
Below is a rough gif of z224, z225, z226 which, I think, shows JBC beginning to react in an extreme way.
(https://i.postimg.cc/JzKmSt4Y/z224-226-gif-1.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
I wonder what other members think of this assessment or if they have a different opinion.
To me, he appears to be reacting to being shot by 224, if not before.Sure looks like it to me. He said that it felt like a fist hitting him in his back. At around Z223/224 his right back looks like it was "punched" or hit by a fist. I know, confirmation bias and all.
Sure looks like it to me. He said that it felt like a fist hitting him in his back. At around Z223/224 his right back looks like it was "punched" or hit by a fist. I know, confirmation bias and all.
Connally (WC testimony): It was "as if someone doubled his fist and came up behind you and just with about a 12-inch blow hit you right in the back right below the shoulder blade."
Isn't that what we see? His right back crumpling?
It is amazing to me how much influence our preconceptions have on what we see in the photographic record. I am not immune to this phenomenon. People who can’t believe the SBT, for whatever reasons, will deny that JBC is reacting to being shot.He is reacting.
It is amazing to me how much influence our preconceptions have on what we see in the photographic record. I am not immune to this phenomenon. People who can’t believe the SBT, for whatever reasons, will deny that JBC is reacting to being shot.
He is reacting.
I can't tell from the film whether he is reacting being hit in the back or reacting to hearing the first shot hit JFK and fearing an assassination unfolding (as he said occurred).
The only reason to think that the bullet through JFK's neck hit Connally is that the bullet passed through JFK's neck without deflecting and the car shows no sign of being hit. Arlen Specter admitted that this was the reason for the SBT.
If that is indeed the case, the SBT must be correct. The evidence would favour the first shot SBT and we would have to find (as John McCloy did) that the evidence that JBC was hit on the second shot must be wrong.
But if JBC was hit by two bullets and did not feel one because it caused only superficial wound that he did not notice for a few seconds before being hit in the back, then there is no problem with any of the evidence. In fact, the difference in JBC's wounds could be easily explained as would the condition of CE399. Tague's evidence that he was struck on the second shot would also fit. And the trajectory would fit much better. I can't think of any evidence that does not fit that scenario.
Right. And people who believe in the single bullet fantasy "see" a simultaneous reaction. It's a Rorschach test.
What do you see, John?
Oh that's easy, Iacoletti sees the exact opposite of any evidence that convicts Oswald.
JohnM
Connally was reacting at Z223 but watching Mrs. Kennedy it seems JFK was hit a bit earlier. She turns and stares at him right after he goes behind the sign.
The interesting thing is that this isn't about people's pet theories, it's just about what the Z-film is showing.
What do people see?
So far there has been a general consensus that JBC is having an extreme reaction that begins around z223/224.
Obviously, people can't resist adding their own spin, be it the SBT or whatever, but it would be interesting to see if a real consensus can be reached over this issue as I believe it would be a first.
Mrs. Kennedy's job was to acknowledge the crowd and at that point in time the majority of the crowd from her position was behind her husband.
(https://i.postimg.cc/6pxrqLBQ/Zapruder-stabilized-just-before-sign.jpg)
Another factor to consider is after hearing a shot at approximately Z160, Connally quickly turns to the right.
(https://i.postimg.cc/7hVkznpy/connallyturn.gif)
Mr. SPECTER. As the automobile turned left onto Elm from Houston, what did occur there, Governor?
Governor CONNALLY. We had--we had gone, I guess, 150 feet, maybe 200 feet, I don't recall how far it was, heading down to get on the freeway, the Stemmons Freeway, to go out to the hall where we were going to have lunch and, as I say, the crowds had begun to thin, and we could--I was anticipating that we were going to be at the hall in approximately 5 minutes from the time we turned on Elm Street.
We had just made the turn, well, when I heard what I thought was a shot. I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot. I instinctively turned to my right because the sound appeared to come from over my right shoulder, so I turned to look back over my right shoulder,...
Rosemary Willis slows down after hearing a shot at approximately Z160
(https://www.washingtondecoded.com/.a/6a00d834523b6869e2019b02be18c8970b-600wi)
At circa Zapruder film frames 164-171 (hereafter "Z-164-171"), she starts to slow down, then she stops running and, simultaneous with her slowing/stopping, she slightly turns her level-facing head to end up looking towards the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository. Willis stated she stopped because she heard a loud noise that attracted her attention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_Willis
JohnM
There is an overwhelming amount of evidence absolutely refuting a first shot as early as the z160's that is covered in "The First Shot" thread.
Rosemary Willis??
Really??
Connally turns his head, therefore there was a shot??
Really??
You seem to have missed that JFK and Jackie also turn their heads to the right at around the same time. Are they all responding to the sound of a shot?
Or are they responding to Mary Woodward and her colleagues shouting at them to turn their way?
Head turns and Rosemary Willis... ::)
You also missed the most reliable piece of evidence of an earlier shot, when Zapruder who was continuously filming while all three shots rang out makes three unique vertical reactions!!!
Zapruder up till and including the headshot only makes three startled vertical jumps while filming, the head shot at Z313, the shot when the Limo emerges from behind the sign and the earlier shot just before Rosemary Willis slows and turns when she says she heard a shot and Connally's quick head turn as confirmed by his own words, testimony which you conveniently ignored. -smug emoji-
(https://i.postimg.cc/85h5y3F8/Zapuder-Shot-Reaction1.gif)
Btw it took time for the gun shot sounds to reach Zapruder hence the slight delay in his reactions.
JohnM
It's not reliable at all.
Marilyn Sitzman describes the shots as sounding really distant. She describes the smashing of the Coke bottle as being far louder.
There is no reason to believe the shots were loud enough to cause a startle effect.
It's not reliable at all.
Marilyn Sitzman describes the shots as not being that loud. She describes the smashing of the Coke bottle as being far louder.
There is no reason to believe the shots were loud enough to cause a startle effect.
Thompson: Could I ask you something about your gaze and actions immediately after the head shot? On the trailer of Mr. Zapruder's film, we noticed that he turned to his right and photographed the general area of the stockade fence, the trees and the stockade fence and that particular area. Did you turn in that direction after the head shot too?
Sitzman: In a way, I have a feeling this: He might have heard the kids throw down the coke bottles and heard that crash or else maybe it was just what he saw could have caused a reaction where he'd jump, but I don't think it was the sound of bullets, because I didn't jump.
Zapruder is a two shot witness. How can Zapruder have a startle reaction to a shot he never heard and he states he never heard. This is an example of the WC and HSCA conclusions indicating “Medias Influence” about inflating the number of shots– He is being asked about a shot he never heard nor did he know anything about this phantom shot until he was told about it.
I believe jiggle analysis only showed a strong reaction twice. Shots one and two that he describes in detail.
ZAPRUDER - Well, as the car came in line almost--I believe it was almost in line. I was standing up here and I was shooting through a telephoto lens, which is a zoom lens and as it reached about--I imagine it was around here--I heard the first shot and I saw the President lean over and grab himself like this (holding his left chest area).
Mr. LIEBELER - Grab himself on the front of his chest?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Right---something like that. In other words, he was sitting like this and waving and then after the shot he just went like that.
Mr. LIEBELER - He was sitting upright in the car and you heard the shot and you saw the President slump over?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Leaning--leaning toward the side of Jacqueline. For a moment I thought it was, you know, like you say, "Oh, he got me," when you hear a shot--you've heard these expressions and then I saw---I don't believe the President is going to make jokes like this, but before I had a chance to organize my mind, I heard a second shot and then I saw his head opened up and the blood and everything came out and I started--I can hardly talk about it [ the witness crying].
Mr. LIEBELER - Nobody should ever be ashamed of feeling that way, Mr. Zapruder. I feel the same way myself. It was a terrible thing.
Let me go back now for just a moment and ask you how many shots you heard altogether.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - I thought I heard two, it could be three, because to my estimation I thought he was hit on the second--I really don't know. The whole thing that has been transpiring--it was very upsetting and as you see I got a little better all the time and this came up again and it to me looked like the second shot, but I don't know. I never even heard a third shot.
Mr. LIEBELER - You didn't hear any shot after you saw him hit?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - I heard the second--after the first shot--I saw him leaning over and after the second shot--it's possible after what I saw, you know, then I started yelling, "They killed him,
Thanks, but under the circumstances of Zapruder concentrating on his filming, I can understand him not specifically recalling an inconsequential missed shot.
As for the two shot eyewitnesses, the number is statistically insignificant.
(https://i.postimg.cc/L6Hn37wd/number-of-shots-pie-chart.jpg)
JohnM
Rather than getting bogged down in various theories, particularly your own, it's more of a general discussion about what we actually see in the Z-film.It looks to me like he is reacting the way he said he reacted to the first shot.
You agree JBC is reacting - how would you describe the reaction?
The example presented was based on startle reaction. How can someone be startled by a sound they did not hear? Again, didn’t jiggle analysis indicate there were only two similar reactions?
These graphs are a fools game. Most of the % is based on earwitnesses not eyewitnesses. Why stop at just the earwitnesses in Dealey Plaza maybe they should have went a block over and asked those people.
The eyewitnesses tell a different story. First statements vs later statements present a different graph. There are endless variations of when the statements are taken as to how many shots and the location of the witnesses, whether they were eyewitnesses or earwitnesses, and also their descriptions of the second shot being the headshot, or two shots so close together they sounded as if they were one. All kinds of descriptions in statements that are interpreted as three shots but are actually two shot descriptions.
Jackie clearly states the medias influence that occurred following the assassination.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection of whether there were one or more shots?
Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, there must have been two because the one that made me turn around was Governor Connally yelling. And it used to confuse me because first I remembered there were three and I used to think my husband didn't make any sound when he was shot. And Governor Connally screamed. And then I read the other day that it was the same shot that hit them both. But I used to think if I only had been looking to the right I would have seen the first shot hit him, then I could have pulled him down, and then the second shot would not have hit him. But I heard Governor Connally yelling and that made me turn around, and as I turned to the right my husband was doing this [indicating with hand at neck]. He was receiving a bullet. And those are the only two I remember.
And I read there was a third shot. But I don't know. Just those two.
Zapruder is correlating everything he hears to the reaction in the car. You are suggesting that after the headshot he forgot he heard another shot? He flat out stated he only heard two shots. The first shot JFK slumps, second shot his head explodes. No other shots, he doesn't hear a shot and nothing happened in the car.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - …... I never even heard a third shot
Knott Lab and their Laser findings concluded that the SBT is IMPOSSIBLE. This makes the ongoing discussion immaterial. No SBT = Multiple Shooters = Conspiracy. CASE CLOSED!
Knott Lab and their Laser findings...
Just as a matter of interest, when did Knott Lab accurately laser measure the position of JFK's Limo on Elm and more importantly when did they accurately laser measure the precise positions of Kennedy and Connally within the actual Limo?
JohnM
FOLLOW THE SCIENCE. This Laser 360 Technology is far more advanced than ANY that has EVER been done with regard to the JFK Assassination/Dealey Plaza. The Knott Lab 360 technology has routinely been used/accepted in court cases across the USA. CASE CLOSED!
Since you brought up the Limo occupants.These witnesses are a perfect example of the ever -changing and morphing witness statements. All at some time, have no knowledge of a third shot or the second shot is the headshot or plainly there was only two shots. This is why a compilation comparing different witness statements as to two or three shots is flawed from the very get go.
Mrs Connally
Mr. DULLES. To the right was into your arms more or less?
Mrs. CONNALLY. No, he turned away from me. I was pretending that I was him. I never again looked in the back seat of the car after my husband was shot. My concern was for him, and I remember that he turned to the right and then just slumped down into the seat, so that I reached over to pull him toward me. X was trying to get him down and me down. The jump seats were not very roomy, so that there were reports that he slid into the seat of the car, which he did not; that he fell over into my lap, which he did not.
I just pulled him over into my arms because it would have been impossible to get us really both down with me sitting and me holding him. So that I looked out, I mean as he was in my arms, I put my head down over his head so that his head and my head were right together, and all I could see, too, were the people flashing by. I didn't look back any more. The third shot that I heard I felt, it felt like spent buckshot falling all over us, and then, of course, I too could see that it was the matter, brain tissue, or whatever, just human matter, all over the car and both of us.
John Connally
Mr. SPECTER. Nellie is Mrs. Connally?
Governor CONNALLY. Mrs. Connally. When she pulled me over into her lap, she could tell I was still breathing and moving, and she said, "Don't worry, Be quiet. You are going to be all right." She Just kept telling me I was going to be all right.
After the third shot, and I heard Roy Kellerman tell the driver, "Bill, get out of line." And then I saw him move, and I assumed he was moving a button or something on the panel of the automobile, and he said, "Get us to a hospital quick." I assumed he was saying this to the patrolman, the motorcycle police who were leading us.
William Robert Greer.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, how many shots, or how many noises have you just described that you heard?
Mr. GREER. I know there was three that I heard--three. But I cannot remember any more than probably three. I know there was three anyway that I heard.
Roy Kellerman heard a flurry of shots enter the Limo(which I believe were the fragments bouncing around), but he definitely heard more than two.
Mr. SPECTER. You mean now two shots in addition to the first noise?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir; yes, sir; at least.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, to the best of your ability to recollect, exactly when did your automobile first accelerate?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Our car accelerated immediately on the time-at the time--this flurry of shots came into it.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you say the acceleration--
Mr. KELLERMAN. Between the second and third shot.
I would also like to finally add that three shells were found in the sniper's nest and the closest earwitness, the "boom click click, boom click click, boom click click" man(Harold Norman) heard 3 shots.
(https://i.postimg.cc/CKZBXQjv/3-shells-in-sniper-s-nest.jpg)
And the closest earwitness, Harold Norman, who was just on the floor below heard 3 shots.
Mr. BALL. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. NORMAN. Three.
@3:58
JohnM
John is right. the only things laser-surveyed were stationary buildings, structures, streets and objects as they exist today.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/b5/ba/VZpWKoBe_o.jpg)
The positioning of the limousine, the two men and the Stemmons sign were entirely subjective. The absurbly-low JFK inshoot and left-chest exit came from a conspiracy theorist.
These witnesses are a perfect example of the ever -changing and morphing witness statements.
You're all over the place Dan, you show three Agents in Altgens6 who all look over their right shoulders looking for a sniper and who were all obviously at that point in time reacting to Kennedy showing signs of being shot and one describes the sounds at that later time in the plural "fireworks"!
Zapruder who was filming at a point not that much further away would have heard the same sounds or do you think that an additional ten or twenty yards would muffle the sounds?
(https://www.grandsubversion.com/jfkAssassination/images/dallas_delaley_plaza/map_dealey_plaza_dallas_jfk_2.jpg)
JohnM
Yes that can be true, nobody wants to be wrong.
In the following video Jay Watson who was a reporter and trained to notice details and was in a media follow up car quickly got back to the studio and tells the world within the hour @27:40 that there was three shots.
At another point in the video Bill Newman doesn't recall a third shot but his wife @32:20 recalls three shots.
Also Jerry, Jay's colleague in the follow up car @36:20 recalls 3 shots.
@27:40
Imo in this case the strongest pieces of evidence is the three expended shells found on the floor of the sniper's nest which concurs with the vast majority of earwitnesses.
(https://i.postimg.cc/CKZBXQjv/3-shells-in-sniper-s-nest.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/L6Hn37wd/number-of-shots-pie-chart.jpg)
JohnM
Sure, they accurately laser plotted Dealey Plaza 60 years later, did they allow for the variation in land movement, repaved road height, etc etc?
Also I juxtaposed the two frames from their video presentation and matching the two images showed heavy variations, for example the Don Knotts Lab's Stemmons sign has the wrong angle, the side of the Limo warps, Connally's shoulder height is way off, etc etc.
And again, and listen closely this time, as can be seen by The Don Knotts Lab Hulking out Connally, this avalanche of mistakes leads to more unavoidable errors and lastly the exact plotting of the precise 3D positions of Hulked out Connally and Kennedy from a 2D image is open to biased interpretation.
Iirc Dale Myers scientifically allowed any variations of 3D depth which concurred with the 2D images to fit his hypothesis whereas the opposite methodology of placing the models to achieve a predetermined outcome is the antithesis of science.
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPRLYPM4/Don-Knotts-lab-sbf.gif)
JohnM
When was JBC shot through the chest?Connally starts to react at Z224.
I ask "when" in terms of the Z-film - when in the Z-film is JBC hit?
That is to say, when does JBC first show signs that he has been hit [as we cannot see the actual bullet entering him].
I am not asking, when does JBC think he was hit or when any other witness believes he was hit or what any "theory" has to say about it.
When, during the Z-film, does JBC show the clear signs of an extreme reaction that can be safely interpreted as being shot through the chest?
In the clip below, which is s bit jerkier than I would like, we see JBC looking off to his right as JFK waves and smiles to the crowds. He is partially obscured by a part of the limo.
JBC is looking off to his right as he disappears behind the Stemmons sign.
He is still looking off to his right as he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign.
(https://i.postimg.cc/m27kWGdH/Z169-226-JFK-close.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Below is z223.
It shows JBC after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign.
He is still looking off to his right as he was before he passed behind the Stemmons sign and, in my opinion, he looks calm and composed:
(https://i.postimg.cc/DyJzTbxy/z223good.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://i.postimg.cc/XvLkfhSJ/z223goodcrop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Almost immediately after this frame JBC appears to have an extreme reaction.
The clip below is from z222 to z250.
In my opinion it shows JBC having an extreme reaction, most likely to being shot:
(https://i.postimg.cc/446tFwtR/JFK-JBC-react-2.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Is it an extreme reaction to being shot or could it be something else?
If you agree it is a reaction to being shot then when does this reaction begin?
Sure, they accurately laser plotted Dealey Plaza 60 years later, did they allow for the variation in land movement, repaved road height, etc etc?Knotts Lab said that they allowed for the change in height due to the road re-paving.
Also I juxtaposed the two frames from their video presentation and matching the two images showed heavy variations, for example the Don Knotts Lab's Stemmons sign has the wrong angle, the side of the Limo warps, Connally's shoulder height is way off, etc etc.
And again, and listen closely this time, as can be seen by The Don Knotts Lab Hulking out Connally, this avalanche of mistakes leads to more unavoidable errors and lastly the exact plotting of the precise 3D positions of Hulked out Connally and Kennedy from a 2D image is open to biased interpretation.
Iirc Dale Myers scientifically allowed any variations of 3D depth which concurred with the 2D images to fit his hypothesis whereas the opposite methodology of placing the models to achieve a predetermined outcome is the antithesis of science.
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPRLYPM4/Don-Knotts-lab-sbf.gif)
JohnM
Royell Royell Royell, u really should try the carnivore diet.
FOLLOW THE SCIENCE. This Laser 360 Technology is far more advanced than ANY that has EVER been done with regard to the JFK Assassination/Dealey Plaza. The Knott Lab 360 technology has routinely been used/accepted in court cases across the USA. CASE CLOSED!
You also missed the most reliable piece of evidence of an earlier shot, when Zapruder who was continuously filming while all three shots rang out makes three unique vertical reactions!!!Jack your comments, in every thread that i have recently read, are top quality, i have allways been very impressed.
Zapruder up till and including the headshot only makes three startled vertical jumps while filming, the head shot at Z313, the shot when the Limo emerges from behind the sign and the earlier shot just before Rosemary Willis slows and turns when she says she heard a shot and Connally's quick head turn as confirmed by his own words, testimony which you conveniently ignored. -smug emoji-
(https://i.postimg.cc/85h5y3F8/Zapuder-Shot-Reaction1.gif)
Btw it took time for the gun shot sounds to reach Zapruder hence the slight delay in his reactions.
JohnM
Royell Royell Royell, u really should try the carnivore diet.
A laser 3D survey adds nothing to any SBT analysis.
A 1963 survey is all that is needed.
The hijinx is in the placing of jfk & Connally & limo.
Re the limo, Greer ran the left wheels just shy of the left lane line.
This placed jfk close to the center of the road, ie the center of the 3 lanes.
After all, jfk should be located at nearly an even distance from gawkers on the left & on the right.
The X painted in the center lane is well placed.
Imo in this case the strongest pieces of evidence is the three expended shells found on the floor of the sniper's nest which concurs with the vast majority of earwitnesses.
Are these the shells Fritz picked up or the ones he threw down in the sniper's nest?
Yes that can be true, nobody wants to be wrong.
In the following video Jay Watson who was a reporter and trained to notice details and was in a media follow up car quickly got back to the studio and tells the world within the hour @27:40 that there was three shots.
At another point in the video Bill Newman doesn't recall a third shot but his wife @32:20 recalls three shots.
Also Jerry, Jay's colleague in the follow up car @36:20 recalls 3 shots.
@27:40
Imo in this case the strongest pieces of evidence is the three expended shells found on the floor of the sniper's nest which concurs with the vast majority of earwitnesses.
(https://i.postimg.cc/CKZBXQjv/3-shells-in-sniper-s-nest.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/L6Hn37wd/number-of-shots-pie-chart.jpg)
JohnM
Wow, lucky ole me, the Forum's most devoted Stalker has chased after me half way across the Planet from the Off Topic section to here.
Go away and get a life, Creep.
JohnM
Myers did it in the 1990s with less computer power than in most iPhones today. Thanks for the error spot!
Of course, we shouldn't expect a molecule-level match-up. The SketchUp program, for example, has no "pincushion" effect that the Zapruder camera lens had. So some elements on the far side of the car could be a bit off in a match-up. My model's side-mirror doesn't match but it's not important; there are multiple features that I'm more sure of that allow me to match the model to the frame. The mirror isn't on my priority list right now. Another thing is the resolution of the 8mm film and panning blur. In essence, even a relatively-sharp frame still means the figures and car can be moved an inch this way-or-than and still match.
That's like an allowable error margin of 5%. The Knotts SBT analysis is a lot more than 5%.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/fb/4a/WQAWUivf_o.jpg)
BTW, the critics are howling over a Knotts capture that they think shows the trajectory followed close to the path of the (oh dear) "official" version.
You think LNers have meekly accepted "Mad Max's" cockamamie Pet Theory?
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2015/06/hollands-deflection-ballistics-and-truth.html
I guess that's what happens when one only visits CT kook sites and blogs.
You really can't bring yourself to read a page on an LN site. Near the top are links to earler critiques that go back to 2007, when the Holland Theory first appeared in as a web article. The very day after Holland published, Gary Mack dismissed it, predicting accurately it would not gain any support. Of course there's always a handful of lost souls who support fringe theories like Mortal Error, Two Shots Total and Third Shot Miss.
So what? Gary Mack would graciously help nearly anybody with just about any kind of lamebrain theory. It didn't cost the Museum anything to have Holland cart away a signal cross-arm. Gary, while at the Museum, was host to numerous visiting CT documentary-makers and Hollywood-mythologists like Oliver Stone. Mack had an keen interest in CT/LN minutia to the point where he was sometimes pro-active, such as impartially timing Oswald's movements in Oak Cliff. Mack was an invited juror on the 2013 State Bar of Texas Oswald Mock Trial that ended in amockhung jury; Mack (the LNer's "Museum Friend") voted "Not Guilty".
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah. He emailed with me too. So what? Mack got hammered on the audio stuff, got buried on the Badge Man, got bludgeoned on the mis-id of Mumford/McKinnon, got shived on his claiming that Wiegman was filmed "continously", etc, etc, etc. He finally was so battered that he went into the tank and took the Curator position/$$ and thereby consented to the limitations of a leash. Maybe you know what Mack did with the Gordon Arnold camera that Arnold's wife and son gave him? Maybe you know why the Sixth Floor has buried the Gordon Arnold interview? Maybe you know why Mack hid his talking with Gordon Arnold way back in "80" or "81"? Don't matter any more as the Knott Lab Laser results have currently put all of this decades old cloak-n-dagger BS: to bed. Those results and the FACTS that RFK Jr is now supplying to the public have opened up the flood gates. The TRUTH is finally being told.
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah. He emailed with me too. So what?
Mack got hammered on the audio stuff
got buried on the Badge Man
got bludgeoned on the mis-id of Mumford/McKinnon
got shived on his claiming that Wiegman was filmed "continously"
He finally was so battered that he went into the tank and took the Curator position/$$ and thereby consented to the limitations of a leash.
Maybe you know what Mack did with the Gordon Arnold camera that Arnold's wife and son gave him? Maybe you know why the Sixth Floor has buried the Gordon Arnold interview? Maybe you know why Mack hid his talking with Gordon Arnold way back in "80" or "81"?
Don't matter any more as the Knott Lab Laser results have currently put all of this decades old cloak-n-dagger BS: to bed. Those results and the FACTS that RFK Jr is now supplying to the public have opened up the flood gates. The TRUTH is finally being told.
Myers did it in the 1990s with less computer power than in most iPhones today. Thanks for the error spot!
Of course, we shouldn't expect a molecule-level match-up. The SketchUp program, for example, has no "pincushion" effect that the Zapruder camera lens had. So some elements on the far side of the car could be a bit off in a match-up. My model's side-mirror doesn't match but it's not important; there are multiple features that I'm more sure of that allow me to match the model to the frame. The mirror isn't on my priority list right now. Another thing is the resolution of the 8mm film and panning blur. In essence, even a relatively-sharp frame still means the figures and car can be moved an inch this way-or-than and still match.
That's like an allowable error margin of 5%. The Knotts SBT analysis is a lot more than 5%.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/fb/4a/WQAWUivf_o.jpg)
BTW, the critics are howling over a Knotts capture that they think shows the trajectory followed close to the path of the (oh dear) "official" version.
That's like an allowable error margin of 5%. The Knotts SBT analysis is a lot more than 5%.
Oh that's easy, Iacoletti sees the exact opposite of any evidence that convicts Oswald.
Iirc Dale Myers scientifically allowed any variations of 3D depth which concurred with the 2D images to fit his hypothesis whereas the opposite methodology of placing the models to achieve a predetermined outcome is the antithesis of science.
You have collected a mountain of evidence that JFK is reacting to the first shot when he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign.
I have done a serious amount of research on the specific topic of when the first shot was fired ["The First Shot" thread]
I have collected a mountain of evidence which demonstrates that the first shot was taken around z222/z223 and is the shot that caused JFK's arms to fly towards his throat as seen in the Z-film.
You should trust me on this one John.
You have collected a mountain of evidence that JFK is reacting to the first shot when he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign.JBC's reactions/actions - the swift head move/turn to the right and then head going back to the center before they go behind the sign - AND his testimony on why he did this, i.e., he said he heard a shot, are explained how? Crowd noise?
When they emerge from behind the Stemmons sign, both men are reacting to the first shot, just as the evidence says they did
The first bullet passed through JFK on a right to left path without deflecting a material amount and did not appear to strike the car so that is when JBC was first hit by a bullet (ie. when the first shot struck).
JBC was hit in the back on the second shot, according to the evidence. There were only three shots.
JBC's reactions/actions - the swift head move/turn to the right and then head going back to the center before they go behind the sign - AND his testimony on why he did this, i.e., he said he heard a shot, are explained how? Crowd noise?JBC's head turn to the right is from z164-171 and follows JFK turning his head in the same direction from z159-168. Neither turns would appear to be unusual. The explanation for those turns was provided by Mary Woodward who said that JFK and Jackie were turned to the left so she waved and shouted to them as they approached. JFK appears to be looking at her as he goes past the lamp post just to the left of Woodward. JBC continues looking and turned to the right as he disappears behind the Stemmons sign. Mary Woodward said that this turn and the subsequent smile and hand wave occurred before the first "horrible, ear-shattering noise". Many others said the same thing. She also said that she and her friends were the last people that JFK ever acknowledged. So that has to be the turn that she is describing.
JBC's head turn to the right is from z164-171 and follows JFK turning his head in the same direction from z159-168. Neither turns would appear to be unusual. The explanation for those turns was provided by Mary Woodward who said that JFK and Jackie were turned to the left so she waved and shouted to them as they approached. JFK appears to be looking at her as he goes past the lamp post just to the left of Woodward. JBC continues looking and turned to the right as he disappears behind the Stemmons sign. Mary Woodward said that this turn and the subsequent smile and hand wave occurred before the first "horrible, ear-shattering noise". Many others said the same thing. She also said that she and her friends were the last people that JFK ever acknowledged. So that has to be the turn that she is describing.Mary Woodward & friends were on the north side of Elm St, she was 3rd after Millican.
The turn that JBC described was a turn in response to the first shot, which he recognized as a rifle shot and immediately feared an assassination was taking place. He said he turned to the right to try to see the President. That turn begins about z230. That is the only time he turns around to make any effort to look in the President's direction.
You have collected a mountain of evidence that JFK is reacting to the first shot when he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign.
When they emerge from behind the Stemmons sign, both men are reacting to the first shot, just as the evidence says they did
The first bullet passed through JFK on a right to left path without deflecting a material amount and did not appear to strike the car so that is when JBC was first hit by a bullet (ie. when the first shot struck).
JBC was hit in the back on the second shot, according to the evidence. There were only three shots.
Doesn't Nelly and Jackie also turn to their right about there?Jackie and Nellie begin their turns to the front-right at about z174.
But nobody on Woodward's side of the street appears to be waving at the Kennedys during that time (a few clap hands). Woodward can't see Jackie's face Z133ff; by time Jackie turns her head right, JFK and his right arm are in the line-of-sight. So the waving and the facial contract between Woodward and the Kennedys must have occurred before Z133. I don't see why the Woodward group wouldn't be eager to get the Kennedys' attention as soon as the car straighten out, rather than seconds before it was to pass them. They seem in awe as the limousine goes by them in the film and satisfied with the moment; seems no further antics were needed.You can tell that they are NOT waving? We can only see their backs. She could have been waving at any time. She said she shouted when JFK was approaching looking to the left. He is looking to the left until z159. He never looks left after that and her impression was that JFK did not acknowledge anyone after acknowledging them.
... and the reactions he shows (sudden jacket pluck, unnaturally-fast wrist flip, subsequent collapse) are merely the Governor "showing concern" for the President.There is an increase in the amount of white shirt seen between z222 and z223. There is a decrease in the amount of white shirt seen from z223 and z224. How are you able to tell that the first (z222-223) is not caused by jacket motion due to arm movement? How are you able to tell that the second (z223-224) is any different: ie. a "pluck" caused by a bullet and not simply a movement of the jacket caused by arm motion (or a combination of jacket movement and, possibly, changing shadow)?
When they emerge from behind the Stemmons sign, both men are reacting to the first shot, just as the evidence says they didI was referring to when both men emerge from behind the Stemmons sign. When both men emerge (z224 and after) I see reactions in both men. JFK is obviously reacting and JBC begins moving his arms from z224-228 as he prepares to turn around. JBC did not say that he reacted to being hit. He said he reacted by turning around to see JFK out of fear that an assassination was unfolding. That arm movement has to be part of that turn.
How can you say JBC is reacting to the first shot when he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign?
Are you seriously saying that this frame shows JBC "reacting"?
Connally himself, after studying high-quality prints of the Z film under high magnification for LIFE magazine, said he was certain, beyond any doubt, that he was not hit before Z228.
When he reemerges into view in Z222, he does have a concerned look on his face and appears somewhat tense, but that is only natural because he has just heard at least one loud bang that sounded like a gunshot. So, yes, naturally, he would feel worried and would become somewhat tense. But that is a far cry from reacting to multiple, extremely painful wounds, including having a bullet tear through your upper torso and smashing several ribs in the process.
In Z238, we see Connally's right shoulder slammed downward and an obvious pained look begins to form on his face. The bullet probably hit him between Z234 and Z237, just as he said.
Connally only studied still frames and did the best he could and guessed!
Today we have the technology to closely examine consecutive frames.
As Connally emerges from behind the sign his jacket billows as CE399 passes through and his right shoulder thrusts forward as his left shoulder violently raises.
At the same split second both Connally and Kennedy react simultaneously
Connally's hat flip and look of immense pain happen way before Z230.
Btw Griffith, why do you believers in Zapruder Film alteration still use exact Zapruder frames to prove your theories, you have absolutely no right to use the Zapruder film! Hypocrite!
JohnM
I use the Zapruder film as evidence because the forgers were not able to remove all the problematic elements from the film. There was only so much editing they could do. They could not get rid of every unwanted sequence. That's why the film was suppressed for so many years. The plotters recognized that even the altered version markedly contradicted the lone-gunman scenario.
Wow, it's amazing that Connally himself, the man who actually experienced the wounding, was absolutely certain that he was not hit before Z228. He looked at every frame from Z222 through Z245 under high magnification and using high-qualify prints of each frame, and he saw no indication that he was hit before Z228. But you say he only "guessed" and could not recognize his own reactions!
His right shoulder does not start to get slammed forward and downward until Z238, and his face does not start to exhibit a pained expression until Z238. Connally said the bullet's impact felt like someone punched him hard in the back, so it's ludicrous to suppose that the impact occurred in Z224. You would not have a 14-frame delay between impact and shoulder collapse. You might have a 3-4-frame delay, but no more. This lines up with Connally's conclusion that the bullet's impact occurred at Z234.
And how do you have an SBT hit at Z224 when JFK begins to react to his non-fatal wounding at around Z200, and when Jackie clearly starts to react to JFK's reaction in Z202, as even the HSCA photographic experts recognized and acknowledged? We now know that the initial Secret Service analysis of the Z film concluded that JFK was hit at Z199.
The HSCA experts also recognized that Willis slide 5 is strong evidence that JFK was hit at least 17 frames before he disappears behind the freeway sign because Willis slide 5 corresponds with Z202. Willis specified that he snapped the picture in a startle reaction to hearing a shot fired. Allowing time for Willis's brain and nervous system to receive, process, and react to the sound of the shot, this means Willis heard the shot at around Z186-190, as the HSCA experts explained. I cover this in some detail in my book.
I use the Zapruder film as evidence because the forgers were not able to remove all the problematic elements from the film. There was only so much editing they could do. They could not get rid of every unwanted sequence. That's why the film was suppressed for so many years. The plotters recognized that even the altered version markedly contradicted the lone-gunman scenario.
Wow, it's amazing that Connally himself, the man who actually experienced the wounding, was absolutely certain that he was not hit before Z228. He looked at every frame from Z222 through Z245 under high magnification and using high-qualify prints of each frame, and he saw no indication that he was hit before Z228. But you say he only "guessed" and could not recognize his own reactions!
His right shoulder does not start to get slammed forward and downward until Z238, and his face does not start to exhibit a pained expression until Z238.
There's no "wow" about it, we can all see the same frames now and today instead of examining still frames we have the added benefit of studying those very same frames in repeated motion.
For starters contrary to popular belief, when someone is struck by a bullet, there has never been an over the top Hollywood type reaction and the frames I presented show Connally's lapel flip and his sharp sudden forward thrust of only an inch or two, you know like real life. And secondly I don't see any forward slamming at Z238??
Take off your conspiracy blinding glasses and have an honest look.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8v-YQb6mFo0/WVXcxF5rw4I/AAAAAAABMJE/Ge6Ef1RgHQkDioCxaoghpM0Npv6-xgpIACLcBGAs/s1600/Z-Film-Clip-SBT-In-Motion---3.gif)
At frame 238 check out the orientation of Connally's severely right turned body and knowing the entrance and exit points of Connally's wounds, seriously consider the trajectory required and then postulate what would be the location of your mysterious sniper, from a helicopter perhaps?? Because at the established earlier Zapruder frame, Connally wounds are perfectly lined up back to Oswald's sniper's nest!
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Jbpymw7jW20/WMzJdh_W5AI/AAAAAAABLkU/Eyc_-irXYv8vxMwinJVEiKJvO4iv0IIwQCLcB/s1600/Z-Film%2BClip-SBT-In-Motion.gif)
JohnM
Well isn't that convenient, the "plotters" only altered frames/sequences which don't affect your theories? What a load of self serving nonsense.
Anyway Griffith, let me get this straight, the "plotters" didn't alter the sequences where Oswald's bullets actually struck his victims but isn't one of your theories that the "plotters" altered ineffectual frames/timing around Brehm's son, is that right and the most important question that needs answering is WHY?
Speaking of self-serving nonsense…
“Oswald’s bullets”. LOL.
“Oswald’s sniper’s nest”. LOL.
All Moot. SBT = DOA
You can LOL as much as you like but it won't change history.
Brennan under oath verified that Oswald was holding a rifle in the 6th floor snipers nest window.
Brennan's close description of Oswald
was in his affidavit and had to be the source of the virtually identical description that went out over the Police radio 15 minutes later.
Oswald's relatively fresh prints were discovered on the rifle rest box which was moved half way across the floor.
Oswald owned the rifle found on the 6th floor.
Oswald was photographed with the rifle.
The bullet fragments recovered from the Limo were an exclusive match
Oswald's prints were on the rifle,
Three types of Oswald's arrest shirt fibres were a match to the three types of fibres found on the rifle.
Oswald immediately flees the scene.
Oswald in his frantic rush get's on and off a bus.
Oswald's cab stops way past his Rooming house.
Oswald admits getting his revolver.
Oswald kills Tippit in front of an eyewitness and many more see Oswald flee that scene holding a gun.
Oswald's shells at the scene exclusively match Oswald revolver.
Oswald discards his jacket in a carpark.
Oswald tries to kill more Police when arrested.
Oswald was not wearing his Zipper jacket when arrested.
Oswald lies about the authenticated backyard photo's.
Oswald lies about the ownership of the rifle.
Oswald lies to Frazier about curtain rods.
Oswald lies about carrying his lunch.
Oswald lies about placing his long package on the back seat of Frazier's car.
Oswald lies about where he purchased his revolver.
Oswald defected to the enemy.
Oswald's told us in his own diary that he tried to commit suicide.
Oswald bashed his wife.
Oswald was a bad bad man!
Etc etc etc....
Here is another clear, obvious fact that proves that JFK was hit well before Z224, and that therefore he and Connally were hit by separate bullets, even if we erroneously assume that Connally was hit at Z224: In Z224, we see that JFK has already brought his left hand up to the level of his throat and that Jackie is looking intently at him. Obviously, JFK began this motion with his left arm many frames earlier because his left hand is already up to the level of his throat in Z224.
You can call unsubstantiated assertions “history” all you like, but it doesn’t make them true.
“Verified”. LOL. No more than Euins “verified” under oath that the rifleman had a bald spot. And Brennan failed to make a positive ID at the lineup that was egregiously unfair and biased to begin with, even after seeing Oswald’s picture on television.
LOL. Wrong height, wrong weight, wrong age, wrong clothing.
Why did it “have to be”? Funny that Sawyer didn’t remember his informant wearing a hard hat.
“Relatively recent”. LOL. “Rifle rest box”. LOL.
LOL.
LOL.
“Recovered from the limo”. LOL.
“Prints”. LOL. “On the rifle”. LOL.
“Match”. LOL.
“Flees”, “frantic rush”, “admits”, “kills Tippit”, “shells at the scene”, “Oswald revolver”, “his jacket”, “tries to kill”, “lies about”.
LOL
Now he believes he is clairvoyant. Further proof the Knott Lab Laser 360 SCIENCE has knocked him for a loop. SBT = DOA
in junction with computer evaluated still frames and photographs taken on 11/22/63.
Even though you inadvertently have supplied further Proof of the Current Z Film being Bogus,
As difficult as it might be, try to FOCUS on the Laser projected bullet trajectory. You are so far off your game or what used to be your game, I feel sorry for you. Knott Labs has really knocked you for a loop. SBT = "IMPOSSIBLE"
Even though you inadvertently have supplied further Proof of the Current Z Film being Bogus,
And I know that if Connally way back when he examined individual frames had this added degree of accuracy he would would heartily agree with this unescapable conclusion!That is very persuasive. But I can do better. I say that this was the first shot ie. there was no earlier missed shot. And I know that if JFK had survived the assassination attempt by Oswald, he would agree with that inescapable conclusion. Presidential credibility beats Governor credibility so you can't get any better than that.
The WC apologists' posts in this thread are a sad but telling example of why nearly all the progress made on the case has been made by WC skeptics. WC apologists are chained down by the Commission's fictional one-shooter-three-shot scenario and so they are forced to come up with ludicrous explanations for evidence that deep down they know refutes the single-bullet theory.
Of all the whacky, self-evidently bogus arguments put forward by WC defenders, the claim that JFK and Connally were hit by the same bullet in Z224 has to rank in the Top 10.
Anyone with functioning eyes can see that JFK is clearly and obviously already reacting to a wound when he partially reemerges into view in Z224 as we see his left forearm nearing the level of his throat, and Jackie is clearly and obviously already noticing JFK's reaction in Z224. Unless you're committed to denying your own eyes can see, you know that these reactions must have started many frames before Z224.
Moreover, even if you force yourself to ignore the self-evident reactions in Z224, there is also the fact that in Z225, when we can see both of JFK's forearms, we see that JFK has both of his hands in a clutching formation and is bringing both hands up to the level of his throat. There is no way he could have done this in response to a shot at Z224. Humans cannot respond and move their arms that rapidly after being wounded. Not on this planet.
And then, of course, there is the fact that Connally survived his wounds and adamantly insisted he was not hit before Z228. No one knows you better than you. No one knows what your facial expressions and body movements mean better than you do. Connally had knowledge that no one else had (1) because he was the guy who actually experienced the wounding, and (2) because no one knew him better than he did.
After carefully studying high-quality prints of the Zapruder film under high magnification, Connally said he was certain beyond all doubt that he was not hit before Z228, and he identified Z234 as the moment of impact--and just four frames later, or just 4/18ths of a second later, or just 222 milliseconds later, or less than 1/4th of a second later, we see the start of the dramatic slamming down of his right shoulder, in perfect harmony with his statement that the bullet's impact felt like someone hit him hard in the back.
I know we can all see these things. It's just a question of whether or not one is willing to be honest and credible about what they prove.
Given how close JBC and JFK were to each other in the car. Explain JBC's wound and from where did the shot originate from if the bullet did not pass through JFK first. Was there two shooters sitting side by side in the Snipers Nest? Early on, JBC gave all kinds of statements and most do not match up with previous statements. Nellie even changed her statement to match his.
It is known that the shots originated from the 6th floor window above BRW, Jarmin, and Norman. We also know BRW said there was two shots and Jarmin describes the headshot as the second shot. You may not like SBT but it is the only answer possible unless you think JFK somehow shot JBC. That would be the only other answer.
False. Connally was consistent on every major point in his various statements through at least the 1970s.
I'm baffled as to how you could think that any shot that hit Connally would have had to first hit JFK. That's just silly, even if you assume that all the shots came from the sixth-floor window.
Moreover, a gunman firing from the Dal-Tex Building or the County Records Building could have barely missed Kennedy and accidentally hit Connally instead.
I think you're another one who's stuck in a time warp. You talk like we're in the early 1970s. Are you unaware of recent research that has utterly destroyed the SBT? Do you know anything about the ARRB disclosures about the back wound's location, about the absolute determination at the autopsy that the back wound was shallow and had no exit point, about the fragments in the C3/C4 region, etc., etc.? Are you aware that the HSCA's photographic experts found clear, powerful evidence that JFK was hit before Z190, i.e., when the sixth-floor gunman's view would have been obstructed by the oak tree? And on and on we could go.
The WC apologists' posts in this thread are a sad but telling example of why nearly all the progress made on the case has been made by WC skeptics. WC apologists are chained down by the Commission's fictional one-shooter-three-shot scenario and so they are forced to come up with ludicrous explanations for evidence that deep down they know refutes the single-bullet theory.
WC apologists are chained down by the Commission's fictional one-shooter-three-shot scenario
So the straight line trajectory doesn’t work for the SBT, so there must have been some zigzagging happening , only not as extreme as the original hand drawn diagram showed ?
Still waiting for a real empirical test that includes the the bullet going thru wrist bone and stopping finally into material replicating thigh muscle.
The 2003 Beyond Conspiracy test not only failed to prove any zigzagging, but in the straight line trajectory they DID record, the bullet did not exit from the throat of the JFK replica torso, but rather from the upper right chest of the torso.
And then there was NO wrist bone element or thigh tissue material that the bullet had to continue thru after exiting the 2nd torso, the bullet instead, into soft ground.
Even with that critical omission, the bullet recovered looked much more deformed than CE 399 was.
How about finish this thought train you are on and explain all of Gov Connally’s wounds starting from the point where the only way to explain the wound in JBC’s back is the fact that the bullet first must pass through JFK’s neck. Somewhere in this belief you are presenting one bullet stopped and another took over coursing through his body to his thigh?There is abundant evidence that JFK was hit in the neck on the first shot and reacted to it. The first shot did not strike JBC in the back but it did not strike the car. It is very likely that the wrist injury was from the bullet exiting JBC's chest. But the wound characteristics and the condition of the bullet that caused the wrist wound differ markedly from that of the left thigh wound. No one seems to have considered that JBC was hit by two bullets, the first one (thigh) which he did not feel (we know that he never felt it).
There is abundant evidence that JFK was hit in the neck on the first shot and reacted to it. The first shot did not strike JBC in the back but it did not strike the car.There is abundant evidence that JFK was hit in the head (small fragments in xray) on the first shot (ricochet off signal arm)(at pseudo Z105) and reacted to it (my god i am hit). The first shot did strike the car (CE567 & 569)(hole in floor... photo dec1963).
I’m not saying the SBT trajectory is impossible.
I’m suggesting it should be aligned as a nearly straight line trajectory similar to Myers computer graphic model with a slight adjustment to Myers positioning of JCs legs and where JC was holding his hat at time of impact of the bullet entering his back.
There has not been,imo, , a satisfactory experiment that’s proved a straight line trajectory for an MC 6.5mm ball nosed bullet that aligns the wounds of JFK and JC, nor has demonstrated such minimal deformation as CE 399 displays , nor has there been a replication of any zigzagging that occurred by this type 6.5 mm MC bullet when fired thru 2 replica human bodies.
Another series of tests are needed to
Prove either :
1. a straight line trajectory of a ball nosed 6.5 mm MC bullet going thru 2 replica bodies that align all the wounds and when bullet recovered matches the minimal deformation of CE339
Or:
2. Demonstrates A slight zigzagging trajectory that aligns the wounds and the 6.5mm ball nosed MC bullet when recovered matches CE399.
The 2003 Beyond Conspiracy experiment demonstrated the MC 6.5mm bullet did NOT zigzag, maintaining a straight path as it went thru both replica bodies.
The correct entry on the back of the JFK model was hit , however the exit from that model was NOT from the throat, instead , the bullet exited from the right side upper chest of the JFK replica torso.
The bullet recovered showed more deformation than CE 399 and this without even having to go also thru wrist bone after exiting the 2nd replica body.
Since there was a fairly believable witness who found a bullet on the stretcher whom always maintained his opinion that the bullet he saw was a more pointed shaped bullet than the ball nosed round shaped CE 399 bullet., therefore requires more tests firing conical shaped bullets from 6.5 mm to 7.62 mm.
The angle of JCs legs and the angle of his upper torso and shoulders must be positioned to align the trajectory path as close to straight line as possible and the hat must be upside down and the well of the hat hanging off the outside of the left thigh because that’s about the only way the same bullet that exited from JFKs body could go thru JCs right hand and not go thru the hat.
It’s a certainty from the Z- film frames ( unless there is some Conspiratorial alteration ) that JC was holding his hat upside down, clutched in his right hand which he raised up suddenly only AFTER being hit.
No hole in the hat and no blood residue on the hat suggests the most probable position of the hat at the moment JC was hit, was such that the hat was upside down on the outside of JCs left leg being held down with the palm of his right hand pressing the rim of the hat against the upper part of his left leg/thigh. The bullet entered the top of JCs right wrist and then exited the bottom of the palm , then entered JCs inner left thigh, without any portion of the hat well or rim, being in the path of the bullet.
There is abundant evidence that JFK was hit in the neck on the first shot and reacted to it. The first shot did not strike JBC in the back but it did not strike the car. It is very likely that the wrist injury was from the bullet exiting JBC's chest. But the wound characteristics and the condition of the bullet that caused the wrist wound differ markedly from that of the left thigh wound. No one seems to have considered that JBC was hit by two bullets, the first one (thigh) which he did not feel (we know that he never felt it).
The trajectory from the SN through JFK's neck and travelling on a 14 degree right to left 18 degree downward path could easily have gone to the left side of JBC.
(https://i.postimg.cc/kg1YrsW4/limo-z197-First-Shot-2.jpg)
If it occurred where the witnesses said the first shot occurred (after z186 and before z202) with JBC turned to the right, the left thigh could easily have been in that path. With JFK to the far right so that his midline was immediately behind JBC's right shoulder (which is farther right than he was) this could have been the view of JBC that he saw before the first shot.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Sx71ZqxW/JBC-z200-rear1-reenactment.jpg)
Shhhhh! ... (Don't tell Mason his figure placements are ridiculous. It's Christmas.)
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1X2yb5u7l9CuouFDagDZdn4ytbyi3emDW)
The question is whether a 12-14 degree right to left trajectory through JFK's midline/neck between z186 and z202 could, within the range of error in determining the relative positions of the two men from the zfilm, put the left thigh on a path from the SN through JFK's neck. That path could be either completely straight or with a possible slight shift in direction due to bullet instability after exiting JFK.
Shhhhh! ... (Don't tell Mason his figure placements are ridiculous. It's Christmas.)
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1X2yb5u7l9CuouFDagDZdn4ytbyi3emDW)
I have to agree, Andrew's 3D characters don't look to be in the right position at the time of the SBF, whereas yours being corroborated with the Croft photo are much more accurate and are perfectly lined up fof the SBF. Very nice work.
Btw, the Knott Lab's 3D artists could learn a thing or two from you. Thumb1:
JohnM
There are inconsistencies between your different views and the photos. As you point out, you need to raise JFK's shoulders in the rear view to fit with your lateral view and with Croft and Altgens' 5. You also have JFK with his ribs pressing against the side of the car, which does not fit with z195 or z225. I would place him at least an inch farther left and probably 2 inches. His right shoulder is definitely inside the car because the upper arm is extending outward from the shoulder to the top of the car:
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1X2yb5u7l9CuouFDagDZdn4ytbyi3emDW)
(https://images2.imgbox.com/a9/19/skukExmE_o.png)I see that you have not tried sitting on a seat on the floor with your knees in the air. Unless you are a eunuch, you would sit with legs apart.
How I currently perceive Mason's Pet Theory.
"The trajectory from the SN through JFK's neck and travelling
on a 14 degree right to left 18 degree downward path could
easily have gone to the left side of JBC."
....
"hit the left thigh if it was out to the left as it likely was
(he would not sit as you have him with his legs together)"
How do you know that? Hee hee. More likely both knees were towards the car door as he spent much of his time looking to his right.
As one might expect, a bullet passing through the soft tissues of a body without directly striking bone should follow a straight line—from the point of entry to the point of exit from where it continues without deviating; however, ballistics has demonstrated that this is not the case.For a bullet to deviate from a straight path a net force must be applied to it (Newton 1). So it must experience asymmetrical forces to deviate from the straight line path from the rifle. It does not appear to have struck anything hard in passing through the neck so, as the WC ballistics experts noted, it would leave JFK's throat in a straight line but likely tumbling (as it would have lost rifling in passing through JFK).
After the bullet penetrates JFK's back, while it traverses through his body, it probably deviates from a straight line—possibly slightly UPWARD from its initial line and to the RIGHT; but continues in a general downward trajectory as it exits his throat and strikes Governor Connally.
The Knott Laboratory digital reconstruction appears rather convincing until one scrutinises it further. They base their findings on straight-line bullet trajectories from entry to exit that continue without deviation while traversing JFK's neck and continue undeviated after projectile exit. A bullet deviating RIGHT as it exits the throat could account for the discrepancy in their trajectory analysis. So, their determinations are demonstrable fallacies and, therefore, cannot be used as irrefutable evidence to disprove the Single Bullet Theory.
There's lot of hype about the Knott Lab laser reconstruction but I can't find an independent analysis or critique of it anywhere.You seem to be starting with the assumption that the SBT is correct and occurred about z225 and criticizing Knott for disagreeing with you.
The pic below shows the culmination of the reconstruction and illustrates their fundamental claim, that the bullet passing through JFK can't be lined up with JBC:
(https://i.postimg.cc/nVPxSGb5/knott2.png) (https://postimages.org/)
The green line shows the trajectory of the bullet from the SN.
The red line shows the trajectory of the bullet passing through JBC.
Two issues spring out immediately:
1] The Knott reconstruction shows the bullet passing through JFK and hitting JBC (green line). It shows the bullet hitting JBC about 10 inches away from where it should be. The question is - what happened to the bullet they show hitting JBC? We know he wasn't hit in the position they are showing, so what happened to this bullet?
2] The red line, showing the trajectory of the bullet through JBC, seems to be showing that JBC was shot by JFK!! Is that the revolutionary new theory Knott are presenting? It is beyond obvious that their reconstruction shows the bullet that hits JBC in the back MUST pass through JFK first. How do they explain this?
Knott Laboratory don't seem to have taken reality into account. They haven't taken into account that the Z-film shows both men reacting at exactly the same moment. If there were two different bullets, as Knott claims, then JFK must have shot JBC as it is IMPOSSIBLE for a bullet to hit JBC in the back without going through JFK first.
On top of this, their reconstruction shows the moment at z225. By z223 the bullet has passed through both men, crushing JBC's rib on the way through. While this does not really affect the position of JFK (as the bullet passes straight through soft tissue), it radically affects the position of JBC by z225 as his body is responding to the instantaneous physical reaction of the bullet against bone. The right side of his body is thrust forward instantaneously and has twisted to a significant degree by z225.
Below is a still from the Knott reconstruction and it shows that JFK and JBC are sat pretty much one behind the other.
(https://i.postimg.cc/T3GgFgCD/knott4.png) (https://postimages.org/)
This is simply not the case. JBC was sat far more inboard than this reconstruction shows. The pic taken by Dave Powers demonstrates this clearly.
(https://i.postimg.cc/85qrH67s/powerspic.png) (https://postimages.org/)
I'm no image analyst but there seems to be lots of issues with the Knott reconstruction and I don't see where they've had to answer any difficult questions about it.
You seem to be starting with the assumption that the SBT is correct and occurred about z225 and criticizing Knott for disagreeing with you.
Knott Labs took all the physical evidence and made an accurate model not only of Dealey Plaza, but of the car and its position and direction on the street at each frame. They then determined the trajectory to see if a shot from the SN could possibly have gone through both men as the SBT says. They conclude that, based on the physical evidence, position and direction of the car and the distances between the two men as they were seated, that JBC would have to have been in the position shown at z225 and concluded that the path would have struck JBC farther left than he was actually struck:
(https://i.postimg.cc/qBGNF7Y0/SBT-trajectory-z225.jpg)
So they conclude that the SBT could not have occurred at z225 according to the trajectory from the SN through JFK unless JBC was seated where they show. So they tried it at z210 to see if it worked. And it did not at z210 either.
I believe that they have mis-labelled the z210 and z225 trajectory images because the position of JBC in the right frame labelled Z225 has him turned to the right side, which is not the position that JBC was in at z225. Rather that was the position before he disappeared behind the sign. The position shown in the frame labelled Z210 has him facing forward, as he was in z225 but not z210:
(https://i.postimg.cc/KjLjJZdk/SBT-trajectory-z210-225.jpg)
There is no doubt JFK is shot through the throat between z-frames 222 and 223. I'm asking a simple question - where did the bullet go that Knott Labs have striking JBC's back?I not only have considerable doubt about the first shot being that late, there is considerable evidence is against it. You are ignoring Phil Willis, as well as his daughter Linda. You are also ignoring Rosemary Willis' sharp turn at z204-206:
There is also no doubt that the Z-film shows both men having radical reactions at exactly the same moment, a reality the Knott Labs model fails to explain.The evidence that the first bullet passed through JFK but did not strike JBC in the back is also consistent with both men having "radical reactions" at "exactly" the same moment. [edit:] JBC said he reacted immediately after recognizing the sound as a rifle shot and, fearing an assassination unfolding, turned around out of concern for JFK being shot. He was quite clear that his reaction to the first shot was not from being hit in the back by it.
And the trajectory for JBC's wounds seems to be showing that he was shot by JFK!! A new theory that holds about as much water as your own truly dead and buried theory.If you are referring to the red line trajectory, that is the path that a bullet would have to follow for JBC to be hit in the right armpit and exit under his right nipple at that point. That red line trajectory does not fit a shot from the SN, obviously. So the conclusion would have to be that JBC was not struck in the back at that point, based on the Knott model.
I not only have considerable doubt about the first shot being that late, there is considerable evidence is against it. You are ignoring Phil Willis, as well as his daughter Linda. You are also ignoring Rosemary Willis' sharp turn at z204-206:Question: What caused the "radical reaction" by JBC at the same moment as JFK's "radical reaction" to a bullet hitting him?
(https://i.postimg.cc/rsF3w5Cx/z202-z206-RWillis.gif)
The evidence that the first bullet passed through JFK but did not strike JBC in the back is also consistent with both men having "radical reactions" at "exactly" the same moment. If you are referring to the red line trajectory, that is the path that a bullet would have to follow for JBC to be hit in the right armpit and exit under his right nipple at that point. That red line trajectory does not fit a shot from the SN, obviously. So the conclusion would have to be that JBC was not struck in the back at that point, based on the Knott model.
I not only have considerable doubt about the first shot being that late, there is considerable evidence is against it. You are ignoring Phil Willis, as well as his daughter Linda. You are also ignoring Rosemary Willis' sharp turn at z204-206:
(https://i.postimg.cc/rsF3w5Cx/z202-z206-RWillis.gif)
The evidence that the first bullet passed through JFK but did not strike JBC in the back is also consistent with both men having "radical reactions" at "exactly" the same moment. If you are referring to the red line trajectory, that is the path that a bullet would have to follow for JBC to be hit in the right armpit and exit under his right nipple at that point. That red line trajectory does not fit a shot from the SN, obviously. So the conclusion would have to be that JBC was not struck in the back at that point, based on the Knott model.
Question: What caused the "radical reaction" by JBC at the same moment as JFK's "radical reaction" to a bullet hitting him?Hearing the first shot. His reaction described in his WC testimony fits exactly what we see him do after z228. I have updated my earlier post to elaborate.
Don't we also see a physical reaction by JBC as the bullet hits him in the right shoulder like, as he said, a "fist"? If that wasn't a bullet then what caused it? I'm sure you answered this before but I can't find it offhand.I can't tell from just the film what he is reacting to. We have to follow the evidence and fit it to what is seen in the film. He said he turned "to look back over my right shoulder" and he does not begin preparing to do that until about z228 and he does not look "back over my right shoulder" until about z255. We can see him straining to look back in Altgens #6 at that time. We know from SA George Hickey that Hickey was turned forward watching JFK at the time of the second and third shots. Hickey is still turned rearward in Altgens #6 at z255. So, according to Hickey, the last two shots are after z255. That fits with what 80% of those who recalled a pattern to the shot sounds said.
The z-frame below is 223.The problem is that everyone assumed he had been struck by only one bullet. You are assuming that he would have felt the bullet hit his thigh. That is not only based on no evidence, it is contrary to the experience of people who have been shot (http://). Bullets do not hurt. Even JBC said it the shot through his chest did not hurt. But he felt the impact because it struck and damaged bone. The whole premise of the original SBT was that JBC did not feel being shot!! That was explained by John McCloy who had witnessed a soldier being shot in by a sniper standing beside him who had not felt the bullet.
It shows JBC as he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign.
He looks calm and composed.
(https://i.postimg.cc/DyJzTbxy/z223good.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://i.postimg.cc/XvLkfhSJ/z223goodcrop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
According to Andrew, Connally has been shot in the leg by this point.
In fact, according to Andrew, Connally was shot in the leg before he even went behind the Stemmons sign and emerges from behind it as if nothing has happened!
Unfortunately, this is the least crazy aspect of his Dead Theory.
The z-frame below is 223.
It shows JBC as he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign.
He looks calm and composed.
(https://i.postimg.cc/DyJzTbxy/z223good.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://i.postimg.cc/XvLkfhSJ/z223goodcrop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
According to Andrew, Connally has been shot in the leg by this point.
In fact, according to Andrew, Connally was shot in the leg before he even went behind the Stemmons sign and emerges from behind it as if nothing has happened!
Unfortunately, this is the least crazy aspect of his Dead Theory.
The problem is that everyone assumed he had been struck by only one bullet. You are assuming that he would have felt the bullet hit his thigh. That is not only based on no evidence, it is contrary to the experience of people who have been shot (http://). Bullets do not hurt. Even JBC said it the shot through his chest did not hurt. But he felt the impact because it struck and damaged bone. The whole premise of the original SBT was that JBC did not feel being shot!! That was explained by John McCloy who had witnessed a soldier being shot in by a sniper standing beside him who had not felt the bullet..
.Sorry to hear about your injury. When did you start feeling pain?
Bullets do not hurt.
Apparently you have never been shot with a bullet. I can assure you from first hand experience that they do hurt.
Hi Dan,
Absolutely correct, Dan!
I am amazed that anyone could actually believe that John Connally has been shot anywhere before he emerges from behind the sign. From the time Connally jerked his head from right to left to right , he remained in the same position until he re-emerges from behind the sign and shows the first sign of any change whatsoever to his face at frame 222 of the Zapruder film. Had Connally been struck at any point prior to frame 222-we would have seen. Not a shred of evidence to support such a theory that Connally was struck before he went behind the sign.
Sorry to hear about your injury. When did you start feeling pain?
We are talking about the first 4 seconds after being shot in the leg. The issue is not whether bullet wounds are painful - obviously any wound can be painful once the effects of the injury are realized. The issue is whether all bullets penetrating a thigh at an oblique angle at reduced speed will necessarily will cause immediate pain and, in particular, whether it necessarily caused immediate pain for JBC that he necessarily would have noticed. I rely on what people who have been shot say they felt in the first few seconds, and few report immediate pain:
At circa z142-z143, Rosemary Willis appears to possibly turn her head sharply to her right in the general direction of The Texas School Book Depository and the Presidential Limousine. If this is a rapid head turn in reaction to the first shot, it may give credence to Max Holland's theory of an early shot miss.She is running to keep abreast of the President's car. Her shoulders are square to the direction she is running so she has to turn her head to see the car. And because she has a hood over her head and because the head is connected to the body part which is facing forward, she can turn her head farther around than the hood. So what you see as she is running is consistent with Rosemary looking at the motorcade out of a partially turned hood.
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID10963945669/Keyp0ok4bet0sqt/woods.gif)She stops running when she plants her right foot at z198-199. That fits a first shot just before z202 as her father testified and when JFK was between Linda Willis and the Stemmons sign, as Linda Willis testified.
(https://i.imgur.com/R7yu7nd.gif)
Rosemary Willis 1979 interview with David Lui:
See: https://archive.org/details/RosemaryWillisArticle/mode/2up
DAVID LUI: Why did you stop running?
Rosemary Willis 1979 interview with Marcia Smith-Durk:
The injury you describe is not at all similar to a bullet penetrating and destroying tissue, such as JBC’s thigh wound.The reason bullets are often not felt is because they destroy the nerve endings as they plow through the tissue. What you are describing is not that kind of injury as there was no damage except to the skin. Nerves would doing their job!
When did you start feeling pain?
I felt it the instant it hit me. It was a .177 caliber, 5.2 grain BB, at approximately 300 to 350 feet per second, which penetrated the skin of the palm of my hand but didn’t go much further. I was maybe 10 to 12 years old and should have known better than to let that happen.
I invite you to experiment for yourself. Use a piece of Kevlar or something to prevent penetration. Shoot yourself in the thigh with a .22 caliber pellet at the appropriate velocity. Multi-pump air guns make this feasible. Record your experiment on video. Then show us how you “didn’t feel” it.
The injury you describe is not at all similar to a bullet penetrating and destroying tissue, such as JBC’s thigh wound.The reason bullets are often not felt is because they destroy the nerve endings as they plow through the tissue. What you are describing is not that kind of injury as there was no damage except to the skin. Nerves would doing their job!
In any event it is a well documented fact - view the YouTube clip I posted - that people can be shot, particularly in an extremity or part of the body that does not immediately interfere with function, and not feel it and are not immediately aware they are shot.
Well, we have evidence from JBC himself that he didn't feel it.
I consider the wound I suffered to be more than skin-deep. In fact the projectile was removed by a doctor. He said that usually they would just leave the projectile in there for fear of doing more damage to 3the tissue during removal. But in this case he could see the BB and felt that it could be removed with minimal collateral damage. I still have a scar, and from time to time that hand gets painful. I cannot help but believe that the pain stems from that injury. JBC’s wound was described by the doctors as shallow also. So I think the two wounds are somewhat similar despite what you say. I am not arguing that it is impossible to get shot and not immediately feel it. There are many variables involved. However, I cannot believe that your idea that JBC was shot in the thigh first and didn’t feel it has any validity whatsoever.
Well, we have evidence from JBC himself that he didn't feel it.
There is really no evidence really that it occurred from the same bullet that passed through his wrist and reason to believe that it wasn't. The wound characteristics of the wrist and thigh are quite different. The thigh wound looked like it was struck by the butt end of an intact missile. The wrist and cuff appeared to have been struck by an irregular shaped missile. The path from wrist to thigh is not obvious and assumes a significant change in direction of a 10 gram bullet moving at several hundred feet per second. The trajectory from JFK to the left thigh does not require any change in direction after passing through JFK.
Well, we have evidence from JBC himself that he didn't feel it.Yes, but again he said he felt the bullet hit him like a "doubled up fist" punching him in his back. That's not a pain reaction/feeling but it is a physical reaction that must have been immediate? I can't see how such a reaction could have been delayed? So, a delayed pain reaction is not only possible but based on his account what happened; but the physical reaction to the bullet was not delayed.
There is really no evidence really that it occurred from the same bullet that passed through his wrist and reason to believe that it wasn't. The wound characteristics of the wrist and thigh are quite different. The thigh wound looked like it was struck by the butt end of an intact missile. The wrist and cuff appeared to have been struck by an irregular shaped missile. The path from wrist to thigh is not obvious and assumes a significant change in direction of a 10 gram bullet moving at several hundred feet per second. The trajectory from JFK to the left thigh does not require any change in direction after passing through JFK.
"The trajectory from JFK to the left thigh does not require any change in direction after passing through JFK."I said the trajectory would not require a change in direction. Whether there is a clear path from JFK's neck to thigh depends more on where it passed JBC's back as he is turned to the right, the correct downward angle and the height of the thigh. If the shot occurred with JBC turned to the right as he was before disappearing behind the Stemmons sign and if his knees were up, as they had to be:
(https://images2.imgbox.com/f8/31/6YRmIurW_o.jpg)
Apparently, in Mason's world, Connally's spine wouldn't defect the bullet on its way to the thigh.
The scenario shown here tried to incorporate everything Mason's Theory demanded, and to see what worked and what didn't. I even spread apart Connally's knees because Mason said Connally's nuts needed the space. Now one can move the left thigh over to be in line with the trajectory, but there remains the problem of getting the bullet pass Connally's torso.You just need to raise the thigh. With that you can see that it is pretty close even with your placement of JBC and trajectory. It grazes the left side of his back. But you are assuming some things about JBC's back and the path that are not quite correct. The path relative to the car is close to 21 degrees down at z193 (24.03 degrees down relative to the horizontal at z186 by the survey at CE884) even assuming that the downward slope of Elm is the full 3 degrees at that point. The straight line trajectory just clears the jump seat back and passes to the level of JBC's lower back. Also, because he has to move a bit forward of the seatback to turn like he is at z190-200, the path would pass his back farther forward, so at an even lower level. I admit that it would be close but the trajectory path can work without striking JBC's back. The wound in the thigh is perfectly consistent with an tumbling undamaged CE399 striking JBC in the left thigh down to the femur, leaving a small bit of lead in the femur and denting just the base as it hits the bone. Because it was tumbling, and because the wound on the thigh was very oblique, its rotational motion may have continued and caused it to continue forward and up toward the surface of the skin or, perhaps, completely out, which could explain why it did not remain in the thigh.
Yes, but again he said he felt the bullet hit him like a "doubled up fist" punching him in his back. That's not a pain reaction/feeling but it is a physical reaction that must have been immediate? I can't see how such a reaction could have been delayed? So, a delayed pain reaction is not only possible but based on his account what happened; but the physical reaction to the bullet was not delayed.JBC said nothing about feeling the wrist or thigh strike. He felt the bullet that hit him in the back and his reaction to that was immediate because he knew he had been hit. Still, he said he felt no pain from it (until he reached Parkland and tried to move, which is possibly when his lung collapsed).
And don't we see that punching at circa 223? Shoulder going forward, jacket bulging. Does your scenario have him hit 2-3 seconds earlier and this shoulder reaction at circa 223?His motions are perfectly consistent with him realizing that he had just heard a rifle shot and is preparing to turn around to see JFK, which he appears to then do. There is no time prior to that where he makes any attempt to look at JFK and JBC he tried to see him before he was hit in the back.
JBC from WC testimony:
Senator COOPER. Would you describe again the nature of the shock that you had when you felt that you had been hit by a bullet?
Governor CONNALLY. Senator, the best way I can describe it is to say that I would say it is as if someone doubled his fist and came up behind you and just with about a 12-inch blow hit you right in the back right below the shoulder blade.
Senator COOPER. That is when you heard the first rifleshot?
Governor CONNALLY. This was after I heard the first rifleshot. There was no pain connected with it. There was no particular burning sensation. There was nothing more than that. I think you would feel almost the identical sensation I felt if someone came up behind you and just, with a short jab, hit you with a doubled-up fist just below the shoulder blade.
My point is that there is no evidence that he was not hit in the thigh earlier than the back strike. There can be no assurance that he would have felt it. Even if you can imagine CE399 deflecting over to the left thigh from the wrist, the characteristics of the wound are not consistent with having been made by the missile that caused the wrist wound:
Well, we have evidence from JBC himself that he didn't feel it.
Of course he didn’t feel it. Because it happened concurrently with the back/chest and wrist wounds. You have absolutely no evidence that the thigh wound happened well before that. Only your own ideas.
The thigh wound looked like it was struck by the butt end of an intact missile.My point is that the damage to CE399 occurred after passing through JFK and was caused by striking the femur butt first. It is the SBT proponents who fantasize about a bullet striking JBC's rib in the back, butt-first, with enough force to break the rib near the spine, demolish 10 cm of rib, fracture the radius, deposit flakes of lead in the wrist, create an irregular tear in the sleeve and have only one impact point.
CE 399 is intact except for a few small flakes of the lead compound missing from the butt end and a flattening deformation on one side.
The path from wrist to thigh is not obvious and assumes a significant change in direction of a 10 gram bullet moving at several hundred feet per second.Right. I didn't realize that JBC was a eunuch.
Place JBC’s legs with the knees to his right (as they most likely were) and all of your objections disappear.
My point is that there is no evidence that he was not hit in the thigh earlier than the back strike. There can be no assurance that he would have felt it. Even if you can imagine CE399 deflecting over to the left thigh from the wrist, the characteristics of the wound are not consistent with having been made by the missile that caused the wrist wound:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Hs2cwJSj/JBC-shirt-cuff.jpg)
My point is that the damage to CE399 occurred after passing through JFK and was caused by striking the femur butt first. It is the SBT proponents who fantasize about a bullet striking JBC's rib in the back, butt-first, with enough force to break the rib near the spine, demolish 10 cm of rib, fracture the radius, deposit flakes of lead in the wrist, create an irregular tear in the sleeve and have only one impact point.
Right. I didn't realize that JBC was a eunuch.
That was Dr. Gregory's understanding of Dr. Shires' understanding. But Dr. Shires actually said what he understood and he said this:
My point is that the damage to CE399 occurred after passing through JFK and was caused by striking the femur butt first.
If you think that the wound penetrated deep enough to strike the femur bone, then your idea is completely at odds with what the doctors who attended to JBC testified to.
Senator COOPER. I am just trying to remember whether we asked you, Doctor, if you probed the wound in the thigh to see how deep it was.
Dr. GREGORY. I did not, Senator. Dr. Tom Shires at our institution attended that wound, and I have his description to go on, what he found, what he had written, and his description is that it did not penetrate the thigh very deeply, just to the muscle, but not beyond that.
That was Dr. Gregory's understanding of Dr. Shires' understanding. But Dr. Shires actually said what he understood and he said this:6H106:
- Dr. SHIRES. The wound on the thigh was a peculiar one. There was a 1 cm.
punctate missile wound over the junction of the middle and lower third of the leg
and the medial aspect of the thigh. The peculiarity came in that the X-rays of
the left leg showed only a very small 1 mm. bullet fragment embedded in the
femur of the left leg. Upon exploration of this wound, the other peculiarity
was that there was very little soft tissue damage, less than one would expect
from an entrance wound of a centimeter in diameter, which was seen on the
skin. So, it appeared, therefore, that the skin wound was either a tangential
wound or that a larger fragment had penetrated or stopped in the skin and had
subsequently fallen out of the entrance wound.
Mr. SPECTER What size fragment was there in the Governor’s leg at that
time?
Dr. SHIRES. We recovered none. The small one that was seen was on X-my
and it was still in the femur and being that small, with no tissue damage after
the debridement, it was thought inadvisable to remove this small fragment.
Mr. SPECTER. Is that fragment in the bone itself at the present time?
Dr. SHIRES. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. What would your best estimate be as to the size of that fragment?
Dr. SHIRES. One millimeter in diameter--one to two.
He wrote in his medical report, CE392, 17H20, that the missile was seen to course through the subcutaneous fat and into the vestus medialis (the inner upper thigh muscle) leaving a fragment embedded in the femur:
(https://i.postimg.cc/gJmRhhnY/shires-report.jpg)
And here is the account of what he said 14 years later to the HSCA 7 HSCA 445:
- He was open-minded about the
possibility that the fragment could have been just under
the skin, but preferred to reiterate his initial impressions
that the fragment was in the thigh bone . Dr. Shires said
that while they explored the entire track of the missile,
they were not " . . .exploring it as a track . . ." ; rather they
were " . . .exploring the wound looking for a big missile
injury ." Dr . Shires said he found little hemorrhage, so
he felt it was likely that a high velocity missile did not
pass through the skin causing the wound".
So use a slope of 21 degrees relative to the car rail? OK. Can I also move Connally so he matches where he's at in the Zapruder film (ie:the Z193 I use in the graphic posted earlier).No. You can't use their positions at z223 either. My point is to show that based on the first shot being between z190 and z200, and taking into account the range of uncertainty over relative positions of the two men, that there was a plausible clear straight line path from JFK's throat exit to JBC's left thigh. So to demonstrate that I am batsh_t crazy, as you suggest, you have to show that for any position and posture of the men that is consistent with the photographic evidence at around z190-195 (I use z193 because it is the clearest) and within the range of uncertainty of the positions and posture of the two men, the trajectory from JFK's exit wound to JBC's left thigh cannot be direct ie. unobstructed by JBC's body parts that were clearly not struck.
The only means by which a metal fragment could have been embedded in the femur, as Dr. Shires always maintained, would be from being deposited there by the butt end of CE399. Dr. Gregory did not operate on the thigh wound. He simply viewed it and thought it looked like it was made by the butt end of an intact missile e.g. the butt end of CE399. Dr. Shires maintained that the bullet penetrated much deeper than you suggest ie. through the skin, fat layer and into the muscle and deposited a fragment in the femur. It was also a tangential wound on an oblique strike in the direction of the femur toward the knee. Pretty hard to fit that with a bullet coming from the right wrist.
It appears quite clear that, if there actually was anything in the femur, then it was only a very small fragment. No where does he indicate that anything the size of CE 399 penetrated deeper than what Dr. Gregory indicated.
You indicated that the damage to CE 399 was caused by it striking the femur. How it that possible? It didn’t even come close to striking the femur. This is what I am saying.[/list]
The only means by which a metal fragment could have been embedded in the femur, as Dr. Shires always maintained, would be from being deposited there by the butt end of CE399. Dr. Gregory did not operate on the thigh wound. He simply viewed it and thought it looked like it was made by the butt end of an intact missile e.g. the butt end of CE399. Dr. Shires maintained that the bullet penetrated much deeper than you suggest ie. through the skin, fat layer and into the muscle and deposited a fragment in the femur. It was also a tangential wound on an oblique strike in the direction of the femur toward the knee. Pretty hard to fit that with a bullet coming from the right wrist.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/f8/31/6YRmIurW_o.jpg)You know I think very highly of your graphics skills, Jerry. But your measurements are not quite accurate. The key factor is the distance between the two men and that requires an accurate limo and placement of the seats. I put the distance between JFK's exit wound and JBC's spine about 6-8 inches longer than you have it (30-32 inches). I also have him a bit lower and a bit smaller head and possibly shoulders (40 cm between armpits) than you have shown. Your model has JBC too far back. He is behind the side window when in z193 his face is partly seen through the window. You also still have the downward angle wrong and his thigh too low.
I use Z193 also, because it's the clearest frame in the area. I moved Connally as far to the right as he could go (in defiance of where he is actually seen in Z193 but where you think he is), twisted his torso as much as humanly possible and nothing about your Theory remotely works.
Maybe you think there's some kind of Yoga gyrations and strange body contortions occurring out of sight. You think Connally's movements as he emerges from behind the sign and turns his body to face the side of the car are natural and merely out of concern for the President.
You keep asking for things, without addressing why Connally doesn't match his position in Z193, if he's supposedly over against the side of the car, per your Theory. There is little I can do for you until you address the problems with your Theory demonstrated in my graphic. Have you considered a life-size reconstruction of the limousine interior and posing live models?
I'm glad you admit what you've been doing to make your Theory "work".No. It is about what you need to do in order to justify calling it "bats_it crazy". (I would write it out in full but it comes out as batspombleprofglidnoctobuns).
(https://images2.imgbox.com/36/ce/AePgRhY1_o.jpg)A sight line is a sightline. The zoom lens changes perspective but not sightlines. Changing focal length does not unblock parts that were previously blocked.I duplicated your model setup with the longer distance between the two men and showed that you used false perspective to align Connally's face with the side window.
- Your distance between JFK and JBC is much greater (than what photos show)
- Connally a bit lower (than photos show him)
- A bit smaller head (more than a bit though; and not what photos show)
- Your model has JBC too far back (Your model has JFK so far back, he morphs into the seat-back)
(What photos show the President's seat-back as a thin slab, as in your model)?)When my model has Connally in the middle of the jump-seat, his head aligns with the side window as seen in Z193. But then the bullet goes to the right of Connally's spine.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/77/33/urGlF61K_o.jpg) (https://images2.imgbox.com/5b/b4/c9UBZ6LV_o.png)
Do you agree with a slope of 21 degrees relative to the car?
How much to raise his thigh (Good Grief) and what is that based on (other than it's necessary to meet your Theory's needs)?You might use this as a guide:
All,
I posted the wrong gif yesterday, and meant to post the one attached, which is much slower and makes it easier to watch Connally's double shoulder up and down movement.
It's very difficult to see it at regular speed. My apologies or posting the wrong gif. It's easiest to see if you watch his right shoulder.
(https://i.imgur.com/GiJqqpD.gif)
Thanks Steve, that’s a very clear sequence of frames and it shows the double shoulder movement as you describe. It also shows JFK’s concurrent reactions, JBC’s jacket front flipping out, and JBC’s right hand and arm moving rapidly upwards. All of this happens in a small fraction of a second. It sure looks to me like this is where both JFK and JBC were struck with CE 399.
My pleasure, Charles. I'm you are able to see the "hunching" of the shoulders. It was David Von Pein who first pointed this out, although I didn't know that he had until after I saw it, and I started a thread in a JFK group and included this gif a long while back, and he posted a note informing us that he had found this himself, and had also posted a gif of it.I don’t dispute that they are reacting at the same time to the same shot. I just disagree that the evidence supports it being the second shot.
I agree with you all the way that this is further proof of both men reacting simutaneously by the same bullet. Thanks so much!
I don’t dispute that they are reacting at the same time to the same shot. I just disagree that the evidence supports it being the second shot.
One of the three shots missed the target. We know that both men were struck where the film shows them being struck. Energing from behind the stemmons sign, and the fatal shot.
This leaves only one other shot, and that shot had to have been fired early, like around Zapruder frame 155/156.
A. Zapruder's camera jiggle proves that a shot was fired there.
B. The sudden head turns of both JFK and Governor Connally-both of whom were looking to their left. And one thing most people do not notice is that Connally was looking to his right
when Zapruder first began filming, turned to his left, then suddenlly jerked his head back to the right, where his head remained turned during the entire travel down Elm Street until he comes out from behind the sign, which is the first motion he made-other than taking his right hand off the top of the side rail of the car.
This is exactly what the Zapruder film shows. Three sudden reactions to three rifle shot sounds.
The physical evidence does not support three shots. The FBI only noted two of the three shells found in the SN exhibited the “chambering mark” from the rifle. CE 543 did not have the indentation. Even the unfired cartridge exhibited the chambering mark along with the next thirty shells, as was noted by Josiah Thompson, that had been fired in the rifle.
Zapruder--Reactions and Jiggle Analysis? Zapruder is a two shot witness.
One of the three shots missed the target.If that was the case then the SBT would be correct. But if that were the case why are they so many witnesses who recalled that JFK reacted immediately to the first shot by doing things we don’t see him doing until after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign? why are there so many witnesses who said the last two shots were in rapid succession? why are witnesses consistent with the first shot being after z186 (Betzner) after the VP car had completed the turn and going downhill? An instant before z202 (Philip Willis)? etc?
We know that both men were struck where the film shows them being struck.
A. Zapruder's camera jiggle proves that a shot was fired there.There are at least 8 jiggles. Besides, there would have to be 2 frames between the bullet strike and the sound arriving at Zapruder’s ears and then a frame or two to react.
B. The sudden head turns of both JFK and Governor Connally-both of whom were looking to their left. And one thing most people do not notice is that Connally was looking to his rightAnd Mary Woodward said that she shouted at the President as he approached and he and Jackie turned to their right and the President acknowledged them as the car passed by. She was certain they were the last people he acknowledged before that first horrible ear-shattering noise.
when Zapruder first began filming, turned to his left, then suddenlly jerked his head back to the right, where his head remained turned during the entire travel down Elm Street until he comes out from behind the sign, which is the first motion he made-other than taking his right hand off the top of the side rail of the car.
If that was the case then the SBT would be correct. But if that were the case why are they so many witnesses who recalled that JFK reacted immediately to the first shot by doing things we don’t see him doing until after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign? why are there so many witnesses who said the last two shots were in rapid succession? why are witnesses consistent with the first shot being after z186 (Betzner) after the VP car had completed the turn and going downhill? An instant before z202 (Philip Willis)? etc?
“We” don’t know that. John Connally said he knew that was not the case. Nellie C. as well. At least three members of the WC didn’t believe it and none of those that did said they thought it was the second shot.
There are at least 8 jiggles. Besides, there would have to be 2 frames between the bullet strike and the sound arriving at Zapruder’s ears and then a frame or two to react.
And Mary Woodward said that she shouted at the President as he approached and he and Jackie turned to their right and the President acknowledged them as the car passed by. She was certain they were the last people he acknowledged before that first horrible ear-shattering noise.
Wrong, the physical evidence DOES support 3 shots, but you go ahead and believe that there are not three distinct sudden physical motions by both men in the limousine. Your credibilty is a stake.
Zapruder's camera doesn't lie. Zapruder wasn't counting the shots as they went off, and within hours of the assassination, he didn't know for sure that he heard 2 or 3 shots. Watch his interview with Jay Watson, WFAA-TV. "...[T]hen I heard another shot or two..." after having earlier seen the "president slump to the side-like this". Zapruder was a two or three shot witness.
Watson was on the air continuously up to the time he interviewed Zapruder and we can see that he didn’t have any opportunity to meet with him. It is apparent from the beginning of the interview that Watson was meeting Zapruder for the first time, just after Zapruder had walked into the studio.
Jay Watson is the problem. He told Bill Newman how many shots there were according to him as well as doing the same with Zapruder. This is exactly what the WC and HSCA meant when they stated "The media influenced the witnesses into inflating the number of shots".
If theres any agreement that Z224 was the 1st shot , then there was about 4.8 secs for 2nd shot head shot followed 1-2 sec later by a 3rd shot that missed high and struck the curb near Tague.The first shot after z186 (Betzner, motorcade witnesses, Woodward, etc) and just before z202 (Phil Willis), with the last at z312~z313, fits the shot pattern if the second shot was just before the head shot.
That would certainly preserve the 1….2..3 spacing as majority heard by witness.
The other alternative .. a missed 1st shot that precedes the Z224 2nd shot, is difficult to fit in between Betzner Z186 and Willis Z205 which is the approx Z195 -200 range, because that’s 1.5 sec between 1st and 2nd Z224 shot , therefore not likely both shots to be fired by the same MC rifle.
Just wanted to repost this excellent gif posted earlier by Steve:There is no question that conservation of momentum will apply. But the problem is that the impact is to JBC’s right armpit not his shoulder. And it is downward. There is no way the impact momentum lifted the right shoulder.
(https://i.imgur.com/GiJqqpD.gif)
I've never noticed the upward double thrusting movement of JBC's shoulder before but it is clear as day.
I believe the 'doubling' of this movement reveals two very different reactions.
The first reaction is the instantaneous physical reaction when two objects collide. There is no delay in this reaction, it is instantaneous. This happens when the bullet physically collides with, and destroys, a relatively large section of JBC's rib. This collision causes JBC's torso to rotate, his right side being thrust forward and downwards causing his left shoulder to be thrust backwards and upwards.
There is no question that conservation of momentum will apply. But the problem is that the impact is to JBC’s right armpit not his shoulder. And it is downward. There is no way the impact momentum lifted the right shoulder.
Second, the ratio of resulting body speed to incoming bullet speed is in inverse proportion to the ratio of their masses. A human male trunk is about 55% of total body mass or about 55 kg for a 100 kg person. So the incoming 10g (.01kg) bullet at 450 m/s (1500 fps) imparts 4.5 kg m/s of momentum to the torso and the torso recoils at a speed of 4.5/55 =.08 m/s or 8 cm/s. That works out to 4.5 mm per frame. You are not going to see sudden motion of the body in one frame or even over 2 or 3 frames
There is no way the impact momentum lifted the right shoulder.Except that the right shoulder lifts and moves forward between z222 and z224:
::)
Oh boy, you really need to read the posts you are responding to.
Of course there is no way that a downward impact to the right side of JBC's torso will cause his right shoulder to lift.
The Z-film shows his LEFT SHOULDER lifting.
Second, the ratio of resulting body speed to incoming bullet speed is in inverse proportion to the ratio of their masses. A human male trunk is about 55% of total body mass or about 55 kg for a 100 kg person. So the incoming 10g (.01kg) bullet at 450 m/s (1500 fps) imparts 4.5 kg m/s of momentum to the torso and the torso recoils at a speed of 4.5/55 =.08 m/s or 8 cm/s. That works out to 4.5 mm per frame. You are not going to see sudden motion of the body in one frame or even over 2 or 3 framesYes, of course. The momentum is transferred from the bullet to the body while it passes thorugh the chest. That occurs almost "instantaneously" (about 1/1000th of a second to pass through JBC's torso).
Pure baloney.
The physical collision of two solids transfers momentum instantaneously.
Except that the right shoulder lifts and moves forward between z222 and z224:
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpgzLGz9/JBC-222-to-225.gif)
Here is a longer clip:
(https://i.postimg.cc/MKjR4nSL/z222-to-z236-JBC.gif)
So if you think he was hit by a bullet in the right armpit, why would the right shoulder lift and turn forward? After that the left shoulder lifts but there is no reason to believe it is anything other than a voluntary movement as he prepares to turn around.
Yes, of course. The momentum is transferred from the bullet to the body while it passes thorugh the chest. That occurs almost "instantaneously" (about 1/1000th of a second to pass through JBC's torso).
The momentum transferred is the bullet mass x the change in velocity. But since the bullet also must have struck the right wrist with a speed of about 1000 fps in order to shatter the radius, the loss of speed in the torso is only about 500 fps or about 150 m/s. So it would be about 3 mm/second of movement. How far do you think that can move the body in 1/18th of a second? Answer: 3/18th of a mm. Do you think you can see that in the zfilm?
The movement of the shoulders is much greater than 3/18ths of a millimetre per frame. What this means is that the movement seen between z222 and z228 is not from a bullet but is a voluntary movement.
Except that the right shoulder lifts and moves forward between z222 and z224:Andrew: What caused his right shoulder to move while his left remained, to me, still? To me (confirmation bias/motivated reasoning and all that) his right shoulder goes downward first and then the left follows. They both then "shrug" up.
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpgzLGz9/JBC-222-to-225.gif)
Here is a longer clip:
(https://i.postimg.cc/MKjR4nSL/z222-to-z236-JBC.gif)
So if you think he was hit by a bullet in the right armpit, why would the right shoulder lift and turn forward? After that the left shoulder lifts but there is no reason to believe it is anything other than a voluntary movement as he prepares to turn around.
Yes, of course. The momentum is transferred from the bullet to the body while it passes thorugh the chest. That occurs almost "instantaneously" (about 1/1000th of a second to pass through JBC's torso).
The momentum transferred is the bullet mass x the change in velocity. But since the bullet also must have struck the right wrist with a speed of about 1000 fps in order to shatter the radius, the loss of speed in the torso is only about 500 fps or about 150 m/s. So it would be about 3 mm/second of movement. How far do you think that can move the body in 1/18th of a second? Answer: 3/18th of a mm. Do you think you can see that in the zfilm?
The movement of the shoulders is much greater than 3/18ths of a millimetre per frame. What this means is that the movement seen between z222 and z228 is not from a bullet but is a voluntary movement.
Which is more than enough time for a voluntary action as he prepares to turn around to check on JFK, as he said he did after the first shot. No need to assume he was hallucinating when he said he was not hit in the back on the first shot. No need to assume that JFK assumed the position seen in z224 and z225:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZY8jfSck/JBC223226.png) (https://postimages.org/)
The difference between these two images is about 0.70 seconds.
Andrew: What caused his right shoulder to move while his left remained, to me, still? To me (confirmation bias/motivated reasoning and all that) his right shoulder goes downward first and then the left follows. They both then "shrug" up.According to the evidence this was the first shot which did not strike JBC in the right armpit. JBC said that he reacted to the first shot by turning around to look at JFK, realizing that he had just heard a rifle shot and feared an assassination was occurring. Nellie said that JFK reacted like we see him reacting after z224 BEFORE the second shot. So, according to the evidence, his right shoulder moves because he has to lean forward a bit and lift his right arm a bit so he can turn around to the right, which he does in the ensuing two seconds.
He specifically said that it felt like a "balled up fist" that first hit him. No pain at that time. Isn't that what we see here?No. Not according to the evidence. According to the evidence this was the first shot. He was hit like that on the second shot.
The sudden movement of JBC that begins at z271-272 and continues through z278 before he falls back. It is subtle but before he falls back onto Nellie he moves toward the front of the car without moving any part of his body to initiate this motion.
Can Andrew point out anything in the Z270-ish range of frames indicating
some kind of impact of a bullet hitting JC?
The sudden movement of JBC that begins at z271-272 and continues through z278 before he falls back. It is subtle but before he falls back onto Nellie he moves toward the front of the car without moving any part of his body to initiate this motion.
There is also a slight change in his hand position and the hat he is holding between z271 and z272.
There is also the odd lifting of JFK’s hair on the right side of his head that George Hickey observed at the time of the second shot (z273-277).
Finally, there is Wm Greer’s first turn around at around z280 which he said he did immediately after -“almost simultaneous” with- the second shot.
Watson was on the air continuously up to the time he interviewed Zapruder and we can see that he didn’t have any opportunity to meet with him. It is apparent from the beginning of the interview that Watson was meeting Zapruder for the first time, just after Zapruder had walked into the studio.
Zapruder’s uncertainty about the number of shots may be because he was concentrating on watching the President and relying more on visual cues. He observed effects from only two shots.
Yes, that was going to be my followup question: How can JBC be hit in the back when he's clearly turned sideways at 271/272? Even before that he's turned away from the building.
The sudden movement of JBC that begins at z271-272 and continues through z278 before he falls back.
The position of JBC at 271-272 relative to the sniper’s nest window is not compatible with a bullet entering and exiting JBC’s back and chest respectively in the places that it actually did enter and exit. Plus, going from memory, JBC testified that he turned back to his right AFTER he was shot. How do you explain these two issues with your idea?
Yes, that was going to be my followup question: How can JBC be hit in the back when he's clearly turned sideways at 271/272? Even before that he's turned away from the building.
I used to be a conspiracy believer in large part because the lone assassin explanation made no sense. But it wasn't explained properly - they (I think it was primarily Groden's book) had the bullet zig zagging and I fell for it; *and* the alternate explanations for what happened didn't add up. Plus this enhanced Zapruder film has details we didn't have before. Any other explanation for what happened, for me, simply doesn't work.
Once one accepts the validity of the physical evidence, it should become clear that the only conclusion that fits the physical evidence is the single bullet conclusion. Therefore some of the witness accounts must simply be inaccurate. I believe that even JBC admits that he could be wrong (in his book).
The sudden movement of JBC that begins at z271-272 and continues through z278 before he falls back.
The position of JBC at 271-272 relative to the sniper’s nest window is not compatible with a bullet entering and exiting JBC’s back and chest respectively in the places that it actually did enter and exit.
The bullet did not pass through the pleural lining of the chest. It went around the fifth rib until the last 10 cm, which it shattered, driving bone shards through the pleural lining and into the right lung. If you draw a path along the fifth rib from the very exposed right armpit that was facing the SN to just below the right nipple, it is almost a straight line - just a small deflection to the left. That deflection is consistent with the impact felt by JBC and with the force required to break the fifth rib close to the spine.
The bullet then exited the chest and struck the back of the radius well above the wrist joint in the middle of the french cuff, which happens to be pressed against the chest with the entry point on the cuff at the same point as the exit point (through the right jacket pocket).
In striking the back of the radius that is pronated so the back of the forearm is against the chest, the bullet fragmented and drove bone shards down into the wrist and made a jagged tear in the cuff. The bullet fragmented, as evidenced by the jagged cuff mark and the lead deposits as well as the large entry wound on the forearm.
Some fragments likely deflected up away from the point of contact and some possibly continued forward through the wrist striking the windshield. A fragment from the second shot struck the curb near Tague. That is consistent with several fragments, one of which went just over the windshield toward Tague and two of which did the damage to the windshield frame and glass. SA Greer (whose right ear was about 12 inches away) described a "concussion" from the second shot. That's not all, there is a change in the appearance of the wrist and hat which is consistent with a slight change in the position of the hat in the hand.
He does turn toward his left from that far right turn as he falls back on Nellie. He told the WC he intended to turn to the left when he was hit but wasn't sure how far around he was when hit. Nellie told DR. Shires that he was turned right when he was hit and did not mention turning forward or to the left before he was hit:
6 H 108:
Dr. SHIRES. She had thought, and I think correctly so, that he had turned
to his right after he heard the first shot, apparently, to see what had happened
to the President, and he then later confirmed this, that he heard the first shot,
turned to his right, and then was hit.
I forgot about that a moment ago, incidentally. He definitely remembers
turning after hearing the first shot, before he was struck with a bullet. I forgot
about that.
Mr. SPECTER. When did Governor Connally tell you that?
Dr. SHIRES Oh, several days later.
Mr. SPECTER. While he was in the hospital?
Dr. SHIRES. Oh, yes. 4 or 5 days later and we were constructing the events.
....
Connally was in the room too, and reconstructing events, she related the story
of her last conversation with the President, relating to him, that the reception
had been warm and that she was glad he couldn’t say that people of Texas
and in Dallas didn’t like him and admire him, and she was very pleased with
the way things had gone the whole visit. Then, the next event that occurred
was that she remembers hearing a shot, he remembered hearing a shot-he
remembers turning to the right, he remembered being struck by a bullet, and
his next thought as he fell over toward his wife was “They’re going to kill all
of us,” and that’s the last really clear memory that he expressed to me until
he remembers vaguely being in the emergency room, but very little of that,
and then he remembers waking up in the recovery room several hours later.
Wow. You can’t even view a simple interview without attempting to twist it into this goofy story you have going on all the time. Actually, it is mind boggling unbelievable.Yes. I see how I twisted Zapruder's interview. I listened to it. Unbelievable! Who actually listens to evidence! How else could I have concluded that Zapruder was not sure whether he heard two or three shots? You, of course, don't think he was confused at all. You may want to review it again.
Wouldn’t it be better to just stick to proving you do not know anything about physics, firearms, witness testimony, sound analysis, and ballistics instead of branching out to proving you do not know anything about assessing the Jay Watson -Zapruder interview?Sorry. I thought most people understood grade 11 high school physics. Next time I post something that uses trigonometry or basic principles like conservation of momentum, should I post a link to a high school curriculum refresher for you?
It hit his fifth rib. Turn around in a chair twisting your shoulders around with your seat facing forward and you can see that your right armpit and right nipple are in an almost straight line to the rear if not the nipple a bit to the left of that line. The bullet does not go through the rib initially because it is an oblique strike and travels along it. But it puts force on the rib pushing it in before it plows through the thinner end of it.
The bullet did not pass through the pleural lining of the chest.
I believe that it would have if JBC was sitting sideways as your idea dictates. It appears to me (and I suspect most of us) that if the limo is essentially pointed and moving directly away from the sniper’s nest (it was), and JBC is sitting sideways relative to the long axis of the limo, then the bullet entering his back below his right armpit would tend to exit on his left side (not near his right nipple). This is why I (and I suspect most of us) say JBC was not in a position to have the wounds line up the way they did during the time your idea suggests.
You are avoiding the fact that JBC himself testified under oath that he turned to his right again after he was shot. Your idea has JBC being shot after he turned to his right for the last time. There is a conflict here that you are apparently trying to avoid. Here is a snip from “Passion For Truth” by Arlen Specter, page 72:I am not trying to avoid a conflict. I am trying to determine whether he turned left before he was hit. We all know that Connally later said he thought he had started his left turn and was hit facing forward after he had turned. I am just pointing out that he was not that clear initially. The last thought he had could well have been "I will turn left to see JFK" but he always admitted that he was not sure how far in that turn he had gone before he was hit.
At one point while viewing the film, Connally and his wife argued over whether the governor had fallen into his wife’s lap or she had pulled him into her lap. Connally insisted that he had fallen. Mrs. Connally insisted that she had pulled him. “No, Nellie,” “No, John,” they shot back and forth, several times. Eventually Mrs. Connally had the film halted and took Connally and Carr out to the hall for a conference. When they returned shortly, Nellie Connally and the governor were in agreement - on Mrs. Connally’s version.
Of course, I didn’t know what they said outside. But considering I was trying to gather a witness’s own account of the shooting, the Connally summit was not comforting. Later that afternoon, when the governor testified, he said, “So I merely doubled up, and then turned to my right again and began to - just sat there, and Mrs. Connally pulled me over to her lap.” His wife’s words.
Yes. I see how I twisted Zapruder's interview. I listened to it. Unbelievable! Who actually listens to evidence! How else could I have concluded that Zapruder was not sure whether he heard two or three shots? You, of course, don't think he was confused at all. You may want to review it again.Sorry. I thought most people understood grade 11 high school physics. Next time I post something that uses trigonometry or basic principles like conservation of momentum, should I post a link to a high school curriculum refresher for you?
11th grade? You are being kind to yourself. You presented your understanding of physics as a bullet striking a hard object.But it doesn’t matter how hard the impact to determine the transfer of momentum. The only thing that matters is the bullet momentum before and the bullet momentum after. Since that loss of momentum is imparted to the body and to whatever it is connected to, the maximum momentum the body can gain is the amount lost by the bullet.
JBC said that gap was a very very short time. It is conceivable to me that he was already in the process of turning back to the front as he reappears from behind the sign in the Zapruder film.”Short” is relative. Four seconds is short too. The evidence that JFK began reacting to the first shot before the second shot occurred is inconsistent with what you are suggesting.
Zapruder is sitting in a chair and Watson is talking and from that you know everything he has heard after entering into the building and standing then sitting in the studio? Did you miss the part where Watson could not wait to tell him there were three shots. Did you also imagine hearing Zapruder mention a shot halfway between the throat shot and the head shot?You need to watch the whole continuous feed for the hour or so beforehand. Watson is on the air continuously. Your allegation was that he caused Zapruder’s confusion. But we can see that Watson did not say anything to him in the hour prior to beginning the interview. He did not mention 3 shots until after Zapruder said:
JBC, Nellie, and Jackie all mention the first shot hit JBC. Are you still struggling with the basics?I am struggling with that. But it is because I am struggling to understand what universe you are in.
”Short” is relative. Four seconds is short too. The evidence that JFK began reacting to the first shot before the second shot occurred is inconsistent with what you are suggesting.
I don’t see how it is plausible that Zapruders statement?? I have never, ever suggested that any shot missed everyone. The evidence is rather strong and uncontradicted that JFK reacted to the first shot as we see when he emerges from behind the sign. I am suggesting that the trajectory as well as the evidence of the Connallys and others establish that the first shot did not strike JBC in the back/armpit. All I am suggesting is that the only wound of JBC that fits being made by CE399 (which must have been the bullet through JFK’s neck) is the thigh wound. And the trajectory through JFK at z190-195 directly to JBC’s left thigh seems to work.
“ he heard a shot and then he saw JFK slump and then heard another shot or 2” could support Andrews proposed sequence of a 1st shot at Z195-200 that missed
Seems to me that Zapruder is backing up Betzner and Willis as well as Harold Normans perception of a 1st shot that was heard , followed by JFK slumping and only AFTER that slumping then was heard a 2nd and or 3rd shot.Yes, he does.
Four seconds is short too.Yet in that “very, very brief span of time” he had enough time to recognize it as a rifle shot, conclude that an assassination was unfolding, turn around in his jump seat to attempt to see JFK, and then decide to turn back the other way. Nellie even said he uttered “oh, no, no” before the second shot.
I understand what you are saying. But in no way (in this context) is four seconds “a very, very short amount of time”.
Yet in that “very, very brief span of time” he had enough time to recognize it as a rifle shot, conclude that an assassination was unfolding, turn around in his jump seat to attempt to see JFK, and then decide to turn back the other way. Nellie even said he uttered “oh, no, no” before the second shot.
But we don’t have to interpret JBC’s statement. Many others did that. The interval between the last two was about half that of the interval between 1 and 2. With Oswald shooting, that requires about 4 seconds between 1 and 2.
Besides, if you think there was an early first shot miss, you don’t accept that his “very, very brief span of time” means what you are suggesting.
You need to watch the whole continuous feed for the hour or so beforehand. Watson is on the air continuously. Your allegation was that he caused Zapruder’s confusion. But we can see that Watson did not say anything to him in the hour prior to beginning the interview. He did not mention 3 shots until after Zapruder said:
“And as I was shooting—as the President was coming down from Houston Street making his turn; it was about a half-way down there—I heard a shot, and he slumped to the side, like this. Then I heard another shot or two—I couldn't say [whether] it was one or two—and I saw his head practically open up [places fingers of right hand to right side of head in a narrow cone, over his right ear], all blood and everything, and I kept on shooting.”
I am struggling with that. But it is because I am struggling to understand what universe you are in.
But it doesn’t matter how hard the impact to determine the transfer of momentum. The only thing that matters is the bullet momentum before and the bullet momentum after. Since that loss of momentum is imparted to the body and to whatever it is connected to, the maximum momentum the body can gain is the amount lost by the bullet.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/88/88/ehlEY5s4_o.jpg)Thanks Jerry. Nicely done. I wasn’t aware of any service available to get this kind of thing done, unless you are offering.
I'm modelling Mason's Theory (he's too cheap to pay to see it done) with his requirements for a Z200s First Shot stated earlier in this thread (Z193, being the clearest in that area, is the frame modeled). This is a draft.
Ok , sorry about the misunderstanding on my part about Andrews Z195-200 shot missing.
So it’s about Z200 is the 1st shot that hits only JFK in his back and then exits his throat?
Then about 70 frames (3.5 seconds ) later , a 2nd shot approx at Z270 ish which hits only JC.
Then there’s the 3rd shot Z313 which is 43 frames (about 2.5 secs) after Z270.
That’s a rather amazing shot at Z313 at a round 8” diameter target , moving away slightly laterally at about 8mph , at a range of about 90 yards in just 2.5 secs after the 2nd shot and accomplished using only the iron sights of the bolt action MC rifle which were fixed zero at 200 meters.The evidence is that shots were fired from the SN that quickly and the damage occurred.
Too bad no one has ever replicated this proposed sequence and timing of shots and scored the head shot .
Does that model of JC , that Jerry just posted here, represent fairly accurately the position of JC at Z270 as proposed by Andrew?No. It is showing JBC's position at the time of the first shot which I put around z190-195, say z193.
If Jerry is willing, perhaps an adjusted model with both of JCs legs turned towards the right side door and the right hand holding hat over the left leg will solve the hat problem.JBC had turned around on previous occasions and knew that JFK was on the far right side of the back seat. He wasn't expecting him to be as far left as he was. That would seem to be a more plausible explanation for why he turned to the right rather than because his legs were to the right. If you sit on a thick cushion on the floor and limit the sideways position of your right leg (in JBC's case, by a car door) where do you put your left leg?:
No. It is showing JBC's position at the time of the first shot which I put around z190-195, say z193.
JBC had turned around on previous occasions and knew that JFK was on the far right side of the back seat. He wasn't expecting him to be as far left as he was. That would seem to be a more plausible explanation for why he turned to the right rather than because his legs were to the right. If you sit on a thick cushion on the floor and limit the sideways position of your right leg (in JBC's case, by a car door) where do you put your left leg?:
The issue is whether a shot through JFK could have passed directly to JBC’s thigh. I am suggesting that it did because there is consistent evidence that it occurred on the first shot and that this occurred between z190 and z200, and very strong evidence that JBC was not hit in the back by it. Since we know that it exited JFK’s throat and would have continued in a straight line and did not hit the car, and since the thigh wound is consistent with being caused by a strike from the butt end of CE399, I am suggesting that it must have struck JBC’s thigh. That means his left knee was out a bit to the left side.
That would seem to be a more plausible explanation for why he turned to the right rather than because his legs were to the right.
Actually JBC told us why he turned to the right. It is because he instinctively turned towards the direction that he heard the shot come from (over his right shoulder).
Also, if you look at the various photos that show JBC’s positions throughout the motorcade, he is almost always facing partially towards the right. In order for those positions to be comfortable for the extended time frame of the motorcade, we might expect that JBC would also have his legs pointed partially towards the right. It might be that he needed to shift his position in the seat a bit towards the center of the limo in order to have more leg room on his right to do this. If so, this type of position would be compatible with the SBT.
The issue is whether a shot through JFK could have passed directly to JBC’s thigh. I am suggesting that it did because there is consistent evidence that it occurred on the first shot and that this occurred between z190 and z200, and very strong evidence that JBC was not hit in the back by it. Since we know that it exited JFK’s throat and would have continued in a straight line and did not hit the car, and since the thigh wound is consistent with being caused by a strike from the butt end of CE399, I am suggesting that it must have struck JBC’s thigh. That means his left knee was out a bit to the left side.
One does not contest such an assertion by saying that both JBC’s legs may have been to the right. One has to show that the facts on which it is based are necessarily in conflict with the preponderance of the evidence.
In any event, if you sit on a cushion on the floor with your feet on the floor immediately in front of you, you will see that the natural position for a man’s legs would be for them to be spread apart. Try it. You’ll see. With the right leg constrained by the right door, the left leg is out to the left.
I was not contesting your idea. You have been asserting this nonsense for many years and I haven’t seen one person even coming close to saying he agrees with it.
I was pointing out that JBC told us why he turned to his right. And that his reason is not the same as your imagined idea of why he turned to the right.I was just responding to Mr. Zeon's suggesting that he turned to the right because his legs were to the right. JBC said he turned around to check on JFK. Why would he have first turned to his left to see JFK?
JFK had leaned forward.That makes no sense. When do we see JFK leaning forward prior to z224? When are you suggesting that JBC turned around to try to see JFK?
We can see it when he emerges from behind the sign. Charles Brehm also said JFK was leaning forward. I believe that the lean forward by JFK is the reason (not that JFK was any further to his left) that JBC didn’t see JFK out of the corner of his eye when he instinctively turned to his right.
By the way, JBC wasn’t sitting cross legged on the floor (or doing more 25 or 6 to 4). Many years ago under a different screen name I did an experiment and posted photos on this forum and discussed it with you. The photos and discussion all disappeared along with all the other data when the website went down. My old computer is gone also, so I no longer have the photos. I set up a chair leaned back at the appropriate angle and put something in front of the chair to simulate the correct height of the chair above the floor of the limo. I suggest you try something similar that simulates the conditions in the limo better than just a cushion on the floor.
There are many reasons your idea is nonsense. Among them are the velocity of the bullet after it exited JFK’s neck was too high to only cause a slight wound, and that JBC would have felt it if he had been shot in the left thigh when you think he was.
But he didn’t. You continue to deny the evidence against your idea. You still haven’t provided any response to the fact that JBC testified that he turned back to his right after he was shot. However, in your scenario JBC does not turn back to his right after he was shot in the back. This is because, as we can see in the Z-film, (JBC had already turned back to his right before the time that you think he was shot in the back.You disagree with much of what the Connallys said. I just disagree with a few minor details. JBC himself said he was not sure where he was facing when hit in the back. He recalled deciding to turn to his left to check on JFK and thought he was facing forward when hit. I do not think that he was correct in that statement. Neither did Nellie. She said he was turned to the right when hit.
You are contesting it. But you don't challenge the evidence that supports it. You maintain a theory that requires JFK to not react to the first shot for several seconds and to smile and wave for several seconds afterward, despite the lack of a single witness who recalled seeing that and dozens who said he reacted quickly. You insist that JBC was hit in the back by the same bullet that struck JFK despite not having a single witness who said that occurred and JBC, Nellie, Powers, Gayle Newman, Hickey and Greer who gave evidence that it did not. And you ignore the vast majority of witnesses who recalled the shot pattern with the last two shots close together.
I was just responding to Mr. Zeon's suggesting that he turned to the right because his legs were to the right. JBC said he turned around to check on JFK. Why would he have first turned to his left to see JFK?
That makes no sense. When do we see JFK leaning forward prior to z224? When are you suggesting that JBC turned around to try to see JFK?
So long as the knees are well above the hips, that is all you need. The legs will be apart. Try it.
Was it a slight wound or a wound that he must have felt? Dr. Shires said it went down to the femur. Obviously, you think he was wrong. I don't. You can't say he must have felt it because a. he didn't and b. many people who are shot do not feel it. You have yet to respond to the video I posted. Here is another:
Here is a quote from the narrator beginning around 1:15: "Many people recount that within the first few moments of being hit by a bullet they didn't feel anything at all."
You disagree with much of what the Connallys said. I just disagree with a few minor details. JBC himself said he was not sure where he was facing when hit in the back. He recalled deciding to turn to his left to check on JFK and thought he was facing forward when hit. I do not think that he was correct in that statement. Neither did Nellie. She said he was turned to the right when hit.
It seems to me that Andrew Mason and others who don't believe that JBC and JFK were struck with the same bullet--and/or other reasons because of JBC's reactions--are either unaware, have forgotten about, or just don't know that Governor Connally did STRANGE, unreal things after being shot, that appear in both the Nix and Zapruder films. Although difficult to see in the Orville Nix film after the fatal shot was fired, according to the Zappruder film, plus Mrs. JBC's testimony JBC falls or is pulled to his left by his wife, and stayed low for only a second before he raised back up and turned to look to the rear into the back seat as we lose him behind the foliage from the pyracantha bush bwtween Zapruder and the limousine. After two seconds pass, he comes back into view once again, just before the limousine disappears beneath the underpass.
I first wrote about this in 1999 titled which John McAdams published on his Website. https://www.jfk-assassination.net/looking.htm Years later, a researcher named Gerda Dunckel released a video on YouTube titled " Zapruder Stabilized JFK Or Connally?", in which she stabillized the Zapruder film beginning with frame 221 and continuing until the final frame of the film, with her focus on John Connally by placing "Crosshairs" over his image in the film, and asking the question about who is sitting erect-JFK or the governor-as the limousine approaches the underpass. View the video here:
Did the governor ever once mention rising back up in his seat? No. Not until the car reached Parkland Hospital, when he said he "Heaved himself up" to get out of the way of the people trying to reach JFK. Obviously, the governor went into some type of shock upon being struck by the bullet he received. Why else would he never mention sitting completely erect in his seat as the limousine entered the triple underpass, or again, as early as while Mrs. Kennedy is rising from the back seat to exit the limousine? People suffering with being in shock have been known to do very unusual and dangerous things. Mrs. Kennedy's actions captured in both the Zapruder and Nix films after the fatal shot is a prime example, and so is what the governor did. He knew someone was shooting at the occupants of the limousine, yet he did not make an attempt to get himself out of harms way.
In a nutshell, I think it's impossible to rely strictly on Governor Connally's description of the shooting, when the Zapruder film shows some of the opposite of what he said he did.
The first sudden reaction seen by JBC upon entering Elm Street is his head turn from right to left. Then, within 1/4 of a second, snap his head back to his right, where he remained transfixed the rest of the way down the street until he emrges from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, when his shoulders hunch twice in rapid succession as the second shot/bullet strikes him in the back after exiting JFK's throat. Both men can be seen reacting violently and simultaneously in the Zapruder film, meaning one bullet struck both men.
You are contesting it. But you don't challenge the evidence that supports it. You maintain a theory that requires JFK to not react to the first shot for several seconds and to smile and wave for several seconds afterward, despite the lack of a single witness who recalled seeing that and dozens who said he reacted quickly. You insist that JBC was hit in the back by the same bullet that struck JFK despite not having a single witness who said that occurred and JBC, Nellie, Powers, Gayle Newman, Hickey and Greer who gave evidence that it did not. And you ignore the vast majority of witnesses who recalled the shot pattern with the last two shots close together.
I was just responding to Mr. Zeon's suggesting that he turned to the right because his legs were to the right. JBC said he turned around to check on JFK. Why would he have first turned to his left to see JFK?
That makes no sense. When do we see JFK leaning forward prior to z224? When are you suggesting that JBC turned around to try to see JFK?
So long as the knees are well above the hips, that is all you need. The legs will be apart. Try it.
Was it a slight wound or a wound that he must have felt? Dr. Shires said it went down to the femur. Obviously, you think he was wrong. I don't. You can't say he must have felt it because a. he didn't and b. many people who are shot do not feel it. You have yet to respond to the video I posted. Here is another:
Here is a quote from the narrator beginning around 1:15: "Many people recount that within the first few moments of being hit by a bullet they didn't feel anything at all."
You disagree with much of what the Connallys said. I just disagree with a few minor details. JBC himself said he was not sure where he was facing when hit in the back. He recalled deciding to turn to his left to check on JFK and thought he was facing forward when hit. I do not think that he was correct in that statement. Neither did Nellie. She said he was turned to the right when hit.
You are contesting it. But you don't challenge the evidence that supports it. You maintain a theory that requires JFK to not react to the first shot for several seconds and to smile and wave for several seconds afterward, despite the lack of a single witness who recalled seeing that and dozens who said he reacted quickly. You insist that JBC was hit in the back by the same bullet that struck JFK despite not having a single witness who said that occurred and JBC, Nellie, Powers, Gayle Newman, Hickey and Greer who gave evidence that it did not. And you ignore the vast majority of witnesses who recalled the shot pattern with the last two shots close together.
I was just responding to Mr. Zeon's suggesting that he turned to the right because his legs were to the right. JBC said he turned around to check on JFK. Why would he have first turned to his left to see JFK?
That makes no sense. When do we see JFK leaning forward prior to z224? When are you suggesting that JBC turned around to try to see JFK?
So long as the knees are well above the hips, that is all you need. The legs will be apart. Try it.
Was it a slight wound or a wound that he must have felt? Dr. Shires said it went down to the femur. Obviously, you think he was wrong. I don't. You can't say he must have felt it because a. he didn't and b. many people who are shot do not feel it. You have yet to respond to the video I posted. Here is another:
Here is a quote from the narrator beginning around 1:15: "Many people recount that within the first few moments of being hit by a bullet they didn't feel anything at all."
You disagree with much of what the Connallys said. I just disagree with a few minor details. JBC himself said he was not sure where he was facing when hit in the back. He recalled deciding to turn to his left to check on JFK and thought he was facing forward when hit. I do not think that he was correct in that statement. Neither did Nellie. She said he was turned to the right when hit.
Dr. Shires said it went down to the femur.That's not what Shaw actually said. He said that he debrided tissue "down to the region of the femur."
You maintain a theory that requires JFK to not react to the first shot for several seconds and to smile and wave for several seconds afterward, despite the lack of a single witness who recalled seeing that and dozens who said he reacted quickly.
The Warren Commission indicated that they could not determine which shot missed. Although I have indicated that I believe that the first shot missed, I have not closed my mind to other possibilities. If another one of the shots missed, the reaction of JFK would fit with the witness accounts that you cite. That would make much more sense than your idea does.
You insist that JBC was hit in the back by the same bullet that struck JFK despite not having a single witness who said that occurred and JBC, Nellie, Powers, Gayle Newman, Hickey and Greer who gave evidence that it did not.
Charles Brehm was one of the closest witnesses and he said he came up with the single bullet idea right away. When the Warren Report came out and confirmed his idea, he felt that they got it right. So, please correct yourself regarding “not a single witness who said…” Also, even JBC said in his book that he could be wrong, and he is the one who was shot.
And you ignore the vast majority of witnesses who recalled the shot pattern with the last two shots close together.
If there was a first shot miss that occurred near Z133, as some evidence suggests, then that pattern would be okay. Also, many of the witness accounts indicate the last two shots extremely close together. I suggest that those accounts are people who heard the bullet impact before the sound of the muzzle blast reached them. Therefore, those accounts should not be counted as hearing three separate shots.
JBC said he turned around to check on JFK.
Actually JBC’s testimony is that he turned as an instinctive reaction to the sound of the shot. Then when he didn’t catch JFK in the corner of his eye, he started to turn the other way in order to look over his left shoulder.
You naturally sit with your legs up well above your hips with your legs together?
So long as the knees are well above the hips, that is all you need. The legs will be apart. Try it.
I have, and I disagree with you completely.
Dr. Shires said it went down to the femur.
Not the bullet, only a very small particle [that was shed off of the bullet]. He said the bullet only penetrated as far as the muscle (just below the skin).
You can't say he must have felt it because a. he didn't and b. many people who are shot do not feel it.But you cannot conclude that he must have felt it immediately or even likely felt it immediately without evidence. The evidence is a. That he never felt it and b. many if not most people feel nothing initially from being shot when they remain conscious and the bullet produces no immediate functional impairment.
He also said he didn’t feel his wrist being shattered and only discovered that injury when he woke up in the hospital after the surgery. The reason is because of his back/chest wounds.
He said it went through the skin and subcutaneous fat and penetrated the thigh muscle. He said he disagreed with the suggestion that it did not penetrate far. How does a fragment embed itself in the femur without the rest of the bullet?
You can't say he must have felt it because a. he didn't and b. many people who are shot do not feel it.
He also said he didn’t feel his wrist being shattered and only discovered that injury when he woke up in the hospital after the surgery. The reason is because of his back/chest wounds.QuoteOk. So how can you say he must have felt it if it occurred separately from the other wounds?
Charles Brehm from “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, pages 62-63:
Within hours after the knowledge was given to me that Connally was also wounded, I said the only thing that I could think of was that a bullet that went through the President had also obviously hit Connally because there were only three shots fired: one went wild and two hit the President. The question then was how could it have happened? At that time, it was very easy for me to open up my shirt and show the bullet wound in what was the solar plexus, to come over here and show the exit wound where it passed through my body and came out between my ribs; then the second part of the bullet, the damage, because the bullet was softened and out of shape, tore my arm apart. One bullet did that to me! Any questions that night about what a single bullet can do, my God, I was living proof of it that day!
Edit: I don’t know what the problem is. But I was trying to respond to the part of your post where you commented about Charles Brehm.
That's not what Shaw actually said. He said that he debrided tissue "down to the region of the femur."Well, he said there was a lead fragment embedded in the femur. Please explain how that occurs if the bullet does not touch the femur.
"The region of the femur" is a non-specific phrase that could mean anywhere relatively close to the bone. More importantly, he's the guy digging the hole that deep. The bullet wound is generally not as deep as the debrided volume around it, and as any Fackler will tell you, surgeons were in the habit of over-treating these wounds by removing too much tissue.
And in their analysis they presented all the evidence for each of the shots definitely not missing. There is really no definite witness testimony of any shot missing and certainly no physical evidence.
You cannot be referring to anything said by Brehm in his statements. In his interview with the Dallas Times Herald on 22Nov63 he recalled only two shots in total and JFK reacting to both.
In a later FBI statement he described the same two shots but added that there was a third shot afterward. He said the President was very close at the time of the first shot.
He was very detailed in both statements about JFK’s facial and bodily reactions to the first shot. In his FBI statement he said he thought the President was badly hit in the head but he describes seeing the President’s hair fly up on the second shot. No mention of his head exploding or even seeing blood. The hair flying up does not describe the dominant impression of the head shot.
He mentioned a third shot after that but does not describe any effect. Mind you he was there with his 5 year old son so he may have been momentarily distracted. So his failure to notice the effect of the third shot may be because he had stopped looking at the President by the time of the third shot.
What Brehm does not mention is seeing any reaction of JBC on any shot, so I am not sure how anyone can say he observed a shot hit both men. His observation of JFK’s hair flying up on the second shot (which Hickey also observed at the time of the second shot) and his subsequent learning of JFK being shot in the head may explain why he thought the second shot struck him in the head.
Very few said the last two were that close. Even Brehm said they sounded like they were spaced “just about as quickly as an individual can manoeuvre a bolt-action rifle, take aim, and fire three shots.” 22H837
That is a hard to fit with three shots over 10 seconds.
He also said he was interested in seeing JFK because he recognized the sound as a rifle shot and feared an assassination taking place. So his purpose in turning around was to see the President.
You naturally sit with your legs up well above your hips with your legs together?
Shires said the bullet passed through the subcutaneous fat and penetrated the outer thigh muscle. How does it embed lead in the femur without the butt end of the bullet striking the femur? Explain the physics of that for us.
But you cannot conclude that he must have felt it immediately or even likely felt it immediately without evidence. The evidence is a. That he never felt it and b. many if not most people feel nothing initially from being shot when they remain conscious and the bullet produces no immediate functional impairment.
Well, he said there was a lead fragment embedded in the femur. Please explain how that occurs if the bullet does not touch the femur.Yeah. He said there was a bullet fragment in the femur. That was his interpretation of Connally's leg x-rays. However, every other physician I can think of who has studied them says that Shaw's interpretation erroneous. Shaw was misled by an x-ray artefact on one of the images, and they place the actual fragment fairly near the surface.
And in their analysis they presented all the evidence for each of the shots definitely not missing.
No, they presented the evidence that the Single Bullet Conclusion is the only conclusion that fits the evidence.
There is nothing in the evidence to suggest that the shot on which Tague was hit (which he said was not the first and not the last of the three shots he heard) was a missed shot. The fragment that deflected up off the curb had already struck something substantial before that, as it left residue of lead/antimony but no copper on the curb. There is absolutely zero evidence for a bullet impact anywhere outside the car.
There is really no definite witness testimony of any shot missing and certainly no physical evidence.
Tague would disagree with this opinion of yours.
What Brehm does not mention is seeing any reaction of JBC on any shot, so I am not sure how anyone can say he observed a shot hit both men.
No one said that Brehm saw it hit JBC. But when he learned that JBC had also been shot, he said that he deduced “within hours” that a bullet that hit JFK also hit JBC.
I suggest that you read the chapter on Charles Brehm in “No More Silence”. Then you won’t need to guess about these things.
And in their analysis they presented all the evidence for each of the shots definitely not missing.
No, they presented the evidence that the Single Bullet Conclusion is the only conclusion that fits the evidence.
There is nothing in the evidence to suggest that the shot on which Tague was hit (which he said was not the first and not the last of the three shots he heard) was a missed shot. The fragment that deflected up off the curb had already struck something substantial before that, as it left residue of lead/antimony but no copper on the curb. There is absolutely zero evidence for a bullet impact anywhere outside the car.
There is really no definite witness testimony of any shot missing and certainly no physical evidence.
Tague would disagree with this opinion of yours.
What Brehm does not mention is seeing any reaction of JBC on any shot, so I am not sure how anyone can say he observed a shot hit both men.
No one said that Brehm saw it hit JBC. But when he learned that JBC had also been shot, he said that he deduced “within hours” that a bullet that hit JFK also hit JBC.
I suggest that you read the chapter on Charles Brehm in “No More Silence”. Then you won’t need to guess about these things.
It was your contention that Dr. Shires did not say the bullet struck the femur. Shires always maintained that the lead was embedded in the femur.
How does it embed lead in the femur without the butt end of the bullet striking the femur?
First, I am not certain that it did embed in the femur. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the x-ray. In response to your question, the same way a passenger (who is not wearing a seatbelt) in an automobile is thrown through the windshield when the automobile comes to an abrupt stop (in a crash for instance).
The WC suggests that the SBT must be correct and, therefore, one shot missed. But they acknowledge the evidence that each shot did not miss and cannot reach any conclusion as to which shot missed. They cling to the SBT despite being unable to conclude which shot must have missed.
In the section “The Shot That Missed” they went through evidence for each of the shots. For each shot they listed evidence that the shot did not miss and then discussed how that evidence may be flawed. For each shot there were multiple independent pieces of evidence that each shot did not miss. There is almost no evidence that any of the shots missed.
The closest they come is with the first shot and the statement of SA Bennett. After suggesting that he was a very important witness (but carefully fail to offer any explanation of why he was not called to testify) as one of his statements - but not his notes made shortly after the events - suggest that the second shot struck JFK in the back. They then go through evidence that it did not miss. They suggest that JBC could support a finding that the first shot missed because he turned “slightly” to the right and didn’t see JFK so maybe he had not been hit. They suggest that Nellie may have been confused about seeing JFK reacting before the second shot (not mentioning the film showing her watching JFK in the z250s but not looking at him anywhere around z225). They then practically concede that there is a lot of other evidence that the first shot struck and suggest that JBC didn’t feel it right away.There is nothing in the evidence to suggest that the shot on which Tague was hit (which he said was not the first and not the last of the three shots he heard) was a missed shot. The fragment that deflected up off the curb had already struck something substantial before that, as it left residue of lead/antimony but no copper on the curb. There is absolutely zero evidence for a bullet impact anywhere outside the car.
If that is your definition of a witness who said that JBC was hit in the back by the same bullet that passed through JFK, you would have to include Arlen Specter, David Von Pein, and anyone else who reached that conclusion from seeing the film.
It was your contention that Dr. Shires did not say the bullet struck the femur. Shires always maintained that the lead was embedded in the femur.
Your only answer is that a piece of lead could have separated from the base somehow and somehow avoided striking the same material that the bullet encountered? Or was it like a car accident in which your body is stopped by the seatbelt but your nose flies off your face and hits the windshield?
It is interesting that Connally did not recall hearing the shot that hit him, as he describes the shots he did hear as being "very loud" and that he immediately recognised them as rifle shots:
"I heard what I thought was a shot. I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot."
"...once I heard the shot in my own mind I identified it as a rifle shot,"
Equally, he is certain about the headshot:
"...the third shot sounded, and I heard the shot very clearly."
"It was a very loud noise, just that audible, very clear."
When asked about the time gap between hearing the first shot and when he was hit by the second shot, it is clear he is describing a "split second", that is to say, a time gap of less than one second.
Mr. SPECTER: "What is the best estimate that you have as to the time span between the sound of the first shot and the feeling of someone hitting you in the back which you just described?"
Governor CONNALLY: "A very, very brief span of time. Again my trend of thought just happened to be, I suppose along this line, I immediately thought that this--that I had been shot. I knew it when I just looked down and I was covered with blood, and the thought immediately passed through my mind that there were either two or three people involved or more in this or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle. These were just thoughts that went through my mind because of the rapidity of these two, of the first shot plus the blow that I took, and I knew I had been hit, and I immediately assumed, because of the amount of blood, and in fact, that it had obviously passed through my chest. that I had probably been fatally hit."
The following is lifted from the Pat Speers website -
(12-13-63 FBI report on a 12-11 interview, CD188, p. 3-5) "When Governor Connally was asked about the elapsed time between the first and last shot he remarked “Fast, my God it was fast. It seemed like a split second. Just that quick” and he snapped his fingers three times rapidly to illustrate the time and said “unbelievably quick…"
A very, very brief span of time
Two or three people involved
Automatic rifle
My God it was fast
A split second
Unbelievably quick
Connally appears to be describing two shots, less than one second apart. He hears the first "very loud" rifle shot but not the second. Instead, after less than one second, he is aware of the impact of a second shot. We know there wasn't initially two shots less than a second apart so what is he describing?
It is well known that when a person recalls a traumatic event, the memory of that event can be distorted in various ways. John Connally was sat in the limo, probably thinking about the the Trade Mart as it was clear the parade was coming to an end. He was then shot through the torso, a massively traumatic, life-threatening injury. The worst person to ask to give an accurate account of this event would probably be Connally himself. The following quotes are from a research article entitled "Does Time Really Slow Down during a Frightening Event?" [Chess Stetson, Matthew P. Fiesta, David M. Eagleman. Published: December 12, 2007https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001295]:
"Observers commonly report that time seems to have moved in slow motion during a life-threatening event."
"Our findings suggest that time-slowing is a function of recollection, not perception: a richer encoding of memory may cause a salient event to appear, retrospectively, as though it lasted longer."
"Temporal judgments – such as duration, order, and simultaneity – are subject to distortions."
The distortion of "temporal judgements" when trying to recollect a traumatic event are commonplace and it is in this light that JBC's recollections should be viewed. JBC is genuinely recalling events to the best of his ability, the problem being that his memory of the event is subject to various distortions.
When he is describing hearing the first shot and feeling the second shot less than a second later, he is actually describing the same shot. The "split second" time gap is caused by the fact it takes human beings a little time to become consciously aware of what is happening:
"Human thought takes time to form, and so the “right now” that we’re experiencing inside our skulls is always a little later than what’s going on in the outside world. It takes 500 milliseconds, or half a second, for sensory information from the outside world to be incorporated into conscious experience."
[ https://nymag.com/speed/2016/12/what-is-the-speed-of-thought.html#:~:text=Human%20thought%20takes%20time%20to,be%20incorporated%20into%20conscious%20experience. ]
JBC is hit
100 milliseconds later the sound of the shot arrives
400 milliseconds after that JBC becomes aware of being shot
In terms of z-frames the difference between being shot and becoming aware of it is approximately 9 frames.
If, as I propose, the first shot passed through JBC by z223, we should expect him to become consciously aware of being shot around z232.
JBC is hit at z223
The sound of the shot reaches him @ z225
He becomes consciously aware of being shot from z232 onwards
It is no coincidence that, after careful examination of specific Z-frames Connally identifies somewhere around z231 - z234 as the moment he is hit.
His recollections of the event are of someone 'projecting back' to this traumatic moment. His memories are not a 'video record' of what happened. His memory is 'stretching out' this split second moment:
"Trauma memories – like all memories – are malleable and prone to distortion...After a traumatic experience, intentional remembering (effortful retrieval) and unintentional remembering (intrusive mental imagery) can introduce new details that, over time, assimilate into a person’s memory for the event..."
[Memory Distortion for Traumatic Events: The Role of Mental Imagery]
It is also no coincidence that around z232 is the only time JBC is looking slightly left as this is the position he remembers being in when he first became aware of being shot:
"I was turning to look back over my left shoulder into the back seat, but I never got that far in my turn. I got about in the position I am in now facing you, looking a little bit to the left of center, and then I felt like someone had hit me in the back."
In this extreme close up we see JBC turning left until he is facing " a little bit to the left of center" :
(https://i.postimg.cc/8zyGfzpf/Connaly-left-turn.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
It is at this moment JBC becomes aware that he is hit.
It is interesting that Connally did not recall hearing the shot that hit him, as he describes the shots he did hear as being "very loud" and that he immediately recognised them as rifle shots:
"I heard what I thought was a shot. I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot."
"...once I heard the shot in my own mind I identified it as a rifle shot,"
Equally, he is certain about the headshot:
"...the third shot sounded, and I heard the shot very clearly."
"It was a very loud noise, just that audible, very clear."
When asked about the time gap between hearing the first shot and when he was hit by the second shot, it is clear he is describing a "split second", that is to say, a time gap of less than one second.
Mr. SPECTER: "What is the best estimate that you have as to the time span between the sound of the first shot and the feeling of someone hitting you in the back which you just described?"
Governor CONNALLY: "A very, very brief span of time. Again my trend of thought just happened to be, I suppose along this line, I immediately thought that this--that I had been shot. I knew it when I just looked down and I was covered with blood, and the thought immediately passed through my mind that there were either two or three people involved or more in this or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle. These were just thoughts that went through my mind because of the rapidity of these two, of the first shot plus the blow that I took, and I knew I had been hit, and I immediately assumed, because of the amount of blood, and in fact, that it had obviously passed through my chest. that I had probably been fatally hit."
When asked about the time between the first and third shots he said it was a "very brief span of time", 10-12 seconds (4H134):
Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate as to the time span between the first
shot which you heard and the shot which you heretofore characterized as the
third shot?
Governor CONNALLY. It was a very brief span of time; oh, I would have to
say a matter of seconds. I don’t know. 10, 12 seconds. It was extremely rapid,
so much so that again I thought that whoever was firing must be firing with an
automatic rifle because of the rapidity of the shots ; a very short period of time.
So, the question is if a "very brief span of time" is 10-12 seconds in JBC"s mind, how much is a "very, very brief span of time"?
As usual, you take a piece of what I have posted and ignore the rest of it that actually answers your query, as if it didn't exist.
I posted the following quotes from "Does Time Really Slow Down during a Frightening Event?" [Chess Stetson, Matthew P. Fiesta, David M. Eagleman. Published: December 12, 2007https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001295]:
"Observers commonly report that time seems to have moved in slow motion during a life-threatening event."
"Our findings suggest that time-slowing is a function of recollection, not perception: a richer encoding of memory may cause a salient event to appear, retrospectively, as though it lasted longer."
"Temporal judgments – such as duration, order, and simultaneity – are subject to distortions."
I then went on to note that:
"The distortion of "temporal judgements" when trying to recollect a traumatic event are commonplace and it is in this light that JBC's recollections should be viewed. JBC is genuinely recalling events to the best of his ability, the problem being that his memory of the event is subject to various distortions."
What you have pointed out is a perfect example of one of the "temporal distortions" that occurs to the memory of someone who is recalling a traumatic, life-threatening event. As I pointed out in the other part of my post that you have tried to pretend doesn't exist, Connally is going out of his way to describe the incredibly short gap that exists between the moment he heard the first shot - a loud noise that he immediately recognised as a rifle shot - and the moment he was aware of feeling the impact of a shot:
A very, very brief span of time
Two or three people involved
Automatic rifle
My God it was fast
A split second
Unbelievably quick
Why would Connally think three people were taking the shots?
Why would he think someone was using an automatic rifle?
It is because he literally experienced a "split second" between the two events.
The point is - he shouldn't have experienced them as two separate events because they were part of the same event...he heard the first shot and was hit by it.
Because his memory has slowed down the event he can discern this "split second" gap as two separate events.
The rapidity of events is in contrast to his recollection of "10 to 12 seconds", but this recollection of how long the shooting took has been distorted. He remembers it as being much longer than it actually was. As happens regularly when a person is recalling a traumatic event, time has slowed down.
As usual, you take a piece of what I have posted and ignore the rest of it that actually answers your query, as if it didn't exist.Actually, JBC said in this interview that there was more than half a second between the first and second and estimated there were 2 seconds between them - at 2:25 of this 1966 statement:
I recall seeing an interview when JBC was asked if it was possible that he and JFK were hit on the second shot and he admitted it was possible, but he also said that the best witness - Nellie - didn't believe it because she saw JFK reacting before he (Gov. Connally) was hit.
I can attest that the super-slow motion memory of watching that snake strike at where my leg had just been is a very real phenomenon. It is quite understandable to me that, due to this phenomenon, JBC might think that a second shot was what hit him. However, in reality, it was the same shot that hit JFK. If I remember correctly, JBC even acknowledges that he could be wrong in his book. I will try to find that passage when I get a chance.
I recall seeing an interview when JBC was asked if it was possible that he and JFK were hit on the second shot and he admitted it was possible, but he also said that the best witness - Nellie - didn't believe it because she saw JFK reacting before he (Gov. Connally) was hit.
The interview was for the CBS 1967 4 part special "A CBS News Inquiry: The Warren Report" hosted by Walter Cronkite. David Von Pein's site has all four parts: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/05/cbs-news-inquiry-warren-report.html
The part referred to is in Part 2, at the 52 minute mark:
Actually, JBC said in this interview that there was more than half a second between the first and second and estimated there were 2 seconds between them - at 2:25 of this 1966 statement:
;DA first shot at z193 and a second shot at z271 is 78 frames or 4.26 seconds. But it is not just Connolly who puts the first two shots that far apart. Dozens of witnesses said there was a longer pause between the first two with the last two in rapid succession. Some said the ratio was about 2 to 1.
Once again, you ignore nearly everything I've posted and this time reproduce just a single sentence. It's quite funny that the single sentence you reproduce is the one pointing out that you ignore nearly everything I've posted.
…….
What we know with 100% certainty is that he is not describing a gap of more than four and a half seconds.
This is the gap required for Mason's Absolutely Demented Theory [ the MAD theory aka The Masonic Bodge].
There is no possible way Connally is mistaking a 4.5 second gap for automatic fire.
There is no possible way Connally is mistaking a 4.5 second gap for two or three shooters.
There is no possible way Connally is mistaking a 4.5 second gap for a "split second".
A first shot at z193 and a second shot at z271 is 78 frames or 4.26 seconds. But it is not just Connolly who puts the first two shots that far apart. Dozens of witnesses said there was a longer pause between the first two with the last two in rapid succession. Some said the ratio was about 2 to 1.
We don’t expect people to be clocks, especially when they are preoccupied with what is happening to them.
It is not surprising that he would think it was automatic fire. JBC’s experience with rifles was as a hunter. I suggest that 3 shots in 6.5 or 6.6 seconds rarely occurs when hunting with a bolt action rifle.
The question is whether he would recognize the shots a NOT automatic fire. I hope you are not suggesting it was an automatic rifle firing those shots.
JBC’s experience with rifles was as a hunter. I suggest that 3 shots in 6.5 or 6.6 seconds rarely occurs when hunting with a bolt action rifle.
Apparently you haven’t read chapter 5: Anchors Aweigh in Connally’s book “In History’s Shadow.” I invite you to do so if you really want to know what Connally experienced during WWII. And if you do, I think you will probably not (after you have read that chapter and learned more about JBC’s experiences) suggest that JBC wouldn’t recognize automatic gunfire.
The question is whether he would recognize the shots a NOT automatic fire. I hope you are not suggesting it was an automatic rifle firing those shots.
A first shot at z193 and a second shot at z271 is 78 frames or 4.26 seconds. But it is not just Connolly who puts the first two shots that far apart. Dozens of witnesses said there was a longer pause between the first two with the last two in rapid succession. Some said the ratio was about 2 to 1.
We don’t expect people to be clocks, especially when they are preoccupied with what is happening to them.
It is not surprising that he would think it was automatic fire. JBC’s experience with rifles was as a hunter. I suggest that 3 shots in 6.5 or 6.6 seconds rarely occurs when hunting with a bolt action rifle.
Anyone with the experiences that JBC had in WWII could easily distinguish the differences. JBC said he never heard the shot that hit him. Apparently he just assumed that it was a separate shot. The fact that he described that only a very very short time span elapsed between when he heard the first shot (that he recalled hearing) and when he felt the “fist” hit his back is what brought the thought of automatic gunfire to his mind. This suggests to me that it was the same shot with a delayed reaction to the pain (similar to what you claim about a supposedly separate shot hitting his leg and him not feeling it for several seconds).But he heard the first shot before he felt the bullet hit him in the back. If two events happened from the same shot, the sound reaching his ear would have happened after the bullet hit his back/armpit.
But it is not just Connolly who puts the first two shots that far apart.Well, he put all 3 shots 10 to 12 seconds apart and estimated the time between the first two at 2 seconds and enough time for him to recognize it as a rifle shot, form the conclusion that an assassination was occurring and decide to turn around to check on the President.
Connally doesn't put the shots that far apart.
His first impressions are that the two events are a split second apart.Yet you want to ignore his later statement that it was not less than a second and closer to two.
His recollection of the event slows time down.
But at no time does he put the shots over four seconds apart.
Automatic rifle.
Two or three shooters.
My God, it was quick.
A split second.
But he heard the first shot before he felt the bullet hit him in the back. If two events happened from the same shot, the sound reaching his ear would have happened after the bullet hit his back/armpit.
Well, he put all 3 shots 10 to 12 seconds apart and estimated the time between the first two at 2 seconds and enough time for him to recognize it as a rifle shot, form the conclusion that an assassination was occurring and decide to turn around to check on the President.
My point is that it is not necessary to have Connally tell us how long it was between shots #1 and#2. We have many others who recalled a longer pause between the first two with the third coming in rapid succession after the second. Connally is only one witness and his recollection conflicts with those of dozens of others.
Yet you want to ignore his later statement that it was not less than a second and closer to two.
My point is that it is not necessary to have Connally tell us how long it was between shots #1 and#2.
Mason Untruth #1
This was not your point at all. The false point you were making was that Connally put the two events over four seconds apart. You were saying that he wasn't the only witness who spaced the shots that far apart. You were not telling the truth.
Your theory would also have to explain why he reversed the order of the two events that he distinctly recalled: hearing a rifle shot then feeling the hit. It would also help if there was evidence to support the theory.
At the distance involved, it takes less than 1/10 of one second difference in time for the bullet to reach the target vs the time for the sound of the muzzle blast to reach the target. A blink of an eye takes about three times that amount of time.
I am trying to describe the perceived amount of time between when he heard the shot (so what if it was less than 1/10 of a second after it actually hit him) and the time that he actually FELT the hit in his back. His perception of that amount of time might also have been distorted due to his instinctual reaction (the amygdala in his brain taking control) as Dan and myself have been describing earlier in this thread.
Isn’t it you that claims he wouldn’t (if your idea were true) have felt a shot to his leg for over 4-seconds? Why would less than 1/10 of a second make a difference in your way of thinking?I said that in many cases bullets are often not felt. In this case, we have JBC describing the moment of impact because he felt it. Not pain. He felt impact. I suggest that he felt it because it was a pristine 2000 fps 10 gram bullet hitting bone. But that doesn't matter. The evidence from JBC is that he felt it and the evidence from Nellie is that he recoiled from it and that it was the second shot. The thigh wound was an oblique wound caused by a tumbling lower speed bullet striking the thigh butt-first and not interfering with any bodily function and which JBC said he never felt. I am just suggesting that the trajectory from the SN through JFK's throat exit wound at around z190-195 goes to JBC's left side and the only wound on his left side was his left thigh AND the wound characteristics of the thigh wound fit being hit butt-first by a tumbling partially spent bullet.
The fact is that JBC himself later said it is possible that they were hit by the same bullet.Yes. The second bullet, although he said he would never believe that happened. He never said that it was possible he was hit in the back by the first bullet - the one he heard, which is what Dan is arguing.
Your theory would also have to explain why he reversed the order of the two events that he distinctly recalled: hearing a rifle shot then feeling the hit. It would also help if there was evidence to support the theory.
I said that in many cases bullets are often not felt. In this case, we have JBC describing the moment of impact because he felt it. Not pain. He felt impact. I suggest that he felt it because it was a pristine 2000 fps 10 gram bullet hitting bone. But that doesn't matter. The evidence from JBC is that he felt it and the evidence from Nellie is that he recoiled from it and that it was the second shot. The thigh wound was an oblique wound caused by a tumbling lower speed bullet striking the thigh butt-first and not interfering with any bodily function and which JBC said he never felt. I am just suggesting that the trajectory from the SN through JFK's throat exit wound at around z190-195 goes to JBC's left side and the only wound on his left side was his left thigh AND the wound characteristics of the thigh wound fit being hit butt-first by a tumbling partially spent bullet.
Yes. The second bullet, although he said he would never believe that happened. He never said that it was possible he was hit in the back by the first bullet - the one he heard, which is what Dan is arguing.
What I should have said, just so you would not be confused, is that it is not just up to Connally to put that much time between the shots.
Connally is not consistent in his estimate of the time between shots. That’s not surprising. He was thinking about other things than counting the seconds.
I have previously pointed out that JBC said the first two were 2 seconds apart and NOT literally a split second apart. He also said on yet another occasion that all three took 10 to 12 seconds. He always said that heard the first shot and, after turning around to check on JFK, decided to turn back to the left. How long does that take? 4 seconds. I don’t know. Maybe.
So we look at other witnesses who are consistent.
But your point, if I understand your theory correctly, is that there was no time between the shot he heard and the shot that hit him in the back ie. they were the same shot. But JBC never said anything close to that. He always insisted they were separate shots. You cannot use an argument to change his evidence to mean the opposite of what he meant.
A further note on John Connally's various statements and testimonies regarding the shooting, in the light of someone recalling a really traumatic, life-threatening event. Someone like Andrew will take a quote that he finds useful, ignore everything else then argue that Connally wouldn't make it up. I totally agree, I don't believe Connally is making anything up, I believe he is doing his very best to genuinely recall the shooting but his recollection of it is distorted in various ways. Because of this, his testimony cannot be taken at face value but must be 'interpreted' as it is not wholly reliable. It must be measured against evidence such as the Z-film, which should be considered primary evidence.I dont ignore anything Connally said. I am just not able to attribute much weight to some of the details, like his estimate of the number of seconds between hearing the first shot and feeling the impact of the bullet that struck his back. Some of his recollections of those details are inconsistent with the recollections of many others. I find other witnesses as to the spacing of the shots to be more reliable. But I do accept his evidence that he heard the first shot and, after a perceptible period of time, felt the impact in his back. I accept that because it fits with the evidence of Nellie, Greer, Hickey, Altgens, Powers, Gayle Newman.
I am not sure how this is in any way similar to JBC being hit in the back by a bullet after he heard the first shot. If I understand the neurological pathway correctly (I don't profess to have any expert knowledge of our neurological system so this may not be completely correct) your eye picked up the sudden snake movement and your brain automatically sent a signal to your leg muscles to move. Your amygdala then made the decision to initiate flight or fight and caused the brain to release the appropriate biochemical to give your body the ability to carry out that response.
Your theory would also have to explain why he reversed the order of the two events that he distinctly recalled: hearing a rifle shot then feeling the hit. It would also help if there was evidence to support the theory.
Technically, it is just an idea, like yours. A theory requires some testing, peer reviews, etc like the SBT has had over the past 60-plus years. We have been explaining the time distortion phenomenon. You just don’t appear to be listening. If I had not experienced it for myself during the snake strike encounter I might not be so adamant about this. I will try to explain what I experienced again and relate some of it to JBC’s recollections.
My instinctive reaction of jumping backwards (amygdala controlled) happened so fast and so automatic that is was already over with before I even “knew” what was going on. I was hiking alone and was not scanning the trail ahead of me like I should have been.
I am not sure how this is in any way similar to JBC being hit in the back by a bullet after he heard the first shot. If I understand the neurological pathway correctly (I don't profess to have any expert knowledge of our neurological system so this may not be completely correct) your eye picked up the sudden snake movement and your brain automatically sent a signal to your leg muscles to move. Your amygdala then made the decision to initiate flight or fight and caused the brain to release the appropriate biochemical to give your body the ability to carry out that response.
In JBC's case he heard a rifle shot. That might result in a startle response but he said it did not. He said he recognized it as a rifle shot and immediately thought that an assassination was unfolding so his concern was for the President seated behind him. He said he turned to the right and (at least in his hospital interview) said that he saw that the President had slumped. He then decided to turn to the left to get a view of the President but felt the impact of the bullet in his back before he could complete that turn. I don't see the hormones kicking in from a stimulated amygdala to really be a factor in that.
I don't see his reaction to the sound of the shot or to being hit in the back to be anything similar to suddenly noticing a snake. So far as I can tell, only you and Dan have thought there might be a connection. A neurologist's opinion might assist your argument but in the final analysis, such opinions must be supported by evidence and there would appear to be none from JBC.
You are reading a lot into the word “instinctively”.
I don't see his reaction to the sound of the shot or to being hit in the back to be anything similar to suddenly noticing a snake.
We had just made the turn, well, when I heard what I thought was a shot. I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot. I instinctively turned to my right because the sound appeared to come from over my right shoulder, so I turned to look back over my right shoulder, and I saw nothing unusual except just people in the crowd, but I did not catch the President in the corner of my eye,
The key words from JBC’s testimony have been bolded by me. An instinctive reaction is typically not voluntary. It is very quick and happens and is already complete before any thought has time to be formed in the mind.
I dont ignore anything Connally said. I am just not able to attribute much weight to some of the details, like his estimate of the number of seconds between hearing the first shot and feeling the impact of the bullet that struck his back. Some of his recollections of those details are inconsistent with the recollections of many others. I find other witnesses as to the spacing of the shots to be more reliable. But I do accept his evidence that he heard the first shot and, after a perceptible period of time, felt the impact in his back. I accept that because it fits with the evidence of Nellie, Greer, Hickey, Altgens, Powers, Gayle Newman.
You, on the other hand are not just cherry picking one comment he made about it being a split second-a comment he later withdrew and said emphatically that it was not less than a second but more like 2. You then proceed to editorialize and argue something contrary to what he always said. You want us to believe that the shot sound arrived at his ears after he was hit in the back, contrary to every statement that he ever made. You are ignoring the substance of every statement he made on the subject, as well as ignoring all the other evidence that there were 3 distinct shots.
You are reading a lot into the word “instinctively”.
In his HSCA testimony, JBC said this (1HSCA42):
“Mr. CONNALLY, Mr. Cornwell, we had gone, I suspect, oh, 150, 200 feet when I heard what l thought was a rifle shot and I thought it came from—I was seated right, as you know, the jump seat right in front of the President, and they have a fairly straight back on them so I was sitting up pretty erect. I thought the shot came from back over my right shoulder so I turned to see if I could catch a sight of the President out of the corner of my eye because I immediately had, frankly, had fear of an assassination because I thought it was a rifle shot.”
You are reading a lot into the word “instinctively”.
Yes, I admit that I am doing that. However it is interesting that JBC chose to use that word (not yours truly). I have only recently made the correlation between Connally’s word and my experience with the striking snake. If I didn’t know as fact that (due to gravity) snakes cannot hang in mid-air and slowly float to the ground over a time period that seemed like 2-3 seconds, I would have no problem swearing under oath that it appeared to do just that. But Connally had no similar reference to let him know that his memory might have been distorted.
Could I be reading too much into this? Of course I could be. Unlike some folks here, I have no problem admitting when I am wrong. I think it is risky to place a lot of weight on witness accounts unless there is other physical evidence to support them. The photographic record, especially the Z-film, can show us a lot. The lack of a sound track and the Stemmons Freeway sign blocking the view of the limo for a short time period requires us to have to improvise and use other clues to try to answer some of the questions.
The Stemmons sign blocks the view and prevents us from knowing whether or not JBC made an instinctive head turn just before he came back into view. However, while JBC was behind the sign, JFK is said to have made an 87-degree head snap to his left between Z203 and Z206 (see the Roberdeaux map notes). I believe this very quick head snap indicates an instinctive reaction by JFK during the time period in question. I believe it could be a reaction to a bullet traversing his lower neck. An additional instinctive reaction could be that Rosemary Willis is said to have snapped her head about 90-100 degrees between Z214 and Z217 (again see Roberdeaux map notes). So, with at least two other apparent instinctive reactions happening during the time period in question, it is reasonable to believe that JBC might also have had a similar instinctive reaction while he is hidden from view of the Zapruder camera.
Of course there is a lot more that can be seen on the Zapruder film. There are a lot of head snaps from the limo occupants and other actions that happen around the late Z150s and the Z160s. It is difficult for me to dismiss them without considering that they might be instinctive reactions to a missed first shot. If they are, then it is reasonable to believe that JBC could have not remembered this accurately. Again, putting too much weight on witness accounts is risky because they are often proven to be inaccurate.
What you are describing is in perfect accord with the science on this particular subject. Earlier I posted these quotes from "Does Time Really Slow Down during a Frightening Event?" [Chess Stetson, Matthew P. Fiesta, David M. Eagleman. Published: December 12, 2007https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001295]:
"Observers commonly report that time seems to have moved in slow motion during a life-threatening event."
"Our findings suggest that time-slowing is a function of recollection, not perception: a richer encoding of memory may cause a salient event to appear, retrospectively, as though it lasted longer."
"Temporal judgments – such as duration, order, and simultaneity – are subject to distortions."
It's a really interesting piece and these 'distortions' are to be fully expected from someone undergoing an experience such as the one you describe.
JFK is said to have made an 87-degree head snap to his left between Z203 and Z206
This head snap to the left (that first came up in the HSCA investigation if I'm not mistaken) has been completely debunked in REPLY#60 (pg8) of "The First Shot" thread, where it is shown, for a fact, that at z207 JFK's head is still orientated to his right.
The only other head movement that can be described as a "snap" is when JBC suddenly turns to look at Nellie (captured in the Croft pic), then turns to look to his right. Around the same moment both JFK and Jackie also turn to look to their right. Far from being a response to a shot, they are responding to the, well documented, calling out of Mary Woodward and her colleagues to get the President and the first lady to look in their direction.
In a motorcade the heads of the occupants are always turning from left to right. I've never understood how this can be used to gauge when a shot is fired as there are more reasonable reasons.
I think it is risky to place a lot of weight on witness accounts unless there is other physical evidence to support them. The photographic record, especially the Z-film, can show us a lot.I think dozens of witnesses who put the first shot around z190-200 and the lack of a single witness who said that JFK continued to smile and wave after the first "horrible ear-shattering noise" together with 40+ witnesses who volunteered their recall of the 1......2...3 shot pattern tell us more than equivocal grainy zframes even if interpreted by experts. I agree that physical evidence is important, but SBTers seem to be ignoring all the physical evidence (eg. condition of CE399 not fitting damage to the fifth rib or radius and clothing and being unwilling to acknowledge that an elliptical shaped wound is consistent with a pristine bullet hitting at an angle).
The lack of a sound track and the Stemmons Freeway sign blocking the view of the limo for a short time period requires us to have to improvise and use other clues to try to answer some of the questions.Here is Rosemary Willis' head turn at z213-217:
The Stemmons sign blocks the view and prevents us from knowing whether or not JBC made an instinctive head turn just before he came back into view. However, while JBC was behind the sign, JFK is said to have made an 87-degree head snap to his left between Z203 and Z206 (see the Roberdeaux map notes). I believe this very quick head snap indicates an instinctive reaction by JFK during the time period in question. I believe it could be a reaction to a bullet traversing his lower neck. An additional instinctive reaction could be that Rosemary Willis is said to have snapped her head about 90-100 degrees between Z214 and Z217 (again see Roberdeaux map notes).
So, with at least two other apparent instinctive reactions happening during the time period in question, it is reasonable to believe that JBC might also have had a similar instinctive reaction while he is hidden from view of the Zapruder camera.Witnesses may be accurate or inaccurate; reliable or unreliable. But there are simple ways of determining that issue. If all the witnesses who were watching JFK at the time of the first shot said that he did not continue to smile or wave and almost all of those witnesses said he did things that we see him doing after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign (which reaction appears to have started earlier) either all the witnesses were in collusion or they actually saw something that caused them to believe they saw JFK react to the first shot as we see him reacting when he emerges from behind the sign.
Of course there is a lot more that can be seen on the Zapruder film. There are a lot of head snaps from the limo occupants and other actions that happen around the late Z150s and the Z160s. It is difficult for me to dismiss them without considering that they might be instinctive reactions to a missed first shot. If they are, then it is reasonable to believe that JBC could have not remembered this accurately. Again, putting too much weight on witness accounts is risky because they are often proven to be inaccurate.
I think dozens of witnesses who put the first shot around z190-200 and the lack of a single witness who said that JFK continued to smile and wave after the first "horrible ear-shattering noise" together with 40+ witnesses who volunteered their recall of the 1......2...3 shot pattern tell us more than equivocal grainy zframes even if interpreted by experts. I agree that physical evidence is important, but SBTers seem to be ignoring all the physical evidence (eg. condition of CE399 not fitting damage to the fifth rib or radius and clothing and being unwilling to acknowledge that an elliptical shaped wound is consistent with a pristine bullet hitting at an angle).
Here is Rosemary Willis' head turn at z213-217:
(https://i.postimg.cc/X7Dm6qDR/Rosemary-Willis-z213-to-z217.gif)
It looks like she has already looked back at the TSBD and is returning to look in the direction of the President's car. The more interesting head movement is the right-rearward snap from z204-206:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6Qn51C8L/Rosemary-Willis-z199-to-z206.gif)
Witnesses may be accurate or inaccurate; reliable or unreliable. But there are simple ways of determining that issue. If all the witnesses who were watching JFK at the time of the first shot said that he did not continue to smile or wave and almost all of those witnesses said he did things that we see him doing after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign (which reaction appears to have started earlier) either all the witnesses were in collusion or they actually saw something that caused them to believe they saw JFK react to the first shot as we see him reacting when he emerges from behind the sign.
I dont ignore anything Connally said.As I said, I don't ignore anything. I just don't attribute any weight to his estimates of the length of time between the shots or his thinking that the shots were from an automatic rifle. These estimates ranged from a split-second to no, not a split second, more like two seconds to a very, very brief span of time, duly noting that he considered 10-12 seconds to be a very brief span of time. I don't attribute weight to these estimates because they are inconsistent and do not fit with the spacing observed by many other witnesses. I do attribute great weight to his recollection of hearing the first shot a perceptible amount of time BEFORE he felt the IMPACT of the bullet in the back. I accept that because all statements he made about that are consistent and they fit with what is seen in the zfilm and with other witnesses as to when the second shot occurred.
Mason Untruth #3
You ignore virtually everything Connally says about the shooting.
You aren't serious are you? In every statement he ever made he emphasized that he heard the first shot and THEN after turning around to his right, failing to see JFK properly and deciding to turn left he felt the impact of the bullet in his back. For example 4 H 135-136:
You want us to believe that the shot sound arrived at his ears after he was hit in the back, contrary to every statement that he ever made.
I know, from past experience, that when you lose it you start to post really weird things and this is an example. A rifle bullet travels faster than the speed of sound so, of course, Connally is going to hear the shot AFTER he has actually been shot. You are correct when you say that I want you to believe "the shot sound arrived at his ears after he was hit in the back". The bullet is traveling faster than sound so it will reach Connally before the sound does. Everybody knows this.
But you believe that this is "contrary to every statement that he ever made".
So, I would like you to reproduce any statement where Connally says the shot sound reached him BEFORE the bullet did.
Again, knowing you like I do, this will probably be part of the 'wilful ignorance' strategy you often use. I will have already posted the answer to this apparent conundrum but, even though you are aware of it, you will pretend you're not to try a score a point. Either that or you have genuinely lost it.
This head snap to the left (that first came up in the HSCA investigation if I'm not mistaken) has been completely debunked in REPLY#60 (pg8) of "The First Shot" thread, where it is shown, for a fact, that at z207 JFK's head is still orientated to his right.
Thank you, I have never been able to discern this head snap. So, I will not argue with you about it. However, the Rosemary Willis head snap around this same time is one of the fastest head snaps on the Z-film according to Roberdeaux’s notes.
Roberdeaux names both JBC’s and JFK’s head snaps, but labels Jackie’s as a head turn. If you note the number of frames that it takes for JFK and JBC to complete their snaps, I think you will see that they are both several times faster than a normal head turn like you are trying to label them as. So I will respectfully have to disagree with you.
(https://i.vgy.me/JxL7if.jpg)
As I said, I don't ignore anything. I just don't attribute any weight to his estimates of the length of time between the shots or his thinking that the shots were from an automatic rifle. These estimates ranged from a split-second to no, not a split second, more like two seconds to a very, very brief span of time, duly noting that he considered 10-12 seconds to be a very brief span of time. I don't attribute weight to these estimates because they are inconsistent and do not fit with the spacing observed by many other witnesses. I do attribute great weight to his recollection of hearing the first shot a perceptible amount of time BEFORE he felt the IMPACT of the bullet in the back. I accept that because all statements he made about that are consistent and they fit with what is seen in the zfilm and with other witnesses as to when the second shot occurred.
As far as Connally's impression that it was fire from an automatic rifle, all I can say is that he accepts the Warren Commission report that Oswald fired all the shots with the bolt action 2766 MC so his impression was wrong by his own admission. Besides, 10-12 seconds to fire and then reload aim and fire two more shots does not require an automatic rifle.
You aren't serious are you? In every statement he ever made he emphasized that he heard the first shot and THEN after turning around to his right, failing to see JFK properly and deciding to turn left he felt the impact of the bullet in his back. For example 4 H 135-136:
"Mr. SPECTER. In your view, which bullet caused the injury to your chest, Governor Connally?
Governor CONNALLY. The second one.
SPECTER. And what is your reason for that conclusion, sir?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, in my judgment, it just couldn’t conceivably have
been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot. In the first place, I
don’t know anything about the velocity of this particular bullet, but any rifle
has a velocity that exceeds the speed of sound, and when I heard the sound
of that first shot, that bullet had already reached where I was, or it had reached
that far, and, after I heard that shot, I had the time to turn to my right, and
start to turn to my left before I felt anything.
It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first bullet,
and then I felt the blow from something which was obviously a bullet,..."
What universe are you in Dan?
As I said, I don't ignore anything.
Mason Untruth #5
Do you ignore that on two separate occasions Connally examined the Z-frames and chose z234 as the frame he was hit?
If you don't just ignore it, what is your explanation for this.
What universe are you in Dan?So can you tell us why JBC saying he heard the first shot and then felt the bullet impact in his back was actually saying the opposite? No interpretation. Just read what he said.
The universe that understands how the English language works.
I don’t ignore it at all. It is just that a second shot at that point is completely inconsistent with:
1. Nellie’s statement to Dr. Shires that he was turned to the right when hit.
2. Nellie’s evidence that after the first shot and before the second she heard JBC yell “no, no, no” before the second shot. JBC appears to utter the words “no, no, no” in the mid 240s.
3. Nellie said she looked back at JFK after the first and before the second shots and saw him with no expression and his hands near his neck. She said after the second shot occurred she never looked back. She does not look back at JFK until after z250 and turns to look at JBC at z269-270. So z250-269 is before the second shot, according to that.
4. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was after the first and before any other shots.
5. Hickey said he was turned facing forward before the second shot and remained facing forward to see the third shot. He is still facing rearward in Altgens 6.Like point 4., this is not evidence against Connally's choice of z234
6. JBC insisted that he turned to his right trying to see JFK before the second shot. There is nowhere prior to z240 that he makes any attempt to see JFK.He is also adamant he was facing a little left of centre when he was shot. More evidence you ignore.
7. The first shot was after z186. We both agree on that. But there are over 40 witnesses who recalled the shot pattern as 1……2…3. That pattern cannot possibly fit a second shot before the midpoint between 1 and 3 with the headshot being the third shot. Z234 is far too early.This can be interpreted as evidence for a shot after the head shot
8… I could go on, but you get the idea.No you can't.
So can you tell us why JBC saying he heard the first shot and then felt the bullet impact in his back was actually saying the opposite? No interpretation. Just read what he said.I literally don't understand this question.
As excellent a researcher as Roberdeaux is, and there can be little doubt of that, I've always found it of paramount importance to do my own research rather than rely on the work of others, regardless of how illustrious they are. Below is a close-up video of JFK in the Z-film. We see his head turn to the right as he waves and smiles to the crowds lined on Elm Street. I, personally, do not detect any great urgency in this head turn and the fact that he begins to smile and wave makes a mockery of any notion that he is responding to the sound of a shot.
Is he smiling and waving at the bullet as it passes by?
This is the very well documented moment when Mary Woodward and her colleagues call out to the President and the First Lady to look their way. This would explain why JFK begins to smile and wave. This is why Jackie turns her head from left to right. I too must respectfully disagree with any notion that JFK's head has snapped to the right as a result of hearing a shot. In fact, I find the idea ludicrous.
Nellie puts the shot at z229.Her estimate was based on a review of still frames after watching the film. Her view is inconsistent with her testimony. We can see her looking back at JFK as he is grasping for his upper chest/throat well after z250. She was adamant that she did not look back after the second shot. She was never asked when she thought JBC turned right after the first shot or when she thought JBC uttered “no, no , no” which she said was before the second shot. We can see JBC saying this in the z240s.
Explain.
How is Altgens 6 an argument against Connally choosing z234 as the frame he felt he was shot?According to Altgens his no. 6 photo at z255 was taken after the first and before any other shots. So with JBC estimating that he was hit on the second shot at z234, there is a conflict with Altgens (as well as several dozen others as to the 1…...2...3 shot pattern).
You were the one implying Connally felt the bullet first and then heard the shot.No. You were arguing that he was hit in the back on the first shot. If that was the case and if his recollection of hearing the shot and feeling the bullet impact was not made up, you are really saying he got the order reversed as he must have heard the shot after the impact.
I was asking you to provide a quote for such a nonsensical idea!
Calling an idea ludicrous isn’t being respectful of it Dan. But thanks for the video link. At least on my iPad and Chrome browser, if I go full-screen with the video, it is possible to pause it and then “grab” the control time bar at the bottom and make the video stop, or go forward or backward at any speed that you want to drag the control at. The first part, which shows the segment in which the limo occupants appear to be reacting to a missed first shot is clear enough to see all four of the VIP passengers. It appears to me that the first part of JBC’s reactions are similar to JFK’s reactions (until the wave by JFK) but lag behind JFK’s reactions by a little bit. They both initially appear to instinctively glance toward their spouses (a normal and instinctive male protective reaction) and one that JBC apparently didn’t remember accurately. Then both of them snap their heads to the right very quickly. JFK appears to have heard the loud shot but didn’t immediately recognize it as a shot, saw nothing that presented itself as a threat, and recovered his composure very quickly and began to wave back at the crowd. On the other hand, JBC appears to be continuing to try to turn as far to his right as he can in that seat. This would be in accordance with his testimony. Both Nellie Connally and Jackie turn to their right also. I really don’t believe that those reactions, from all four of them at roughly the same time, would be warranted by someone in the crowd calling out. After all, they were just leaving a huge crowd where a lot of people were doing just that.
There is a lot of other physical evidence that suggests an early missed shot. Off the top of my head I can name a few:
1. Rosemary Willis snaps her head back towards the TSBD and begins slowing down in order to stop. The spacing of the dots showing her path on the Roberdeaux map graphically illustrates the slow down. It can also be seen in the Z-film.
2. The Hughes film has a skip of a few frames at approximately this same time. It is believed it could only be due to Hughes’ reaction to the sound of the shot by lifting his finger pressure on the camera button for an instant.
3. The Dorman film has a huge jiggle upwards before being abruptly stopped at approximately this same time.
4. The Tina Towner film stops just before this same time, this agrees with her statement that the first shot sounded about the same time, or slightly after, she stopped filming.
5. It appears to me that the Zapruder film has a jiggle about the same time that JFK snaps his head to the right.
I have been trying to explore different possibilities with an open mind. But again, I cannot simply dismiss all the above physical evidence that suggests an early missed shot. There are also plenty of witness accounts that also suggest this that I haven’t listed.
Calling an idea ludicrous isn’t being respectful of it Dan.
With all due respect Charles, I was being very kind by referring to your suggestion that JFK responded to the sound of a shot by waving and smiling at Mary Woodward and her colleagues as "ludicrous". It's the kind of nonsense I would expect from a "Greer shot JFK" kind of mentality.
I have been trying to explore different possibilities with an open mind.
Really?
Then spend half an hour or so familiarising yourself with Mary Woodward's account of events.
Hughes has a skip
Dorman has a jiggle
Towner stops
Zapruder has a jiggle.
How embarrassing.
First of all, this is not physical evidence of a missed first shot. Physical evidence of a missed first shot would be a divot in the pavement, or in whatever it struck showing signs of being made by a bullet - such as little pieces of lead/antimony in it. There is no physical evidence of a missed first shot.
Calling an idea ludicrous isn’t being respectful of it Dan. But thanks for the video link. At least on my iPad and Chrome browser, if I go full-screen with the video, it is possible to pause it and then “grab” the control time bar at the bottom and make the video stop, or go forward or backward at any speed that you want to drag the control at. The first part, which shows the segment in which the limo occupants appear to be reacting to a missed first shot is clear enough to see all four of the VIP passengers. It appears to me that the first part of JBC’s reactions are similar to JFK’s reactions (until the wave by JFK) but lag behind JFK’s reactions by a little bit. They both initially appear to instinctively glance toward their spouses (a normal and instinctive male protective reaction) and one that JBC apparently didn’t remember accurately. Then both of them snap their heads to the right very quickly. JFK appears to have heard the loud shot but didn’t immediately recognize it as a shot, saw nothing that presented itself as a threat, and recovered his composure very quickly and began to wave back at the crowd. On the other hand, JBC appears to be continuing to try to turn as far to his right as he can in that seat. This would be in accordance with his testimony. Both Nellie Connally and Jackie turn to their right also. I really don’t believe that those reactions, from all four of them at roughly the same time, would be warranted by someone in the crowd calling out. After all, they were just leaving a huge crowd where a lot of people were doing just that.
There is a lot of other physical evidence that suggests an early missed shot. Off the top of my head I can name a few:
1. Rosemary Willis snaps her head back towards the TSBD and begins slowing down in order to stop. The spacing of the dots showing her path on the Roberdeaux map graphically illustrates the slow down. It can also be seen in the Z-film.
2. The Hughes film has a skip of a few frames at approximately this same time. It is believed it could only be due to Hughes’ reaction to the sound of the shot by lifting his finger pressure on the camera button for an instant.
3. The Dorman film has a huge jiggle upwards before being abruptly stopped at approximately this same time.
4. The Tina Towner film stops just before this same time, this agrees with her statement that the first shot sounded about the same time, or slightly after, she stopped filming.
5. It appears to me that the Zapruder film has a jiggle about the same time that JFK snaps his head to the right.
I have been trying to explore different possibilities with an open mind. But again, I cannot simply dismiss all the above physical evidence that suggests an early missed shot. There are also plenty of witness accounts that also suggest this that I haven’t listed.
Is that true that Altgens had heard only one shot /loud noise, when he took his no.6 photo at Z-255?You can’t do that. The shot sequence 1……2…3 is based on evidence from dozens of independent sources. You try very hard to convince us that you can see a bullet striking JBC at z224, but it does not fit large bodies of independent and consistent evidence.
If so , and IF the 1st loud shot was theoretically fired at Z195-200 ,(as proposed by Andrew Mason) , then the 2nd shot which majority of forum members here seem to agree is causing the abrupt rotation turn of JCs right shoulder at Z224 must have been a suppressed shot which Altgens did not hear.
Perhaps this might explain also the of reaction by the SS agents not occurring (seemingly) until after Z255?
Andrew keeps trying to dismiss this Z224 reaction of JC as something not caused by a bullet impacting JC , so as to preserve his version of the WC theory that only 3 loud shots were fired by a solitary MC rifleman.
The majority of the LNs and some CTs (myself included) , however , agree that the reaction of JC at Z224 is more probably due to impact of a bullet hitting JC.
Therefore I propose that an adjustment must be made to Andrews theoretical shot sequence to include the Z224 reaction of JC caused by a suppressed shot fired by 2nd gunman, which would resolve the Altgens issue.
First of all, this is not physical evidence of a missed first shot. Physical evidence of a missed first shot would be a divot in the pavement, or in whatever it struck showing signs of being made by a bullet - such as little pieces of lead/antimony in it. There is no physical evidence of a missed first shot.
There are equivocal movements of people in the photographic record. By itself, no one would ever say that record shows reactions to a shot. On the other hand, there is a mountain of witness evidence that says there was no missed first shot - that JFK reacted to being struck by the first shot. You say witnesses are not reliable yet you cling to a few vague witness statements to interpret the photographic images to support a first shot miss.
This is the one thing Dan has right - the first shot struck JFK. I disagree with Dan that this occurred at z222 and that JBC was struck in the back by it. Mary Woodward and others described all the things we see in the zfilm prior to the car disappearing behind the Stemmons sign as happening BEFORE the first shot.
To be physical evidence of a shot you need something that tells you JBC’s movement could only have resulted from a bullet to the back. All the movement you see in JBC is consistent with voluntary motion reacting to hearing the sound of the first shot.
First of all, this is not physical evidence of a missed first shot.
It is physical evidence. A witness account is not. That is the point.
All evidence requires interpretation. And there are a lot of experts who disagree with your interpretation (opinion).
To be physical evidence of a shot you need something that tells you JBC’s movement could only have resulted from a bullet to the back. All the movement you see in JBC is consistent with voluntary motion reacting to hearing the sound of the first shot.
Besides, you want to use JBC’s statements of what he thought was his position at the time of the first shot to support your view. So you are relying on witness evidence that you say is not reliable.
As far as experts disagreeing with a second shot striking JBC at z271-272 (I don’t consider FBIs Robert Frazier to be a qualified medical expert) or the bullet through JFK striking JBC in the left thigh directly, I would certainly appreciate it if you could point them out. As far as I am aware no medical or ballistics expert has even considered the JFK throat to JBC thigh trajectory.
Please post some diagram that shows how it’s possible for a shot fired from TSBD 6th floor SE window thru JFKs back that exited his throat to line up with JCs thigh wound without that bullet having gone thru some part of JCs body before impacting his inner left thigh.
Her estimate was based on a review of still frames after watching the film. Her view is inconsistent with her testimony. We can see her looking back at JFK as he is grasping for his upper chest/throat well after z250. She was adamant that she did not look back after the second shot. She was never asked when she thought JBC turned right after the first shot or when she thought JBC uttered “no, no , no” which she said was before the second shot. We can see JBC saying this in the z240s.
According to Altgens his no. 6 photo at z255 was taken after the first and before any other shots. So with JBC estimating that he was hit on the second shot at z234, there is a conflict with Altgens (as well as several dozen others as to the 1…...2...3 shot pattern).
JFK wasn't clear of the foliage until z207. To state otherwise is a deliberate falsehood.I showed you the position of JFK when clear of the foliage. I showed you the map and Itek’s positions of JFK at the time of Betzner, z188 and Willis #5 (z202). Are you suggesting that Itek was deliberately spreading falsehoods?
The idea that the assassin would shoot through the oak tree is utterly ridiculous. Any shot before z207 would have been through the branches of the oak tree.We don’t know what Oswald was thinking. He would have been able to track the car while it passed under the tree branches. So he could easily have shot just as JFK was clear of the tree. It is conceivable that he could have fired before.
I showed you the position of JFK when clear of the foliage. I showed you the map and Itek’s positions of JFK at the time of Betzner, z188 and Willis #5 (z202). Are you suggesting that Itek was deliberately spreading falsehoods?
We don’t know what Oswald was thinking. He would have been able to track the car while it passed under the tree branches. So he could easily have shot just as JFK was clear of the tree. It is conceivable that he could have fired before.
I am not sure what you base z207 as the time JFK was clear of the tree branches as seen from the SN. Are you using the flawed FBI recreation?
In any event there is certainly a change in JFK’s hand and head between z188 and z198 and we have evidence that the first shot was after z186 and before z202.
Itek isn't deliberately spreading falsehoods, you are.Do you agree that JFK was clear of the tree branches when he was between the lamp post and the Thornton Freeway sign?
You can tell old Mason got all excited when he found the Itek Map, with its confirmation bias for his Looney Tunes Theory. He jumped all over it without one bit of scrutiny.
My comparison of the Itek Map with the Cutler Plat and Topo Map showed everything was off with the Itek Map. For example, they have the limousine centered in the roadway, but it was more towards the south of the center lane. If you draw a sight-line from Itek's location for Betzner through Itek's location for the lamppost, it is not where the lamppost dissects the pergola in the photograph. To Mason's perspective-addled eye, though, it would have been a match because he needs the Itek Map for his Theory.
Nothing wrong with the Secret Service footage. But a lot wrong with how you use a muddy copy and the whiteness of the limousine to claim the foliage didn't block the view from the SN.Where do you put JFK when he is clear of the oak tree? What zframe do you say that corresponds to?
Dan made a good point about JBCs own estimate of Z234 as the approx point at which JC felt the effect of a bullet hitting him.Zeon, if the first shot was around z195 how long do you think it would take for JBC to recognze it was a rifle shot, realize that an assassination was unfolding, complete his turn around to check on JFK and then turn back to be facing forward at z222? JBC could not have heard a shot at z195 and done all that in less than a 1.5 seconds. So a first shot at z195 means that JBC is beginning his turn to check JFK after he emerges from behind the sign.
It’s only 0.5 sec approx after the Z 224 abrupt forward motion of JCs right shoulder.
It’s certainly without doubt well before Z270.
There do not seem to be any other forum members who agree with Andrew that JCs reaction at Z224 was merely just from hearing a shot fired at Z195 approx.
Yet the Willis girl stopping approx Z195 and the Betzner 186 photo and Willis Z205 photo are valid reasons to consider that the 1st loud shot heard was at Z195-200 approx.
Is there any way to reconcile a Z195 loud shot with a Z224 loud shot?
"the lanes were 12 feet wide"Standard lane widths in North America are 12 feet. I think you will find that the 40' width figure includes the sidewalk and curbs. JFK appears to be in the middle of the middle lane:
Where do you get this? The lanes have equal width. On a 40' wide street with 6" wide stripes, they are 13 feet wide.
My plotting says JFK arrived opposite the lamppost at Z190. This is way closer to the Cutler and Roberdeau placements than Z186. I used the line-of-travel at the center of the street. If more to the south, he would arrive later than Z190.So show us your plotting!
As explained to you countless times, you're using a dissolved-foreground frame capture that allows the lightness of the white car to bleed through. It's a camera effect that I wonder if the human eye could duplicate. I don't think the SS intentionally wanted the foreground to dissolve; it just happened. From the SN window, Kennedy was dark-on-dark in his limousine and pictures of the foliage taken through the still cameras on Nov. 22 and during the SS reenactment show the foliage obscured the car in the Z190s.And show us why JFK was not visible between the lamp post and Thornton sign! You can't use the FBI May 1964 recreation because it uses he wrong car and with the tree looking very much fuller than it was in late fall 1963.
. . .
Yet the Willis girl stopping approx Z195 and the Betzner 186 photo and Willis Z205 photo are valid reasons to consider that the 1st loud shot heard was at Z195-200 approx.
. . .
Certainly Rosemary Willis coming to a stop around z195 is not evidence for a shot at z195-200. Because what is relevant is not when she came to a stop but when she started to slow down. Humans, girls, indeed objects in general cannot stop on a dime, unless they run into a brick wall. They have to decelerate, which takes some time. We have to take into account basic physics.It doesn't take that long to stop. Most people can go from a run to a stop in 2 or 3 steps. She may have been slowing because the President's car was pulling away and she could not longer keep up to it. Besides, she said that when she heard the first shot she stopped and looked back at the TSBD and saw pigeons flying away from the roof. She stops at z199. She was not turned looking at the TSBD until z204. She then turns sharply back toward the TSBD at z204-207. Pigeons didn't wait 5 seconds to take flight after hearing the shot.
"She was not turned looking at the TSBD until z204."
(https://images2.imgbox.com/e5/36/E6ZEDLSI_o.jpg)
Rosemary can easily see the Depository as she was slowing. Even if her eyes were looking straight out from her head, she could see with both eyes. More likely, she had her eyes turned a little in the direction of the shot, which allowed her to focus a line-of-sight on the pigeons.
"Pigeons didn't wait 5 seconds to take flight after hearing the shot."
Who said that? Must be more Masomactics.
. . .
"Pigeons didn't wait 5 seconds to take flight after hearing the shot."
. . .
Who said that? Must be more Masomactics.
It doesn't take that long to stop. Most people can go from a run to a stop in 2 or 3 steps. She may have been slowing because the President's car was pulling away and she could not longer keep up to it. Besides, she said that when she heard the first shot she stopped and looked back at the TSBD and saw pigeons flying away from the roof. She stops at z199. She was not turned looking at the TSBD until z204. She then turns sharply back toward the TSBD at z204-207. Pigeons didn't wait 5 seconds to take flight after hearing the shot.
40' width is the roadway for traffic.Your source would be helpful.
The right side of the car is about in the center of the lane. Cutler and Roberdeau have JFK a little to the left-of-center. But you know more than anyone else, so never-mind.I was using the actual measurements found in the 6 HSCA 50:
I think you meant 78.6" wide. But if you think Ford got it wrong all these years, write them.
The tire distance to the lane stripe isn't the side of the car distance. The tire is not on the same plane as the side of the car. With Z170, for example, I don't think the widest part of the left side of the left-front tire is in view and we can only see the tread, which is inward from the car side more.Ok. So tell us how far the right edge of the car is left or right of the centre of the centre lane and how far JFK is to the left of that.
I would be happy to, if you can find one.
I suggest you use a map that's somewhat accurate.
But you know more than what aerial photos can tell us, so never-mind.Your aerial view does not show Dealey Plaza as it was in 1963. For one thing, in 1963 the lamp posts were on the curb edge of the sidewalk. They are moved back to the grass side in your photo.
Re: 40' width is the roadway for traffic. Really, Andrew. This is 101 stuff. "The width of each concrete roadway through the Plaza is 40 feet." (CE 877) Houston Street (and Elm and Main where they begin eastward of Houston) are wider, at 60' width per Google Apps.That is a document prepared by the FBI and it is not clear where the FBI person who wrote that got their information. They look like asphalt roadways. I note that BBN in its HSCA report stated that Elm St. was “about 40 feet wide” which sounds like they didn’t measure it. .
Sounds like a typo. The Hum-3D model has a width of 78.6". Without a 1961 Continental in front of me, I can't tell you what that 76.8" (if accurate) measurement refers to (the width of the rear bumper only?). If someone could, please let me know.
I can't travel back in time and set up laser scanners to give you a figure in inches. Would you agree that JFK's line-of-travel was not in the center of the middle lane, as you tried to con people into believing?
I wasn't referring to the lampposts. What do you make of how far removed the rounded curb and north end of the reflecting pool are relative to the Itek Map? Are you going to continue to use that map?All I need is a surveyed map with an accurate scale. I could agree to google maps if you can establish that there was no change in road width since 1963. According to Google maps the measured width is 11.8 m (38.7 feet).
Do you agree that JFK was clear of the tree branches when he was between the lamp post and the Thornton Freeway sign?
If yes, what zframe does that correspond to? If it is not between z186 and z200, tell us what is wrong with the Itek analysis.
If no, what is wrong with the Secret Service December 1963 reenactment?
Simple questions.
Simple questions indeed.The limo in the Itek plot may have been between 1 and 9 inches too far right. Not exactly “way off”
It would have been a pleasure to take your BS: apart myself but Jerry has done that far better than I ever could.
As he points out, the position of the limo is way off in the Itek analysis which blows your reliance on it, to bolster your demented theory, out of the water.
Jerry also reveals your suspect use of a dodgy pic to make some kind of weak point. His correction to that picture (shown above) yet again destroys your demented theory.Actually, the “dodgy pic” was taken by the Secret Service and is one of the frames from the video posted on YouTube. The dodgy pics are the ones provided by Jerry and superimposed over the car in the Secret Service film. He doesn’t reveal their source.
It is also important to highlight how devious you are willing to be to as you cling on to your nonsense. You ask this question:You seem to be completely unaware that the correct placement of Betzner puts JFK farther back on Elm St. at the time of Betzner’s photo than was shown by Itek. So you need to get a better grasp of what you are criticizing.
"If it is not between z186 and z200, tell us what is wrong with the Itek analysis"
Yet in your very next Reply you post this:
"I agree with you that the placement of Betzner is wrong. (Itek has Betzner where Willis was. But they have Willis on the grass off the pavement where Croft was. It appears to me that they mistook Willis for Betzner and Croft for Willis). "
You knew all along there were fundamental problems with the Itek analysis but were willing to pretend there wasn't.
Typical you.
The bottom line is that your idea that the shooter shot through the oak tree is as preposterous as the rest of your demented theory. Your weak attempts to show JFK was clear of the oak tree by the time of your first proposed shot have been revealed as exactly that - pathetically weak.You obviously haven’t read or understood my posts. The “demented theory” is that Oswald waited for almost two seconds to fire after his target came into clear view.
The limo in the Itek plot may have been between 1 and 9 inches too far right. Not exactly “way off”
Actually, the “dodgy pic” was taken by the Secret Service and is one of the frames from the video posted on YouTube. The dodgy pics are the ones provided by Jerry and superimposed over the car in the Secret Service film. He doesn’t reveal their source.
You seem to be completely unaware that the correct placement of Betzner puts JFK farther back on Elm St. at the time of Betzner’s photo than was shown by Itek. So you need to get a better grasp of what you are criticizing.
You obviously haven’t read or understood my posts. The “demented theory” is that Oswald waited for almost two seconds to fire after his target came into clear view.
:D You really are unbelievable.[Your problem, Dan is that you think that everyone who disagrees with your theory that there were only two shots is demented or dishonest. I don't understand why you think that is a constructive way to carry on a discussion.
You ask what's wrong with the Itek analysis and when it's pointed out that the limo is in the wrong position in Itek you agree!
You then quibble over how wrong you are.
By the way, where are you getting "1 and 9 inches too far right" from?
Where on earth are you getting a lower parameter of 1 inch from?
As you well know, when I used the word "dodgy" I wasn't referring to the source of the image.
As you well know, it was a reference to your dishonest use of a blurred image to disguise the full coverage of the foliage. Jerry's graphic reveals the depth of your dishonesty.
I'm criticising you and, after dealing with you and your demented theory on "The First Shot" thread, I have a full grasp of what I am criticising.
You dishonestly tried to assert that the Itek analysis was correct while all along you knew there was fundamental problems with it that you dishonestly decided to ignore in order to prop up your demented theory.
I fully understand your posts.
That's how I can easily point out the dishonesty and deviousness in them.
Speaking of which - what is this new lie about waiting for almost two seconds about?
Who is saying the shooter waited for almost two seconds after JFK came into clear view before shooting?
Is it me?
Is that the new lie?
Your problem, Dan is that you think that everyone who disagrees with your theory that there were only two shots is demented or dishonest. I don't understand why you think that is a constructive way to carry on a discussion.
Just because you fail to understand the subtleties of an argument you want to lash out with vitriol. Since you do it all the time, we are used to it and some of us find your use of language to describe your obvious difficulty in understanding points somewhat entertaining.
My plotting says JFK arrived opposite the lamppost at Z190. This is way closer to the Cutler and Roberdeau placements than Z186. I used the line-of-travel at the center of the street. If more to the south, he would arrive later than Z190.Are you saying that Oswald would not have been able to distinguish the oak leaves (green or brown colour) from the dark blue limousine and the red haired, blue suited JFK? Are you suggesting that Oswald could not have seen JFK while passing beneath the oak tree branches?
(https://www.documentyourdaytoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/blurryforeground006.jpg)
As explained to you countless times, you're using a dissolved-foreground frame capture that allows the lightness of the white car to bleed through. It's a camera effect that I wonder if the human eye could duplicate. I don't think the SS intentionally wanted the foreground to dissolve; it just happened. From the SN window, Kennedy was dark-on-dark in his limousine and pictures of the foliage taken through the still cameras on Nov. 22 and during the SS reenactment show the foliage obscured the car in the Z190s.
A properly-focused camera and scientific placement of the automobile shows the President obscured in the Z190s. He becomes distinguishable by the mid-Z200s. Bear in mind that the Queen Mary's bright horizontal features (the cream-colored partition, jump-seats and folded canopy) that aid in sighting were not present during the assassination.
| (https://i.postimg.cc/bw6xVq7V/Linda-Willis-to-JFK-to-Stemmons-sign-z196.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/KcJ8M4BW/Linda-Willis-to-JFK-to-Stemmons-sign-z205.jpg) |
| (https://i.postimg.cc/05TgNxKK/Linda-Willis-to-JFK-to-Stemmons-sign-range-z196to205.jpg) |
(https://images2.imgbox.com/8f/f6/ORdobElJ_o.jpg)I have adjusted the position of the Limo and the followup QM to show the positions of JFK and Clint Hill at the time Betzner took his z186 photo, showing the limo width at 1/2 the width of a lane (brown line) and the left side of the limo just inside the left lane marker and with JFK's midline 1/5th of the width of the car (15 inches) inboard from the right edge of the car.
Never, at any point, have I proposed the theory that there were only two shots.Sorry about that.Your theory is that the third shot was after z313 and disappeared without a trace, despite dozens of witnesses saying that the headshot was the last. Have you ever thought that that shooter might be actually looking at his target as he was shooting?
You're thinking of Jack Nessan.
Clearly, one of your many problems is that you pay no attention to what other members.
Just because you fail to understand the subtleties of an argument you want to lash out with vitriol.
There is nothing subtle about the underhand tactics you constantly use to defend a theory that is truly demented.
Almost every single element of it is ridiculous and is more than worthy of the scorn poured upon it.
You use the evidence like a plaything and have no interest in reasoned debate - if it doesn't agree with your demented theory then it's wrong.
Sorry about that.Your theory is that the third shot was after z313 and disappeared without a trace, despite dozens of witnesses saying that the headshot was the last. Have you ever thought that that shooter might be actually looking at his target as he was shooting?
You think 3 shots, 3 hits, which was the FBI’s working scenario for several months, is demented? Do you think JBC and Nellie were demented too? That was their theory. It is also Clint Hill’s, apparently.
“You think 3 shots, 3 hits..... It is also Clint Hill’s, apparently.”Not based on his WC statement. It is based on this (beginning at 30:20 through to 35:00):
You can even butcher Clint Hill’s statement? Clint Hill can now be added to the long list of witnesses you obviously know little to nothing about. Seriously Andrew, give up this goofy theory. You seem to have no limits as to how far you will go or how tortured your interpretations will become to try and support this nonsense.
Not based on his WC statement. It is based on this (beginning at 30:20 through to 35:00):
Sorry about that.Your theory is that the third shot was after z313 and disappeared without a trace, despite dozens of witnesses saying that the headshot was the last. Have you ever thought that that shooter might be actually looking at his target as he was shooting?
You think 3 shots, 3 hits, which was the FBI’s working scenario for several months, is demented? Do you think JBC and Nellie were demented too? That was their theory. It is also Clint Hill’s, apparently.
“Not based on his WC statement.”I never claimed it as proof of anything. It was in response to Dan saying that 3 shots, 3 hits is a demented theory. I just pointed out that JBC, Nellie and, apparently,Clint Hill, agreed with such a “demented theory”. When you accused me of twisting Clint Hill’s statement, I simply pointed out that I was not relying on his statement but on what he accepts as the correct sequence of events: 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter.
Not based on anything would be more to the truth.
You know what his statements concerning the number of shots were all along and you see fit to post this tripe? This isn’t even desperate; it is just outright throwing in the towel.
Give it up Andrew. This theory, as has been shown repeatedly over many years, is not even theoretically possible let alone a possibility. When you have to resort to claiming this kind of proof it is time to re-examine it all.
I never claimed it as proof of anything. It was in response to Dan saying that 3 shots, 3 hits is a demented theory. I just pointed out that JBC, Nellie and, apparently,Clint Hill, agreed with such a “demented theory”. When you accused me of twisting Clint Hill’s statement, I simply pointed out that I was not relying on his statement but on what he accepts as the correct sequence of events: 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter.
You, on the other hand, think that anyone who thinks there were 3 shots, let alone 3 hits, is twisting the evidence..
I just looked at Z160 frame and , I think I see THREE SS agents ( one of whom is Clint Hill) looking towards their LEFT!!
So that kind of changes my previously opinion that ALL SS agents in the follow up car kept looking “forward” and or to the right side of the JFK limo thru the sequence from Z133 to Z207.
Also I noticed at Z234 -z238 that the agent behind Clint Hill seems not to have reacted yet either to the Z 224 shot.
But Clint is looks like he is looking at JFK at Z234, so he has to have seen the Z224 reaction, yet he does not HEAR that shot?
I can’t really see any of the other SS agents from Z234 thru Z313 so other than Altgens Z255 photo , it’s uncertain if any of them are recorded in other film or photo looking back to TSBD prior to Z 255.
It was in response to Dan saying that 3 shots, 3 hits is a demented theory.I maintain 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter. First shot hits JFK in the neck, Second hits JBC in the back, Third shot hits JFK in the head. That’s it. You think my view is some kind of demented theory-your words not mine. If you are now saying that 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter is not an unreasonable scenario, I would expect you to withdraw your characterization of it as being demented.
This is an out-and-out lie and I will be looking for you to retract it.
You can think that JFK is not reacting at z224 and that his hands just happened to be in that position, but many reasonable people disagree and have concluded that it his reaction to the first shot started well before z224. I would suggest that the HSCA photographic panel’s conclusion that JFK began reaction to a severe external stimulus before he passed behind the sign is more likely to be correct than your view that he did not react until after z225.
Clint is looks like he is looking at JFK at Z234, so he has to have seen the Z224 reaction,
There was no reaction at z224.
z234 is about half a second later. What reaction are you expecting in half a second?
I never claimed it as proof of anything. It was in response to Dan saying that 3 shots, 3 hits is a demented theory. I just pointed out that JBC, Nellie and, apparently,Clint Hill, agreed with such a “demented theory”. When you accused me of twisting Clint Hill’s statement, I simply pointed out that I was not relying on his statement but on what he accepts as the correct sequence of events: 3 shots, 3 hits, one shooter.
You, on the other hand, think that anyone who thinks there were 3 shots, let alone 3 hits, is twisting the evidence..
This whole post is just beyond the pale, once again.Clint Hill has always maintained that he heard only two shots and I never said otherwise. I just said that he agrees there were three shots, three hits, one shooter. In the Youtube video, if you were to watch it, confirms that. He admits in the video that he heard only two shots but accepts there was a shot after the first shot and before the head shot, both of which he heard, while he was running between cars. He accepts this because other agents told him there was such a shot.
Seriously, “Three shots and three hits”, where is the evidence other than in fantasy land? In fact where is there any piece of information backing this disjointed theory.
You did lump Clint Hill in this nonsense. What you left out in this huge BS story is you admit he stated there was a different number of shots in his earlier WC testimony. You remember “not based on WC Testimony”.
Nellie referenced JBC was hit by the first shot and was confirmed by Jackie referencing JBC’s utterances after being struck by the bullet.Now you are in fantasy land. Nellie never said JBC was hit by in the back by the first shot. She said he uttered "oh, no, no" after the first shot and before he was hit in the back by the second.
JBC only ever stated he actually heard two shots.Yes. But he certainly said he was sure he was not hit in the back by the first because of the perceptible time difference between hearing the first shot, turning to see JFK and then feeling the forceful impact of the bullet that hit him in the back.
The biggest obstacle to this nonsense is the fact there was only evidence of two bullets and two shells having been fired. It is easy to tell the people who know about firearms and those who do not by their belief in SBT. Based on the orientation of JBC and JFK, only a complete idiot would make the claim it was not possible.Whether it is possible depends on when it occurred. The issue is not whether it would be possible at some point but whether there is evidence to support it.
despite dozens of witnesses saying that the headshot was the last.For starters, here are 1.33 dozens who described JFK being hit on the last shot heard: JBC, Nellie, Greer, Dave Powers, Curtis Bishop, Ken O’Donnell, George Hickey, Paul Landis, Clint Hill, James Altgens, Mary Woodward, J. W. Foster (WC testimony), Glen Bennett, William MacIntyre, Gayle Newman, William Newman.
I won't call this a bare-faced lie as I've underestimated how confused you seem to be.
For factual accuracy you are stating that there are at least 24 witnesses who say the headshot was the last shot.
Dozens?
There's no need to go out of your way to dig out all the witnesses who make up this comprehensive list.
Instead, just name ten witnesses who state the headshot was the last shot.
You think 3 shots, 3 hits, which was the FBI’s working scenario for several months, is demented?All of what you say is demented is the only three shot, three hit, one shooter scenario that is possible on the evidence. So you are actually saying that such a theory is demented. You are saying that Clint Hill and Gerald Blaine are promoting a demented theory.
No.
I think your demented theory is demented.
Shooting through the oak tree
Having the bullet ricochet at least 40 degrees off Connally's ribs
Passing through Connally when he was turned side on to the SN window
The bullet smashing his wrist-bone without moving his hand
And this is only the tip of the iceberg.
The staggering amount of evidence and testimony you simply ignore to try to make it work, the twisted interpretations you apply to the evidence, the constant evasiveness and deception...
Clint Hill has always maintained that he heard only two shots and I never said otherwise. I just said that he agrees there were three shots, three hits, one shooter. In the Youtube video, if you were to watch it, confirms that. He admits in the video that he heard only two shots but accepts there was a shot after the first shot and before the head shot, both of which he heard, while he was running between cars. He accepts this because other agents told him there was such a shot.
Now you are in fantasy land. Nellie never said JBC was hit by in the back by the first shot. She said he uttered "oh, no, no" after the first shot and before he was hit in the back by the second.
Yes. But he certainly said he was sure he was not hit in the back by the first because of the perceptible time difference between hearing the first shot, turning to see JFK and then feeling the forceful impact of the bullet that hit him in the back.
Whether it is possible depends on when it occurred. The issue is not whether it would be possible at some point but whether there is evidence to support it.
[b]You, on the other hand, think that anyone who thinks there were 3 shots, let alone 3 hits is twisting the evidence.
“he heard only two shots but accepts there was a shot after the first shot and before the head shot, both of which he heard, while he was running between cars. He accepts this because other agents told him there was such a shot.”Again, you have to read the posts. I simply pointed out that Clint Hill accepts the 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter theory. I didn't say he gave evidence of it. He clearly didn't because he always said he heard only two shots. He accepts the "theory" that the first shot struck JFK and he reacted immediately to it (his own observation), that he jumped off the running board and ran to the President's car and during this run another shot was fired that struck Governor Connally (which he did not hear but believes because fellow agents told him), that as he was about to reach the President's car a third shot was fired and struck JFK in the head. He believes that all shots were fired by the same gun although his only evidence is that the shots appears to come from his right rear.
He was told there was another shot and that is good enough for you. Somehow you can torture and twist that into confirming this goofy theory? In effect changing Clint’s testimony to fit this bizarre theory.
He went deaf while running. That is your assessment of years of statement to the contrary? That can happen?His mind was focused on getting to the President's car. He had to run faster than both cars to do that. I expect there was a surge of adrenalin in his body. He also commented that the noise of the car engine as he was right beside it may have affected his hearing.
That erases years of statements there were only two shots. Is their a statement that actually means something to you because you can stumble around on the internet until you find a statement that is more to your liking?I did not say it was evidence of anything except Hill's present agreement with the 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter scenario.
But Jackie and Nellie confirm that was the first shot.You need to exit lala land first. Then we can talk about the evidence.
Again, you have to read the posts. I simply pointed out that Clint Hill accepts the 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter theory. I didn't say he gave evidence of it. He clearly didn't because he always said he heard only two shots. He accepts the "theory" that the first shot struck JFK and he reacted immediately to it (his own observation), that he jumped off the running board and ran to the President's car and during this run another shot was fired that struck Governor Connally (which he did not hear but believes because fellow agents told him), that as he was about to reach the President's car a third shot was fired and struck JFK in the head. He believes that all shots were fired by the same gun although his only evidence is that the shots appears to come from his right rear.
His mind was focused on getting to the President's car. He had to run faster than both cars to do that. I expect there was a surge of adrenalin in his body. He also commented that the noise of the car engine as he was right beside it may have affected his hearing.
I did not say it was evidence of anything except Hill's present agreement with the 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter scenario.
You need to exit lala land first. Then we can talk about the evidence.
I have never said JBC was wounded before Hill left the running board. I said:
Clint Hill could not hear while running alongside the car you say. Turns out there was nothing to hear by your own admission JBC is wounded before Hill ever leaves the running board.
That “he reacted immediately and during the run another shot was fired that struck Governor Connally.” Also “His mind was focused on getting to the President's car. He had to run faster than both cars to do that. I expect there was a surge of adrenalin in his body. He also commented that the noise of the car engine as he was right beside it may have affected his hearing.”Not if JBC and Nellie were correct that he was hit on the second shot. According to Altgens there was only one shot to that point. And not according to SA Hickey who is still facing backward at z255. He said he turned forward and was looking at JFK at the time of the second shot. Greer also said he turned in response to, and almost simultaneously with, the second shot. He turns rearward for the first time between about z278 and z283.
"that he jumped off the running board and ran to the President's car and during this run another shot was fired that struck Governor Connally (which he did not hear but believes because fellow agents told him),"
One problem with all your drivel, Hill is still standing on the running board looking at JFK in Z255 in the Altgens photo. JBC is already reacting to having been shot two seconds earlier.
You never answered this part of the earlier post. Maybe take another shot at it. I would hate for you to miss your time to shine.No. I can't prove it to your satisfaction. You think 132 witnesses (as compiled for the HSCA who reported hearing exactly three shots) and this distribution of witness recollections as to the number of shots means there were only two shots:
“Yes. But he certainly said he was sure he was not hit in the back by the first because of the perceptible time difference between hearing the first shot, turning to see JFK and then feeling the forceful impact of the bullet that hit him in the back”
But Jackie and Nellie confirm that it was the first shot. According to you, it was OK for other people to tell Clint Hill that he was wrong, but now according to you JBC is somehow different? Jackie was not running anywhere, and she never heard a third shot. As did a very large number of other eyewitnesses. What is your excuse for them? They went deaf because they were standing or sitting there? What about all the eyewitnesses who place the second shot as the head shot. They went deaf and then regained their hearing for a third shot as the car accelerated?
This disjointed theory requires three shots and evidence of them. Can you prove three shots? Where is the evidence of three shots and three hits? Don't be shy, post it all. Torture all the witness statements that you want but when you are done how about provide the physical evidence that proves it. You have been at this a long time you must have a treasure trove of evidence to be posted. Can't wait to see it.
Mason; I have never said JBC was wounded before Hill left the running board. I said:
Mason;"He accepts the "theory" that the first shot struck JFK and he reacted immediately to it (his own observation), that he jumped off the running board and ran to the President's car and during this run another shot was fired that struck Governor Connally (which he did not hear but believes because fellow agents told him), that as he was about to reach the President's car a third shot was fired and struck JFK in the head. "
The statement "that the first shot struck JFK and he reacted immediately to it" refers to JFK reacting immediately to it. It was not only Clint Hill who observed this. Every witness who was watching JFK at the time, with the possible exception of Mary Woodward, noticed this. Woodward just said he turned forward at the moment of the first "horrible ear-shattering noise". [Note: at that distance 200 feet from the SN, the sound arrives about 100 ms after the bullet. It could be that the turn was in response to the bullet.]
Not if JBC and Nellie were correct that he was hit on the second shot. According to Altgens there was only one shot to that point. And not according to SA Hickey who is still facing backward at z255. He said he turned forward and was looking at JFK at the time of the second shot. Greer also said he turned in response to, and almost simultaneously with, the second shot. He turns rearward for the first time between about z278 and z283.
No. I can't prove it to your satisfaction. You think 132 witnesses (as compiled for the HSCA who reported hearing exactly three shots) and this distribution of witness recollections as to the number of shots means there were only two shots:
(https://i.postimg.cc/d3psZ1yH/Statistical-corroboration-no-shots.jpg)
We can see him running between cars in the Nix film. It takes him quite a while because the cars are moving and he has to outrun them. We cannot see him leave the running board in the zfilm. It is quite consistent with the known evidence that he left the QM within a second after Altgens #6, which was taken at z254-255.
Your post is directly tied to Hill running and nothing else. Unfortunately for this goofy theory , Clint Hill does not leave the running board and start running to JFK’s limousine until Z310.
No, let me help you. Woodward stated “he faced forward again and suddenly there was a horrible, ear-shattering noise coming from behind us”I said “with possible exception of Woodward. It depends on the time difference between the forward turn and the muzzle blast reaching her ears. The forward turn just before she heard the sound of the shot could be from the impact of the bullet if it was 100ms before the sound reached her. That was the point of my Note: at that distance 200 feet from the SN, the sound arrives about 100 ms after the bullet. It could be that the turn was in response to the bullet.
Good for you Andrew, it has taken 10+ years but you finally clued in and accepted the fact that all the eyewitnesses state JFK reacted to the first shot. Seriously, it has taken you a long time to grasp things. I am glad you finally did. This realization on your part ends the goofy early Z190 shot?You must be confusing me with someone else. I have always maintained that JFK reacted to the first shot. His reaction is gradual. It starts after the impact between z186 (Betzner) and z202 (Phil Willis) with the gradual realization that something is wrong. Jackie turns her head directly toward him as they go behind the sign -watch her hat turn. The change of facial expression and movement of hands is complete when he is seen again in z223 and z224. The reaction then becomes panic-like at z226, perhaps when he tries to take a breath and he experiences difficulty breathing.
Mary Woodward's correct quote explains that JFK had turned forward before the first shot. He did not turn forward until Z207. Picking her as a witness to promote a shot at Z190 seems strange. Her statement does not confirm your theory it dismisses it.He turns within a few frames after z193 which is hard to see because of the blur but is apparent by z198.
We can see him running between cars in the Nix film. It takes him quite a while because the cars are moving and he has to outrun them. We cannot see him leave the running board in the zfilm. It is quite consistent with the known evidence that he left the QM within a second after Altgens #6, which was taken at z254-255.I said “with possible exception of Woodward. It depends on the time difference between the forward turn and the muzzle blast reaching her ears. The forward turn just before she heard the sound of the shot could be from the impact of the bullet if it was 100ms before the sound reached her. That was the point of my Note: at that distance 200 feet from the SN, the sound arrives about 100 ms after the bullet. It could be that the turn was in response to the bullet.
You must be confusing me with someone else. I have always maintained that JFK reacted to the first shot. His reaction is gradual. It starts after the impact between z186 (Betzner) and z202 (Phil Willis) with the gradual realization that something is wrong. Jackie turns her head directly toward him as they go behind the sign -watch her hat turn. The change of facial expression and movement of hands is complete when he is seen again in z223 and z224. The reaction then becomes panic-like at z226, perhaps when he tries to take a breath and he experiences difficulty breathing.He turns within a few frames after z193 which is hard to see because of the blur but is apparent by z198.Quote
We can see him running between cars in the Nix film. It takes him quite a while because the cars are moving and he has to outrun them. We cannot see him leave the running board in the zfilm. It is quite consistent with the known evidence that he left the QM within a second after Altgens #6, which was taken at z254-255.
"Quite awhile," are you joking, No, Hill only takes 4 to 5 steps and he then grabs the back of the Limo. He does not exit the SS car until around Z310. Sorry but it is the harsh reality of it. Maybe before you came up with this odd theory with Hill you should have done a little more homework.
I said “with possible exception of Woodward. It depends on the time difference between the forward turn and the muzzle blast reaching her ears. The forward turn just before she heard the sound of the shot could be from the impact of the bullet if it was 100ms before the sound reached her. That was the point of my Note: at that distance 200 feet from the SN, the sound arrives about 100 ms after the bullet. It could be that the turn was in response to the bullet.
Woodward rained on your parade. She is quoted properly and give the pseudo math analysis a rest.
You must be confusing me with someone else. I have always maintained that JFK reacted to the first shot. His reaction is gradual. It starts after the impact between z186 (Betzner) and z202 (Phil Willis) with the gradual realization that something is wrong. Jackie turns her head directly toward him as they go behind the sign -watch her hat turn. The change of facial expression and movement of hands is complete when he is seen again in z223 and z224. The reaction then becomes panic-like at z226, perhaps when he tries to take a breath and he experiences difficulty breathing.
You have never maintained anything or you would not have generated so many different scenarios. You drift with every breeze.
He turns within a few frames after z193 which is hard to see because of the blur but is apparent by z198.
No, not blurry at all. At Z206 he is still looking left and waving to the crowd. At Z207 he looks straight ahead and goes behind the sign.
We can see him running between cars in the Nix film. It takes him quite a while because the cars are moving and he has to outrun them. We cannot see him leave the running board in the zfilm. It is quite consistent with the known evidence that he left the QM within a second after Altgens #6, which was taken at z254-255."quite a while" is 3-4 seconds. He has to step off the running board and get his feet running to keep pace with the QM and then sprint the 15 feet from the running board position to the back of the limo. But the cars are moving at about 12 mph or 18 feet per second. From z280 or so appear to slow down to about 12 feet per second from z280 to z320.
"Quite awhile," are you joking, No, Hill only takes 4 to 5 steps and he then grabs the back of the Limo. He does not exit the SS car until around Z310. Sorry but it is the harsh reality of it. Maybe before you came up with this odd theory with Hill you should have done a little more homework.
He turns within a few frames after z193 which is hard to see because of the blur but is apparent by z198.The blur is between z193 and z198. JFK in z198 has already turned quite a bit forward. You can see his right ear and can no longer see the left side of his face:
No, not blurry at all. At Z206 he is still looking left and waving to the crowd. At Z207 he looks straight ahead and goes behind the sign.
Where in that Z195-z207 sequence of frames does JFK get hit in Andrews scenario?
Should there not be some forward motion of the body if hit in the back by a 2000ft/sec 6.5 mm bullet?
Where in that Z195-z207 sequence of frames does JFK get hit in Andrews scenario?
Should there not be some forward motion of the body if hit in the back by a 2000ft/sec 6.5 mm bullet?
I’m not certain though depending the path of the bullet thru the back and exiting the throat without striking any bone, perhaps there was less transfer of momentum than if the bullet had hit some bone and gone they the cavity.
Wow which one of the 5 theories to choose from 🤔
1. WC standard : 3 shots from the solitary gunman ( Oswald )using the MC rifle from the SE window 6th floor TSBD , 1st shot Z160-170 was a missed shot fired (before Betzner 186 photo) which shot was not heard by Betzner or Willis 2nd shot fired approx at Z224 , the SBT shot, a bullet that went thru 2 bodies , thru flesh and between ribs and thru wrist bone , and was CE 399 , a bullet so marginally deformed that it seems to defy physics.
2. WC (Jack variation)There were only 2 shots fired from a solitary gunman (Oswald?) using the MC rifle, 1st one at Z224 , and 2nd one at Z313 and that vast majority of witness that heard 3 shots must be mistaken.
3. WC (Andrew variation) : 3 shots fired from the solitary gunman (Oswald )using the MC rifle , 1st shot at Z195-200 (thru at least some minimal tree foliage) that hit only JFK. 2nd shot somewhere around Z270 that hit only JC. 3rd shot at Z313 that hit JFK.
4. WC/CT (Dan version) 3 shots fired by solitary gunman ( NOT Oswald however) , from TSBD, using the MC rifle? 1st shot at Z224 hits JFK and JC as per the SBT. 2nd shot is Z313. 3rd shot is about 2 secs later which was just a final unaimed shot ( which hit the curb near Tague?)
5. CT (Zeon version) : 4 shots total were fired. 3 loud shots from one gunman in TSBD using a semi auto rifle , 1 suppressed shot by a 2nd gunman in Daltex bldg.
1st shot at Z160-170 was the suppressed shot by Daltex gunman that missed just past JFKs right shoulder. Only a few persons heard this shot . Willis girl slowed and then stopped by Z195 in response to hearing that shot. Amos Euins may have heard that shot also, explaining why he heard 4 shots.
2nd (1st loud shot heard ) was at Z224 that hit both JFK and JC . That bullet was a pointed bullet found on the stretcher, which had to be replaced with CE399.
3rd (2nd loud shot heard ) shot was between Z224 and Z313 at about Z270 that went slightly high and hit the curb near Tague. That bullet left trace metallic element in the curb that were different than an MC bullet
4th (3rd loud shot heard) was 313
Note: the 3 loud shots were fired in 4.8 seconds with the last 2 just slightly closer together , which matches Harold Normans boom click click 3 shot spacing which he completes in about 4 secs ( in video recordings) The “click click” could be sound of the shells bouncing on the floor.
In Andrew's scenario JFK is shot at z193, through the oak tree, and he carries on smiling and waving.Yes it is. At worst Oswald fired the first shot when JFK was clear of all parts ofc the tree except a few outer leaves that really did not hide much. And he reacted immediately but gradually, by turning forward moving left, then bringing his hands to his upper chest and then slipping down and leaning to the left with his head down and facing to the left. All of this starts at z193.
This is not a joke or an exaggeration.
It must also be noted that, in Andrew's demented theory, at the same time JBC is hit in the leg by a bullet that hits the bone in his leg....and he doesn't notice it.What is unusual about someone being shot in the leg and not feeling it? It is actually very common for people to be shot and not feel anything immediately.
According to Andrew's demented theory JFK doesn't realise he's been shot and neither does JBC.
Yes it is. At worst Oswald fired the first shot when JFK was clear of all parts ofc the tree except a few outer leaves that really did not hide much. And he reacted immediately but gradually, by turning forward moving left, then bringing his hands to his upper chest and then slipping down and leaning to the left with his head down and facing to the left. All of this starts at z193.
What is unusual about someone being shot in the leg and not feeling it? It is actually very common for people to be shot and not feel anything immediately.
At worst Oswald fired the first shot when JFK was clear of all parts of the tree except a few outer leaves that really did not hide much.Because he knew he may need to make more than one shot before the car had moved out of accurate shooting range and he shot as soon as he felt he had a clear view of the President. At that point there were only a few leaves which did not prevent an accurate shot. I am not saying he shot when he couldn’t see JFK. I am saying that is the worst case shooting before JFK was not completely clear. And I am saying he was clear of the oak tree by z193 when the first shot occurred.
:D
So you finally admit that you have the assassin shooting through the oak tree!!
Why would he do that when the limo was about to enter a stretch of open road?
And he reacted immediately but gradually, by turning forward moving left,Is that difficult to understand? He reacted within a few frames by turning forward with a blank look, then leaned to his left and brought both hands to his upper chest, then he slipped down with a choking expression, then he leaned forward with his head facing downward.
Immediately but gradually?? :D :D
Please explain to everyone what "turning forward moving left" means.His head turns from facing right to facing forward. Then his body moved leaned to the left exposing JBC to view from the rear as observed by Dave Powers.
Because he knew he may need to make more than one shot before the car had moved out of accurate shooting range and he shot as soon as he felt he had a clear view of the President. At that point there were only a few leaves which did not prevent an accurate shot. I am not saying he shot when he couldn’t see JFK. I am saying that is the worst case shooting before JFK was not completely clear. And I am saying he was clear of the oak tree by z193 when the first shot occurred.
While we are asking such questions, why would the shooter wait over a full second and a half to shoot after JFK was in the clear? And why would the shooter fire a shot after the head shot? Why would the shooter do that after seeing an obvious fatal shot?
In Andrews scenario, of a z193 6.5 mm bullet at 2000ft/sec having gone thru only a minimal amount of JFKs body and throat with only a minimal transfer of momentum, thus the velocity reduced only by 500ft/sec, then should not that bullet now traveling at least at 1500 ft/ sec and going directly into JCs left thigh muscle have been buried pretty deeply in his leg?
In the WC scenario, the reason for the bullet supposedly having fallen out of JCs left leg was because that bullet lost much more velocity from having gone thru more of JCs torso, muscle and passing between 2 rib bones AND also from going thru JCs wrist bone. Thus the thigh wound was very shallow.
So how does Andrew account for JCs thigh wound being so shallow if the Z 193 bullet after exiting JFK still had a velocity of 1500 ft/ sec when it hit JCs left leg?
The usual demented nonsense.Maybe we can settle this debate by reference to the lane markers. In this frame from the 1963 Secret Service film, JFK's back is even with the end of the lane markers:
JFK is covered by leaves but clear of the tree??!!
| (https://i.postimg.cc/289MSfvF/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/m2hVVXpm/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends-telescopic-sight.jpg) |
This is the view the assassin was staring at "transfixed":I would have to say it would be well before this position. JFK has been in the clear for almost a car length, say 15-20 feet. Why would the shooter wait at all? I would suggest that, since JFK was visible while passing under the outer oak tree branches, the shooter could easily have pulled the trigger as soon as he was clear and did not have to wait at all. He could have fired even a bit earlier than that while JFK was here but still quite visible:
(https://i.postimg.cc/PJwrkCc9/View-from-SN-2.png) (https://postimages.org/)
Imagine you are the assassin visualising the kill zone. Where, in the above picture, is the perfect place to take the kill shot?
In Andrews scenario, of a z193 6.5 mm bullet at 2000ft/sec having gone thru only a minimal amount of JFKs body and throat with only a minimal transfer of momentum, thus the velocity reduced only by 500ft/sec, then should not that bullet now traveling at least at 1500 ft/ sec and going directly into JCs left thigh muscle have been buried pretty deeply in his leg?According to Larry SPersonivan, at 1000 fps to 1400 fps the bullet will start deforming on impact with bone (SPersonivan 3H396). The 1400 fps is if it hits nose-first. The 1000 fps is if it hits sideways. It deformed just on the side of the butt end in only one place. Let's say that indicates that it hit bone at 1000 to 1200 fps.
In the WC scenario, the reason for the bullet supposedly having fallen out of JCs left leg was because that bullet lost much more velocity from having gone thru more of JCs torso, muscle and passing between 2 rib bones AND also from going thru JCs wrist bone. Thus the thigh wound was very shallow.
So how does Andrew account for JCs thigh wound being so shallow if the Z 193 bullet after exiting JFK still had a velocity of 1500 ft/ sec when it hit JCs left leg?
Maybe we can settle this debate by reference to the lane markers. In this frame from the 1963 Secret Service film, JFK's back is even with the end of the lane markers:Here is CE882, the scale map of Dealey Plaza showing the lane markers on which I have shown the position of JFK when he is in the position of being even with the ends of the lane markers:
(https://i.postimg.cc/289MSfvF/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends.jpg) (https://i.postimg.cc/m2hVVXpm/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends-telescopic-sight.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/4yymcFbc/JFK-position-when-aligned-with-lane-marker-ends.jpg)
On this, I have shown the sight line from Zapruder to JFK and extended it to the right where it intersects with the very end of the curved concrete wall around the end of the reflecting pool.
So to determine the zframe that this corresponds to, we simply look for the frame in which JFK aligns with the end of that concrete wall. It appears to be z196:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Kc19xctZ/zf044.png)
I would have to say it would be well before this position. JFK has been in the clear for almost a car length, say 15-20 feet. Why would the shooter wait at all? I would suggest that, since JFK was visible while passing under the outer oak tree branches, the shooter could easily have pulled the trigger as soon as he was clear and did not have to wait at all. He could have fired even a bit earlier than that while JFK was here but still quite visible:
(https://i.postimg.cc/15XhwZxX/Clear-earlier-than-even-with-lane-line-ends-telescopic-sight.jpg)
Maybe we can settle this debate by reference to the lane markersIf you are right, you should be able to show why JFK was not in the clear where the SS film shows him to be in the clear OR why that position is not z196. You refuse to look behind the FBI reconstruction. It was not my only ITek that didn’t agree with it. Anyone who has looked at it has been unable to explain their findings. We can see from the SS film with a better car with seats similar to those in the SX100 that JFK would have been in clear view from the SN well before z207. To suggest that he waited until z222 is just speculation.
Rest assured, this debate was settled quite some time ago.
It was settled the day the FBI did it's reconstruction.
At z193 JFK is still passing beneath the oak tree from the SN PoV.
It doesn't matter if you don't accept that. It really doesn't matter at all.
It doesn't matter that all your arguments have been destroyed over and over again.
It doesn't matter how deep in denial you are.
None of it matters.
@Andrew; Is your Z193 hit on JC include the bullet going thru his wrist bone before it hits JCs leg?Here is the trajectory from the SN through JFK at z195:
If so that could slow the bullet down a little more but I’m not sure if it would be enough velocity lost to cause only a shallow wound in JCs leg.
The WC scenario has the bullet being slowed down to about 900 ft/sec when it exited more JCs body and then slowed even more because it was tumbling when it hit JCs wrist and supposedly entered the wrist backwards , before it exited thru the hand and into JCs leg.
So I’m uncertain if you were suggesting that the bullet exiting JFK s throat started tumbling at that point and or if it hit JCs wrist bone backwards similar to the WC theory.
Maybe we can settle this debate by reference to the lane markers. In this frame from the 1963 Secret Service film, JFK's back is even with the end of the lane markers:Here is CE882, the scale map of Dealey Plaza showing the lane markers on which I have shown the position of JFK when he is in the position of being even with the ends of the lane markers:
(https://i.postimg.cc/289MSfvF/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends.jpg) (https://i.postimg.cc/m2hVVXpm/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends-telescopic-sight.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/4yymcFbc/JFK-position-when-aligned-with-lane-marker-ends.jpg)
On this, I have shown the sight line from Zapruder to JFK and extended it to the right where it intersects with the very end of the curved concrete wall around the end of the reflecting pool.
So to determine the zframe that this corresponds to, we simply look for the frame in which JFK aligns with the end of that concrete wall. It appears to be z196:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Kc19xctZ/zf044.png)
I would have to say it would be well before this position. JFK has been in the clear for almost a car length, say 15-20 feet. Why would the shooter wait at all? I would suggest that, since JFK was visible while passing under the outer oak tree branches, the shooter could easily have pulled the trigger as soon as he was clear and did not have to wait at all. He could have fired even a bit earlier than that while JFK was here but still quite visible:
(https://i.postimg.cc/15XhwZxX/Clear-earlier-than-even-with-lane-line-ends-telescopic-sight.jpg)
| (https://i.postimg.cc/289MSfvF/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/m2hVVXpm/Clear-even-with-lane-line-ends-telescopic-sight.jpg) |
You are trying to convince everyone that the image on the right is a close up of the image on the left - that is how you want to prove that JFK is clear of the oak tree when his back is level with the end of the lane markers.Of course they are different photographs! Did you understand where they are from? The Secret Service did several different takes with a camera and several through the telescopic sight. How are they going to do them both at the same time? View the film yourself:
BUT THEY ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PHOTOGRAPHS.
Of course they are different photographs! Did you understand where they are from? The Secret Service did several different takes with a camera and several through the telescopic sight. How are they going to do them both at the same time? View the film yourself:
What I did was provide you frames from the film showing the car and JFK in the same position relative to the tree. I didn't realize that you needed that explained.
BS:Dan, this seems to be your modus operandi. When you misunderstand something you accuse others of trying to deceive you. When your error is revealed you feel you have to double down on on the accusation that you have been deliberately deceived rather than admitting the error. It appears to be a habit you have.
You were caught out being deceitful and, as usual, are going to lie your way out of it.
Explain how JFK's back is in line with the end of the lane markers.
Explain how the two images you posted are of the same moment.
Dan, this seems to be your modus operandi. When you misunderstand something you accuse others of trying to deceive you. When your error is revealed you feel you have to double down on on the accusation that you have been deliberately deceived rather than admitting the error. It appears to be a habit you have.
What have I misunderstood and, if this is something I always do, please point out another example.Ok. When you accused me of deliberate deception by using the Itek map because it contained errors. When I showed you the errors were not on the map but on their placement of Betzner and Willis and not on the position of JFK, which was the whole point of using it, you doubled down and repeated your little rant - several times now. It still appears that you do not understand the tests with Betzner and Willis in their correct locations that show the Itek map as being accurate. But I am not asking you to change. I kind of enjoy seeing you go apoplectic into your misguided little rants.
While Andrew tries to find his way out of the maze of lies and and deceit he has built for himself I would again invite those who haven't put their opinions forward to hazard an opinion as to when John Connally is shot in the clip below:All I see is JBC voluntarily turning around in an attempt to see JFK after hearing a rifle shot and fearing an assassination and uttering “oh, no, no” as Nellie said he did before the second shot. Why did you cut it off at z250? After all, Altgens was very clear that his photo at z255 was before the second shot. Here is the entire sequence from z222 to z312:
(https://i.postimg.cc/446tFwtR/JFK-JBC-react-2.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Use the frame count provided in the clip to pinpoint your best guess.
It would be good to hear from those who usually stay quiet on such matters.
While Andrew tries to find his way out of the maze of lies and and deceit he has built for himself I would again invite those who haven't put their opinions forward to hazard an opinion as to when John Connally is shot in the clip below:
(https://i.postimg.cc/446tFwtR/JFK-JBC-react-2.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Use the frame count provided in the clip to pinpoint your best guess.
It would be good to hear from those who usually stay quiet on such matters.
The Zapruder Film and other assassination films have a perspective issue regarding the seated position of JFK with his (R) Arm resting on top of the Passenger side of the Limo vs Gov. Connally's Jump Seat location inside the JFK Limo. The absolutely best way to view the alignment of JFK vs Connally is at Love Field when both men got inside the Limo, sat down, and we then view them from the rear as the JFK Limo pulls away from Love Field. There is B/W Film Footage of this which puts the SBT to bed. It is Images such as this which provided the foundation for Knott Lab Laser SCIENCE declaring that the SBT, "Is Impossible". I have been around this Forum for years and NEVER seen this B/W Love Field footage posted here.
Better you post those images than make others guess. That's about it for "JFK Limo pulls away from Love Field" back-view visuals.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/DPowers.jpg)
Did you mean the Dave Powers film? (With Connally inboard relative to Kennedy).
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/snapshot_22.jpg)
This one shows Connally becomes even more inboard when he tries to turn around.
There are some here who say my presentations inform and educate.
Making their presence known? You need better than your clairvoyance to make images known.
Blockbuster? LOL.
And where, exactly, do you see him turn around like that before z240?
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/snapshot_22.jpg)
This one shows Connally becomes even more inboard when he tries to turn around.
And guess what! JBC said that he had just tried to turn around when he felt the impact of the bullet that hit him in the back. Yet people still want to pretend that JBC was not inboard. Go figure!
And where, exactly, do you see him turn around like that before z240?
We will just ignore the fact that Nellie said she looked at JFK with his hands to his neck after the first shot and before the second when JBC was turned around like that:
(https://i.postimg.cc/4xWHvdsj/zf099.png)
And I guess it is also ok to ignore the many witnesses who said JFK stopped smiling and waving and quickly reacted to the first shot, even though a second shot-SBT means he kept smiling and waving for 3 seconds afterward, which not a single witness reported seeing.
It is perfectly ok to use photos from Love Field to show their relative positions to bolster the SBT argument. Here is an even better one:
(https://i.postimg.cc/zGB9BtBK/robinson1-jbc-inboard.jpg)
So it should also be ok to use photos like this one on Main Street that show JBC in the middle of his seat:
(https://i.postimg.cc/j5MJcSHD/limo-Main-St.jpg)
and very similar to their positions seen a second before JFK is seen reacting to the neck shot:
(https://i.postimg.cc/CKXzj8xj/JFK-193-to-198.gif)
Go figure!
Connally doesn't to that extent. But it shows that when he did lean, he tended to go more inboard. Try it with human models without grooming them for a bias result.That is because he is not trying to turn around to look back at JFK. His gaze is consistent with a turn toward Mary Woodward and her group who had just shouted to the President to get his attention.
(https://i.postimg.cc/g0cYmfG8/AM-model3-D-z195.jpg)
You have Connally doing the opposite, falling towards the car door when he tries to turn.
Time to turn over that record. Nearly all those "smiling and waving" witnesses were behind JFK. Mary Woodward could see the President and she said he was uninjured by it, and merely looked around. Both Kennedys (plus the Connallys, Agents Ready and Hill, the woman walking near the pool in the "Closer Look" animation) turn their heads, some quite sharply, prior to your Z193 fantasy first shot.Most of the JFK leaned/slumped to the left witnesses (Dave Powers, Sam Kinney, Clint Hill, George Hickey, etc) were also behind JFK. I don't see JFK smiling AND leaning left or slumping at any time.
Who do you think you are to accuse people of being OK with ignoring witnesses?Sorry. I must have thought I was Jerry "the FBI were bats_it crazy for the first 5 months" Organ. But I do apologize to you. You don't ignore them. You just think they didn't see what they said they saw so you don't include them in your analysis. I suppose, there is a difference between that and ignoring their evidence entirely.
What Andrew says someone is "OK with ignoring witnesses", that's a mischaracterization. But I guess it's standard for his courtroom demeanor. I "ignore" (or rather, refuse to accept) many of his interpretations of those witnesses. So, Charles, yes, it's Andrew's opinions that are being contested.If it was just an opinion based on my interpretations of the witnesses, how did the FBI develop it without me?
Re: the latest in his long line of weirdo accusations: " Jerry "the FBI were bats_it crazy for the first 5 months" Organ".Well, you called the shot sequence that I was saying followed from the evidence, to wit: JFK being hit in the neck around z195, JBC being hit in the back around z270, and JFK being hit in the head at z313 - "bats__t crazy" several times (this was before the current software started adding a whole lot of scrambled letters e.g. "batspombleprofglidnoctobuns"). How does this sequence differ from the FBI's original shot sequence, accepting SA Howlett's initial review and survey immediately after the assassination finding that "where the President was struck the first time in the neck was approximately 170 feet [from the window ledge of the farthest window to the east in the sixth floor of the TSBD], and that "President Kennedy was struck with the first and third shots fired by the assassin, while Governor Connally was struck with the second shot"? (FBI Gemberling Report of 30 Nov 1963 - Commission Document #5, p 117-118)? [The only difference is that I place the second shot around z271 based on the compiled statements of witnesses as to the shot pattern and the evidence of Greer, Hickey, Powers, Gayle Newman etc., whereas at that point the FBI could not place the location of JBC at the time of the second shot.]
Andrew is like a MAGA supporter; he wants to go back to a simpler time, before 3D modeling, the Lattimer/Haags tests, the Posner/Bugliosi books, clearer copies of the film on home computers, etc. to went the FBI put forth some theory that "coincides" with his fantasy scenario.Experts are fine until they conflict with the evidence. That doesn't seem to be a problem for you. It is for me.
There's Andrew pleading with Canning to help him get the Justice Department to fund his "compelling" cockamamie Pet Theory for free. Andrew's like Trump, who doesn't spent a dime of his own money on his own Presidential campaign. Now that Don Knotts Lab has the DP laser scan, they could probably test his theory for a few thousand dollars. But Mason won't spend the money.I never asked, or discussed with, Mr. Canning about funding anything. He offered the statement on his own: "I conclude that the side of Connaly's head is likely to be about
The photo on Main Street shows JBC’s right shoulder inline with JFK’s left arm.
The Z193 frame shows JBC’s right shoulder significantly further inboard relative to JFK’s left arm. If the angles of the two different photos are similar, then this indicates to me that JBC was significantly further inboard than you suggest.I agree that JBC’s midline is inboard of JFK’s midline. I also agree that a shot at z222 through JFK’s neck and continuing straight would have hit JBC in the back. It just would have hit him slightly to the left side of his spine.
Relying on the Z Film is why you guys continue with this same 60 yr old banter. There is a Z Film perspective issue relative to the positions of JFK vs Gov Connally inside the Limo. You're wasting your time centering this discussion around the Z Film. Well, that is if you want to deal with the Limo seating reality on 11/22/63. For starters, ask yourself WHY Connally is turning to his (R) and contorting himself into a pretzel in order to see what is going on with JFK in the Limo backseat? Connally is doing this because after cruising around Dallas for roughly 30 minutes, he KNOWS that JFK is seated behind him and Well to his (R). Some of you continue wanting to place Connally toward the center of the JFK Limo. Go ahead, literally knock yourselves out. With JFK tucked into that corner where the passenger side of the Limo runs directly alongside the backrest of the backseat, vs Connally being seated toward the center of the vehicle = the SBT "Is Impossible". (Knott Lab Laser SCIENCE).
And NO I am not using the Powers images. His ELEVATED view point again raises perspective regarding the images captured inside the Limo. You guys need to go back to the drawing board and do some serious research. You're reliance on the same old images only results in your repeating this discourse that has been going on for 60+yrs. Like I said, the images I am examining I have Never seen before.
Another issue that has come to my attention is how extremely LOW the JFK Limo sits relative to the ground. So we have: (1) the low riding JFK Limo traveling downhill, (2) the Queen Mary right on the Limo rear bumper with those 4 tall/bulky SS Agents riding on the running boards, yet somehow a vintage WW2 bolt action rifle hits its' mark? Twice? This is why the re-creations NEVER include a closely following vehicle with tall/bulky men towering above the target.
Relying on the Z Film is why you guys continue with this same 60 yr old banter. There is a Z Film perspective issue relative to the positions of JFK vs Gov Connally inside the Limo.
With JFK tucked into that corner where the passenger side of the Limo runs directly alongside the backrest of the backseat, vs Connally being seated toward the center of the vehicle = the SBT "Is Impossible". (Knott Lab Laser SCIENCE).
Relying on the Z Film has you guys all balled up.
They do align - with a point behind and to the car left. The shot came from behind to the car right.
I agree that JBC’s midline is inboard of JFK’s midline. I also agree that a shot at z222 through JFK’s neck and continuing straight would have hit JBC in the back. It just would have hit him slightly to the left side of his spine.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/1e/2d/VDkWHcBG_o.jpg)
Trying to figure out what Andrew was getting at. He thinks a SBT shot would have come in over the tire hump?
They are fairly close - less than a degree difference.
They do align - with a point behind and to the car left. The shot came from behind to the car right.
They align with the camera angle. That is the point. If the camera angle is similar to the camera angle in Z193, then the space between JFK’s left arm and JBC’s right shoulder (in Z193) indicates that JBC is further inboard in Z193 than he is in the Main Street photo that you tried to use to demonstrate JBC’s position. Perhaps someone with better skills and motivation than me will compare the two camera angles and let us know if they are relatively close.
[img height=300https://images2.imgbox.com/1e/2d/VDkWHcBG_o.jpg[/img]http://Trying to figure out what Andrew was getting at. He thinks a SBT shot would have come in over the tire hump?I was trying to figure out what Charles was getting at. He said: "The photo on Main Street shows JBC’s right shoulder inline with JFK’s left arm." ie
I was trying to figure out what Charles was getting at. He said: "The photo on Main Street shows JBC’s right shoulder inline with JFK’s left arm." ie
(https://i.postimg.cc/XvvkQvYT/Main-st-JBC-JFK-Charles.jpg)
I thought he was referring to something to do with the SBT. But based on his last post he was referring to the fact that in z193 there is a space between those shoulders. But he is assuming that JBC is oriented the same in z193 and that JFK is in the same vertical position. JBC is turned more to the right in z193 than he was on Main St. and JFK appears to be leaning forward on Main St. and sitting more vertical in z193.
(https://i.postimg.cc/G2XFYnRb/shoulder-separation-JFK-JBC-z193.jpg)
The horizontal camera angle is also slightly greater and the vertical angle is much lower in z193 than on Main St. But the main difference is the distance from the camera to the car and the different perspective. One can see on Main St., for example, that the right side of JFK projects back to the spare tire but in z193 his right side projects to the left of the spare tire.
"SuperScience"? Specifically, what is that?It is called "sarcasm"
STOP with the door handles, spare tire, and reliance on the perspective challenged Z Film. None of that comes close to actually resolving this age old issue. I'll give you a hint and then wait to see if you are worthy of being called a JFK Assassination Researcher. Go back to the very Beginning. You know, Love Field. The principles were filmed boarding and then selecting where they sat down inside the JFK Limo relative to each other. You can even see inside the Limo with respect to the placement of Gov Connally's jump seat. There's also footage from the rear of the JFK Limo pulling away. Now, Chop, Chop!
STOP with the door handles, spare tire, and reliance on the perspective challenged Z Film. None of that comes close to actually resolving this age old issue. I'll give you a hint and then wait to see if you are worthy of being called a JFK Assassination Researcher. Go back to the very Beginning. You know, Love Field. The principles were filmed boarding and then selecting where they sat down inside the JFK Limo relative to each other. You can even see inside the Limo with respect to the placement of Gov Connally's jump seat. There's also footage from the rear of the JFK Limo pulling away. Now, Chop, Chop!
Just because some of us are not buffoon enough to post images does not necessarily warrant a conclusion that our opinion or argument is unworthy of consideration.
Plus, it’s EASIER to let those more dedicated researchers whom probably have a whole library of images ready to be posted on moments notice, either reinforce or refute propositions/ observations made by non buffoon people 🔍
quote author=Jerry Organ link=topic=3867.msg157287#msg157287 date=1719608439]I think you are right about my placement of the rear doorhandle in z193. I have moved it to where you suggested:
(https://images2.imgbox.com/00/79/gbQ98bXm_o.jpg)
Do you mean something like this, Charles?
Yes, Jerry, thanks I think you get the general idea. Also, I question Andrew’s angle calculation for the Z193 frame. It appears to me that he has mistaken a glare from the sun for the rear door handle. I circled the two door handles (as I see them) on the photo below:
(https://i.vgy.me/tftu6H.jpg)
If I am correct about the door handles, then Andrew’s angle calculation would appear to be off significantly. It sure looks to me like there is more of a difference in camera angles between the Main Street photo and the Z193 frame than the 0.2-degrees that Andrew calculated.
I don’t need any image other than the Z film frames from Z223-z226 to see with my own eyes that JFK and JC are reacting simultaneously like 2 persons being hit by some force.Exactly: "like" two persons being hit by some force. They are reacting at the same time (although we really can't tell when JFK began reacting). I can tell that JFK is reacting to his throat wound. But the evidence is that JFK reacted that way to the first shot. And Governor Connally said he reacted physically to the first shot but was not hit in the back by it. He said he was hit in the back a perceptible time after that - after he had turned to his right to look back over his right shoulder to see the President because he recognized it as a rifle shot and feared that the President was being assassinated.
I think you are right about my placement of the rear doorhandle in z193. I have moved it to where you suggested:
(https://i.postimg.cc/prNsG235/shoulder-separation-JFK-JBC-z193.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/Fs56GZQC/Projection-z193-sightline-onto-HEdwg-corrected.jpg)
So at z193 the angle appears to be 30.5 degrees or 2.4 degrees more than in the Main St. photo (28.1 degrees).
Exactly: "like" two persons being hit by some force. They are reacting at the same time (although we really can't tell when JFK began reacting). I can tell that JFK is reacting to his throat wound. But the evidence is that JFK reacted that way to the first shot. And Governor Connally said he reacted physically to the first shot but was not hit in the back by it. He said he was hit in the back a perceptible time after that - after he had turned to his right to look back over his right shoulder to see the President because he recognized it as a rifle shot and feared that the President was being assassinated.
If JBC had said he reacted to being hit in the back and then turned around for 3 seconds to try to look at JFK because he feared they were being assassinated, I would agree with you that this must be where he was hit. But that is not the evidence. There is nothing about his behaviour from z225 to z270 that is inconsistent with him not being hit in the torso by the shot he felt. Indeed, it would be rather difficult to understand why he would not fall down immediately after being hit like that.
The rest of your post speculating about another gunman with a silent shot is just that - speculation - as it is based on zero evidence.
Just look at Connally. He turns his entire Upper Body to the (R), (not just a head turn), in order to see what is going on with JFK in the backseat. Connally's jump seat is close to the center of the Limo. Being close to the center of the vehicle gives Connally the Open Space to make his exaggerated upper body turn.
Not at all. JFK is leaning back into that corner that is created where the Backrest meets the passenger side of the limo. Connally's jumpseat is close to the Middle of the JFK Limo. Connally therefore has the SPACE/ROOM to corkscrew his upper torso as he tries to SEE JFK and figure out what is going on with him in the backseat. This "alignment" is clear at Love Field as JFK sits down inside the Limo and Kellerman unfolds the jumpseat for Connaly to sit in. Solely relying on the perspective challenged Zapruder Film is a mistake. Going back to images from the beginning/Love Field needs to be included when considering the SBT.
(although we really can't tell when JFK began reacting)You are guessing that he is not already reacting behind the sign. You are guessing that his right hand suddenly moved from a high wave at z193 to a knarled clutch at z223 for no reason relating to being shot. The fact is that we cannot see him when he is behind the sign. So if you think he is not reacting behind the sign it is not based on something that can be seen in the film.
Yes, we can
He said he was hit in the back a perceptible time after thatHe also said it was enough time for him to recognize it as a rifle shot and turn to look back over his right shoulder in a serious attempt to see JFK and then decide to turn back before he was hit in the back. He estimated it to be two seconds. His words, not mine.
He said he was hit a "split second" after hearing the shot. He said the two events were so close together he thought there was multiple people firing at the same time or that an automatic rifle (which can fire two rounds in a split second) was being used.
His memory of the event has the typical temporal distortions experienced by those who go through a traumatic, life-threatening event. That is to say, in his memory of the event time slowed down in a very radical way. The shot he heard and the shot he felt were the same shot.
The right side of his jacket didn't burst forward because JBC was concerned about JFK.I agree. But I also see no evidence that the jacket did burst forward. Neither did the WC or HSCA. Where do you see JBC looking down at his chest? He said he immediately saw blood and knew that he had been shot.
It burst forward as a result of the bullet exiting his chest.Again, that’s your guess. It is not my guess. My guess is that it is consistent with jacket movement due to his right arm moving as he prepares to turn around to see JFK.
I get 18.5 degrees at z193 using the Berkley map.
It is difficult to discern the door handles but that seems to me to be the correct spots and there seems to be something there. It is also difficult to discern the rear handholds due to the motorcycle front forks beyond the left one and the chrome trim on the front of the Queen Mary beyond the right handhold. However I think we both agree that is the way it appears in Z193. Although, as Murphy’s law would have it, the Roberdeaux map seems to indicate an angle closer to 28-degrees when the line of sight is laid out on it. The image quality of the Z193 image might be part of the issue.
Anyway, what angle do you calculate the bullet trajectory would be (at Z193) from the sniper’s nest window relative to the long axis of the JFK limo? My quick analysis indicates about 16-degrees.
I get 18.5 degrees at z193 using the Berkley map.
(https://i.postimg.cc/WpM72VsM/Angle-car-to-SN-at-z193-Berkley-map.jpg)
I place JFK on a line from Zapruder to a point about 3 feet north of the end of the concrete retaining wall as seen in z193. Drawing a line parallel to the lane markers at that point and extending back (green) and drawing a line to the SN perpendicular (light blue), and then drawing a direct line from the SN to JFK (red), the angle between green and red is arcsin(light blue/red) which I measure to be arcsin(86/272)=18.4 degrees. When I do the same thing on Trask's map I get 17.5 degrees:
(https://i.postimg.cc/8Pj9cx3t/Angle-car-to-SN-at-z193-Trask-map.jpg)
so I suspect there are differences in the maps. The Berkley map claims to have been surveyed. I don't know the source of Trask's map.
If you have another preferred map of Dealey Plaza that includes the TSBD I will work it out on that map.
Jerry - The film footage I referenced shows JFK directly facing the guy outside of the Limo that is shaking his hand. The BACK of JFK's head is facing Jackie. He is NOT leaning toward her. The (L) photo you have posted is Not capturing the same moment in time as this Love Field film footage.
Now he's trolling "blockbuster" discoveries the "Old Guard" have known and presented for years. Canning had JFK over to his right as far as possible. Connally ended up off his seat only because the limousine drawing Canning used was, unbeknownst to him, highly-flawed.Canning’s drawing had nothing to do with the May 1964 re-enactment using the QM.
(https://media.gettyimages.com/id/615320700/photo/kennedy-assassination-bullet-trajectory.jpg?s=1024x1024&w=gi&k=20&c=zTkKyuMmNaDPcMpU-UCug4U2avc8uYQf-eLdw4SJMw0=)
During their May 1964 reenactment, the FBI had their Kennedy surrogate over to the right as far as possible in the Queen Mary limousine. But the lay-out of the Queen Mary didn't allow for the extra amount of space toward the right that Kennedy had in the SS-100-X. Nonetheless, the FBI and Warren Commission allowed for the variations between the two limousines in their conclusions; some researchers are too stupid or lazy to do that.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT.jpg)
Now he's trolling "blockbuster" discoveries the "Old Guard" have known and presented for years. Canning had JFK over to his right as far as possible. Connally ended up off his seat only because the limousine drawing Canning used was, unbeknownst to him, highly-flawed.
(https://media.gettyimages.com/id/615320700/photo/kennedy-assassination-bullet-trajectory.jpg?s=1024x1024&w=gi&k=20&c=zTkKyuMmNaDPcMpU-UCug4U2avc8uYQf-eLdw4SJMw0=)
During their May 1964 reenactment, the FBI had their Kennedy surrogate over to the right as far as possible in the Queen Mary limousine. But the lay-out of the Queen Mary didn't allow for the extra amount of space toward the right that Kennedy had in the SS-100-X. Nonetheless, the FBI and Warren Commission allowed for the variations between the two limousines in their conclusions; some researchers are too stupid or lazy to do that.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT.jpg)
Canning made reference to "a similar angle in a photograph taken by James Altgens on Houston less than a minute earlier."I am not sure where you are getting that from. That is not something Canning ever said. I am not sure he was aware of Altgens' #5 photo.
Thus, Connally is significantly inboard of Kennedy while on Houston. Since none of Connally's head appears in Betzner, then he must still be as inboard relative to Kennedy as he is seen to be in the Altgens Houston photo.The issue is not whether JBC is inboard of JFK. The question is how much was he inboard? Enough for JBC's right armpit to be on a right to left path through JFK's neck? That just doesn't work - even for a first shot SBT at z222.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/72/35/FfoCr3IB_o.jpg)
Your sight-lines are never going to work because your convergence point is wrong and, more importantly, the HSCA limo drawing is deeply flawed. Why you insist on using it, I don't know.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/PDVD_083.JPG) (https://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/images/news/croft.jpg)
You have Kennedy's back merging into the top of the seat-back. The Towner film and Croft Photo show Kennedy's back about three inches forward of the seat-back's front seam.
Connally is not over almost to the door in Z193. So if you're wrong and the SBT is wrong, then there must be another scenario as to what happened.Connally can be just where you put him, as can JFK.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/99/b5/djnCjrMf_o.jpg)
"6.86 degrees to car direction" Not me. I use a lateral of 8-degrees, the same angle I figured out on the HSCA map years ago.
What 9.5 degree angle? I'll give you credit for one thing. You have a knack for taking any map and limo plat, and getting whatever angle you want.The difference appears to be where we place the rifle. If your placement is correct, the angle is 8.3 degrees:
The SBT and your Theory are something for the WC critic to, at least, consider.My rejection of the SBT is based on all the evidence but primarily the evidence of the 1...........2......3 shot pattern, the evidence that JFK reacted to the first shot and the evidence that JBC was struck in the back by the second shot, not the first shot. The trajectory issues, condition of CE399, the concussion effect of the second shot and fragment striking Tague on the second shot, the hair flip on the second shot, Nellie's evidence, the absence of evidence of a missed shot etc. provide further support for the 3 shot, 3 hit shot sequence.