A straight line

[John Iacoletti]

Then how did you come to your conclusions?

 

Your lack of an answer to that question speaks volumes.

[Tim Nickerson]

So let's make this clear. You are saying that:

1.  The witnesses (40+) who recalled that the last two shots were in rapid succession, noticeably closer than the first two, were all wrong and what they really heard was 1...2.....3  AND

I'm saying that the 40+ witnesses who recalled that the last two shots were closer than the first two were wrong. 54 other witnesses recalled differently.

2.  The witnesses who heard 3 shots and said JFK reacted to the first shot, including Dave Powers, TE Moore, Linda Willis, Nellie Connally, Bobby Hargis, George Hickey, Sam Kinney, Emory Roberts, Harold Norman, Gayle Newman,  and Cecil Ault, did not see what they said they saw; AND

Dave Powers just says that after the first shot the President moved to the left. That?s not much of a reaction. Moore said that all three shots were spaced at regular intervals. Nellie Connally said that there was less time between the first and the second than between the second and the third. Hargis couldn't recall more than two shots. Kinney said immediately after the second shot they stepped on the gas. They never stepped on the gas until after the third shot. His second shot was really the third shot. Initially, Roberts wasn't sure whether there were two or three shots fired. A week later, he thinks he recalls three shots but didn't know if kennedy was hit in the head by the second shot or by the third shot. Norman said that the shots were evenly spaced. He placed the first shot at the same time that Williams did, right about  when the President was smoothing back his hair. Gayle Newman placed the first two shots much closer together than the second and third shots. Cecil Ault said he saw the President slump after the second shot.

3. The witnesses who said that the first shot was after z186/z191 were wrong even though not a single piece of evidence conflicts with their recollections. These witnesses include Hughes, Betzner, Linda Willis, Phil Willis, Mary Woodward, TE Moore, and motorcade witnesses in the VP car, VP security car as well as witnesses along Elm: Jean Newman, Billy Clay, Georgia Hendrix, Sue Dickerson, Dorothy Garner, Karan Hicks, Gloria Calvary, Karen Westbrook.

Hughes never specified anything about the shots. Betzner is a two shot witness. The real first shot is missing from his account. Phil Willis  said that all three shots were evenly spaced. Mary Woodward said that the first shot missed. Max Holland interprets Moore's statement differently than you. He says that Moore's highway marker was to the east of the one you believe it to be. Jean Newman recalled hearing only two shots. Hendrix saw Kennedy slump on the second shot. Dickerson didn't specify when the first shot was fired. Neither did Dorothy Garner. The other three never said how many shots they heard.

No. The second shot nearly hit him in the head, according to George Hickey, but just lifted his hair on the right side.  One or two witnesses may have thought the second shot hit him in the head (eg. John Chism) but these witnesses were never cross-examined. 

Many of your witnesses were not cross examined.

But not in "rapid succession" (eg. SA Hickey 18H762), "quick succession" (SA McIntyre 18H747), "very close together" (Robert Jackson 2H159, Lee Bowers 6H287), "pretty close together" (Luke Mooney 3H282), "rather close together" (B R Williams 3H175), "one and one-half seconds" - "a much shorter time" (Sen. Yarborough 7H439), "real close" (Clyde Haygood, 6H298), "very quickly" (James Crawford, 6H172).

And these witnesses all said that the difference in spacing was quite noticeable.  Many said it was about 2:1.  Even if it was just 1.5:1 (7.5 seconds to 5 seconds) that puts the first shot before the QM finished the turn, with the VP car just entering the intersection and the VP security car behind that on Houston.  (How could the occupants of those cars be so wrong - in the same way?)

Rapid succession, quick succession, and very close together are all relative descriptions. They could mean two seconds , three, four or more.

The bullet was traveling from right to left at an angle of at least 9 degrees.  Over the 24 inches between JFK's throat and the plane of the back of the jump seat, the bullet would have travelled left an additional 3.8 inches. According to the HSCA the wound on JBC was 20 cm or 7.9 inches from his midline. If his midline was 8.6 inches left of JFK's midline, that puts his right armpit .7 inches left of JFK's midline.  It has to be another 3.1 inches farther left than that.  And that is assuming the maximum distance he could have been to the left of JFK, which is your best case scenario. ITEK actually said he was probably 6.4 inches left and could have been as little as 4.2 inches left.  That would make JBC too far right probably by 5.3 inches and possibly by as much as 7.5 inches.

Are you sure that the HSCA placed the wound on JBC 7.9 inches from his midline?  Baden's measurement was 6.5 inches from the midline. I thought that 7.5 inches would be about right. However, I think that I can still get the SBT to work with 7.9 inches from the midline.

Right. z224.

What are his hands doing at z224?

[Gary Craig]

I'm saying that the 40+ witnesses who recalled that the last two shots were closer than the first two were wrong. 54 other witnesses recalled differently.

Dave Powers just says that after the first shot the President moved to the left. That?s not much of a reaction. Moore said that all three shots were spaced at regular intervals. Nellie Connally said that there was less time between the first and the second than between the second and the third. Hargis couldn't recall more than two shots. Kinney said immediately after the second shot they stepped on the gas. They never stepped on the gas until after the third shot. His second shot was really the third shot. Initially, Roberts wasn't sure whether there were two or three shots fired. A week later, he thinks he recalls three shots but didn't know if kennedy was hit in the head by the second shot or by the third shot. Norman said that the shots were evenly spaced. He placed the first shot at the same time that Williams did, right about  when the President was smoothing back his hair. Gayle Newman placed the first two shots much closer together than the second and third shots. Cecil Ault said he saw the President slump after the second shot.

Hughes never specified anything about the shots. Betzner is a two shot witness. The real first shot is missing from his account. Phil Willis  said that all three shots were evenly spaced. Mary Woodward said that the first shot missed. Max Holland interprets Moore's statement differently than you. He says that Moore's highway marker was to the east of the one you believe it to be. Jean Newman recalled hearing only two shots. Hendrix saw Kennedy slump on the second shot. Dickerson didn't specify when the first shot was fired. Neither did Dorothy Garner. The other three never said how many shots they heard.


Many of your witnesses were not cross examined.

Rapid succession, quick succession, and very close together are all relative descriptions. They could mean two seconds , three, four or more.

Are you sure that the HSCA placed the wound on JBC 7.9 inches from his midline?  Baden's measurement was 6.5 inches from the midline. I thought that 7.5 inches would be about right. However, I think that I can still get the SBT to work with 7.9 inches from the midline.

What are his hands doing at z224?

"Dave Powers just says that after the first shot the President moved to the left. That?s not much of a reaction."

No!
Powers was directly behind the President in the follow up car.
After hearing the first shot, he saw JFK pull his hand towards his throat and fall over towards Jackie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=Yl7a-50BHLE

[Andrew Mason]

I'm saying that the 40+ witnesses who recalled that the last two shots were closer than the first two were wrong. 54 other witnesses recalled differently.

Who are the 54 witnesses?  By my count, 6 said that the first two were closer and 10 thought they were about equally spaced.  45 said the last two were closer together.  See my paper on the shot pattern evidence.

Dave Powers just says that after the first shot the President moved to the left. That?s not much of a reaction.

Where do you see him move to the left before z222?  Where does JBC disappear from his view?

Moore said that all three shots were spaced at regular intervals.

Where did you get that? Moore did not mention shot spacing in his FBI statement, which is the only statement I have found. He said he heard the first shot when the President was at the Thornton Freeway sign and he could not see the President's car when the last two shots were fired: 24H534.

Nellie Connally said that there was less time between the first and the second than between the second and the third.

That is true. But she also said she did not look back after the second shot. She is looking back up to z269. So that conflicts where her impression of the shot spacing.

Hargis couldn't recall more than two shots.

Sorry about that. You are right. I was going by Stuart Galanor's page which said he heard 3 shots but he did recall only 2. He said things happened so fast that he may not have noticed if there were another 30 shots.

Hughes never specified anything about the shots. Betzner is a two shot witness. The real first shot is missing from his account. Phil Willis  said that all three shots were evenly spaced. Mary Woodward said that the first shot missed. Max Holland interprets Moore's statement differently than you. He says that Moore's highway marker was to the east of the one you believe it to be. Jean Newman recalled hearing only two shots. Hendrix saw Kennedy slump on the second shot. Dickerson didn't specify when the first shot was fired. Neither did Dorothy Garner. The other three never said how many shots they heard.

So all their evidence is wrong. Thanks for making my point that one has to make excuses why their evidence could be wrong. Why did they all imagine, falsely, that JFK reacted to the first shot? Why did none of them see JFK smile and wave after the first shot? Why did so many say he was smiling and waving before the first shot?

Rapid succession, quick succession, and very close together are all relative descriptions. They could mean two seconds , three, four or more.

?? Not likely. The spacing was described by Charles Brehm, who had experience with guns, that the three shots "were fired just about as quickly as an individual can manouver a bolt-action rifle" (22H837). Do you think 7.5 seconds and 5 seconds fits that description? How about 4 and 2.3?

Are you sure that the HSCA placed the wound on JBC 7.9 inches from his midline?  Baden's measurement was 6.5 inches from the midline. I thought that 7.5 inches would be about right. However, I think that I can still get the SBT to work with 7.9 inches from the midline.

20 cm: = 7.9 inches. 6 HSCA 48

What are his hands doing at z224?

They appear to be doing what Nellie and others described they did in response to the first shot.

[Tim Nickerson]

Who are the 54 witnesses?  By my count, 6 said that the first two were closer and 10 thought they were about equally spaced.  45 said the last two were closer together.  See my paper on the shot pattern evidence.

It was something that Dave Reitzes had posted on McAdams' forum. For the life of me, I cannot find it this evening. His compilation numbers were: 15 placed the first two shots closer together, 39 said that they were all evenly spaced , and 58 said that the last two were closer together.

Dave Powers just says that after the first shot the President moved to the left. That?s not much of a reaction. Where do you see him move to the left before z222?  Where does JBC disappear from his view?

Powers is a first shot hit witness.

Where did you get that? Moore did not mention shot spacing in his FBI statement, which is the only statement I have found. He said he heard the first shot when the President was at the Thornton Freeway sign and he could not see the President's car when the last two shots were fired: 24H534.

Larry Sneed, in No More Silence, quoted Moore as saying "I feel sure that there were three shots and they spaced at regular intervals."

So all their evidence is wrong. Thanks for making my point that one has to make excuses why their evidence could be wrong. Why did they all imagine, falsely, that JFK reacted to the first shot? Why did none of them see JFK smile and wave after the first shot? Why did so many say he was smiling and waving before the first shot?

I don't see how I made your point. Clearly you've misread what I said.  Why did approximately 40 witnesses report seeing the limo stop?

?? Not likely. The spacing was described by Charles Brehm, who had experience with guns, that the three shots "were fired just about as quickly as an individual can manouver a bolt-action rifle" (22H837). Do you think 7.5 seconds and 5 seconds fits that description? How about 4 and 2.3?

You left off the "take aim, and fire three shots."

Brehm has the second shot as the head shot.

20 cm: = 7.9 inches. 6 HSCA 48

They purportedly used Baden's report of his examination of Connally's scars to come up with the placements on that diagram.

157.In addition to the information that already had been analyzed concerning Kennedy's neck wound, derivation of this trajectory required placement of the location of Connally's entry wound to the back. At the committee's request, Connally agreed to have the position of his back wound redetermined by the Forensic Pathology Panel. His inshoot wound was described as being immediately above his right armpit. This description is essentially consistent with figure II-18. (JFK exhibit F-377.) (57)

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0027b.htm

(57) Memorandum from Dr. Michael Baden to the House Select Committee on Assassinations, Sept 8, 1978


That says Sept 8, whereas the actual letter is dated Sept 6.

ADDENDUM G

REPORT OF THE PHYSICAL EXAMINATION OF GOVERNOR JOHN R. CONNALLY--MEM ORANDUM BY MICHAEL M. BADEN, M.D., TO TIlE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ASSASSINATIONS. DATED SEPTEMBER 6, 1978

MEMORANDUM

To: Gary Cornwell, Esq. From. Michael Baden, M.D. Date: September 6, 1978.

Re Physical examination of Governor John Connally.

Pursuant to your arrangements I met with Governor Connally on September 6, 1978, at 2:05 p.m. In room 772 of the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. Also present were Mrs. Connally; Mr. Julian Reed, an associate of the Governor who had been with him on the day of the assassination of President Kennedy; and Mrs. Ida Jane Ross of your staff.

The Governor was very cooperative, but rushed, to catch a plane.

On removing his shirt, it was readily apparent that at the site of gunshot perforation of the upper right back there is now a 1 1/8-inch long horizontal pale well healed scar that is up to 3/8 inch wide centrally, with a lateral border slightly lower than the medial border (about 5 degrees). The medial margin is one-half inch superior to and five-eighths inch medial to the apex of the right posterior axilla. The lateral border is 6 inches to the right of the midline of the back and 4 3/4 inches below the shoulder line.

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0125b.htm

Previously, I believed that the terms medial and lateral were mistakenly reversed by Baden. However, I now realize that "The lateral border is 6 inches to the right of the midline of the back" was really meant to be "The lateral border is 8 inches to the right of the midline of the back." That would place the midpoint of the 1 1/8" long scar at 7.5 inches to the right of the midline.

They appear to be doing what Nellie and others described they did in response to the first shot.

What was that exactly? The hands drop between Z224 AND Z225. I don't recall Nellie describing seeing that.

[Andrew Mason]

It was something that Dave Reitzes had posted on McAdams' forum. For the life of me, I cannot find it this evening. His compilation numbers were: 15 placed the first two shots closer together, 39 said that they were all evenly spaced , and 58 said that the last two were closer together.

I can guarantee you that those numbers are wrong.  I looked at every witness who heard the shots and i found only 6 who heard 1...2.....3 and 9 who said they were about equally-spaced. Over 40 recalled 1.......2....3 and many of those said volunteered that last two shots were in rapid succession/close together. In addition, there are witnesses who put the second shot around z270, such as Altgens, Nellie C., SA George Hickey, and SA Wm. Greer. 

Powers is a first shot hit witness.

Larry Sneed, in No More Silence, quoted Moore as saying "I feel sure that there were three shots and they spaced at regular intervals."

You are relying on an interview made 30 years afterward?!!

I don't see how I made your point. Clearly you've misread what I said.  Why did approximately 40 witnesses report seeing the limo stop?

We have gone over this before. In fact, there were only 8 witnesses who said the limo stopped. 19 said it slowed but did not stop and another 20 gave ambiguous statements about whether it stopped or slowed. See my analysis here.

You make my point by arguing that the witnesses did not observe what they said they observed. Your argument that they were wrong is not evidence that they observed what you suggest. The statistical significance of the consistent observations of the "first shot hit", "first shot after z191" and "second shot close to third shot" witnesses is impossible to explain as random error.  You need collusion of all those witnesses to explain how they all got their observations wrong in the same way.

....
Previously, I believed that the terms medial and lateral were mistakenly reversed by Baden. However, I now realize that "The lateral border is 6 inches to the right of the midline of the back" was really meant to be "The lateral border is 8 inches to the right of the midline of the back." That would place the midpoint of the 1 1/8" long scar at 7.5 inches to the right of the midline.

You are still going to be 2.5 inches out and probably 4.8 inches out and possibly as much as 7 inches out.

What was that exactly? The hands drop between Z224 AND Z225. I don't recall Nellie describing seeing that.

The hands stay in roughly that position for a while (going by memory).  The impression of many was that he was clutching at his throat.

[Tim Nickerson]

I can guarantee you that those numbers are wrong.  I looked at every witness who heard the shots and i found only 6 who heard 1...2.....3 and 9 who said they were about equally-spaced. Over 40 recalled 1.......2....3 and many of those said volunteered that last two shots were in rapid succession/close together. In addition, there are witnesses who put the second shot around z270, such as Altgens, Nellie C., SA George Hickey, and SA Wm. Greer.

Found it:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/_hY71ak_h3o

I count 15 in that who said that the first two shots were closer together. I would add Karen Westbrook to that number. In her recent interview with Stephen Fagin of the Sixth Floor Museum, she said that the first two shots were closer together.

You are relying on an interview made 30 years afterward?!!

I wouldn't say that I'm  relying on it. I'm just making note of it, that's all. It's worth considering. Particularly if it doesn't contradict something he said much earlier. The same goes for all of the Sneed interviews.

We have gone over this before. In fact, there were only 8 witnesses who said the limo stopped. 19 said it slowed but did not stop and another 20 gave ambiguous statements about whether it stopped or slowed. See my analysis here.

Yes we have gone over it before.  I don't count 40 but I count a lot more than 8.

You make my point by arguing that the witnesses did not observe what they said they observed. Your argument that they were wrong is not evidence that they observed what you suggest. The statistical significance of the consistent observations of the "first shot hit", "first shot after z191" and "second shot close to third shot" witnesses is impossible to explain as random error.  You need collusion of all those witnesses to explain how they all got their observations wrong in the same way.

Again, I don't understand how my pointing out that witnesses were wrong makes your point. It does just the opposite.

You are still going to be 2.5 inches out and probably 4.8 inches out and possibly as much as 7 inches out.

You have a poor memory. I've demonstrated to you in the past that I can make it fit. And that was using a lateral angle of 10.5 degrees, not the 9 degrees that you have offered. I'll show it to you again but let's see if we can agree on some numbers first.

- A lateral angle of 9 to 10.5 degrees.

- The bullet struck Kennedy at 2 inches to the right of his midline.

- the distance that the bullet travelled through Kennedy's neck was 6.5 inches

- The straight on (shortest) distance from the front of Kennedy's neck to Connally's back was about 24 inches.

- Connally was recessed further into the car than Kennedy 6.4 +/- 2.2 inches   -- pages 43 - 47 of "John Kennedy Assassination Film Analysis", ITEK corporation, May 2, 1976

- The thickness of Connally's torso, from the very back of his spine to the front of his sternum, was about 9 inches.

- Connally's torso was rotated to the right by 30 degrees.  (HSCA Appendix to Hearings - Volume VI, "The Trajectory Analysis",  prepared under the direction of Thomas N. Canning, with the assistance of Clyde C. Snow and C.S. McCamy.)

The hands stay in roughly that position for a while (going by memory).  The impression of many was that he was clutching at his throat.

At z224, his hands are not at his neck.

[Andrew Mason]

Found it:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/_hY71ak_h3o

I count 15 in that who said that the first two shots were closer together. I would add Karen Westbrook to that number. In her recent interview with Stephen Fagin of the Sixth Floor Museum, she said that the first two shots were closer together.

Thanks for the link.  I will study it further but a few comments:

Reitzes uses Pierce Allman as an "equal spacing" witness because Allman said the shots were well-spaced and distinct.  But many who recalled the 1......2...3 pattern also said the shots were distinct and described shots spaced 3 and 1.5 or 2 seconds apart, which could also be described as "well-spaced". 

Reitzes uses Harold Norman as an "equal spacing" witness on the basis of Norman's interview where he vocalizes the shot sounds:

But if you measure the spacing, he has the spacing at roughly 3:2 (at 8, 11 and 13 seconds) which is not equal.  Furthermore he was not asked about the spacing - he was asked what they sounded like.  His earlier WC statement refers to "I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots".  I don't see how one gets an equal spacing out of that evidence.

As far as Karen Westbrook is concerned, she describes the first two shots closer together and then refers to having heard that Jackie Kennedy also recalled that pattern as a kind of support for her recollection (at about 24:20 of her interview which is at

).  If she confidently recalled the 1..2....3 pattern why did she immediately refer to Jackie for support. She did not do that for her recollection of the number of shots or the location of the first shot or what JFK did in reaction to the first shot. (In fact, Jackie did not describe the shot spacing at all and was unsure of the number of shots). There is no record of Karen Westbrook describing the shot spacing prior to this 2013 interview, unfortunately.

Karen Westbrook did have an apparently clear recollection that the first shot occurred while Jackie was turned looking directly toward her brushing her hair away from her face and waving. That could not have occurred until at least z190 because Jackie is turned left or forward until z189. In fact, she identifies z202 as the time of the first shot (but that was done in a rather leading way by the interviewer).  And she says that JFK reacted to that first shot.

Again, I don't understand how my pointing out that witnesses were wrong makes your point. It does just the opposite.

The point I was making is that you need to do that to support the SBT.  One does not have to point to any body of evidence being wrong in order to support the 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter conclusion.