You apparently went to the same law school as Jimmy McGill.
Jimmy McGill never went to law school.
Show us where anybody anywhere has every claimed Betzner "forgot" about the first shot he described.
"I started to wind my film again and I heard a loud noise. I thought
that this noise was either a firecracker or a car had backfired."
Right. Our disagreement is over the number of shots he could recall. I say he recalled two shots: the head shot and the one before that.
No. Our disagreement is over whether he did not recall hearing the one that you say was before his z186 photo. The number of shots he heard is not clear. It doesn't matter. What matters is whether the first shot was before or after his photo at z186. He said it was after. So you were arguing that he heard the first shot before z186 but, because he "dismissed" it as a firecracker, he did not treat it as the first shot when reporting his observations.
Betzner said "I heard at least two shots fired" meaning there could have been more. I thought we agreed that the two-shot witnesses have to have heard all three shots.
This is transcribed from the statement that Betzner actually gave:
"Hugh William Betzner Jr.: DALLAS SHERIFF'S STATEMENT: November 22 1963. 24 H 200
"I was standing on Houston Street near the intersection of Elm Street. I took a picture of President Kennedy's car as it passed along Houston Street [
Comment: Betzner photo no. 1]. I have an old camera. I looked down real quick and rolled the film to take the next picture. I then ran down to the corner of Elm and Houston Streets, this being the southwest corner. I took another picture just as President Kennedy's car rounded the corner [
Comment: Betzner no. 2]. It was just about all the way around the corner. I was standing back from the corner and had to take the pictures through some of the crowd. I ran on down Elm a little more and President Kennedy's car was
starting to go down the hill to the triple underpass. I was running trying, to keep the President's car in my view and was winding my film as I ran. I was looking down at my camera to see the number of the film as I ran.
I took another picture as the President's car was going down the hill on Elm Street [
Comment: Betzner photo no. 3]. I started to wind my film again and I heard a loud noise [
Comment: Betzner loud noise no. 1]. I thought that this noise was either a firecracker or a car had backfired. I looked up and it seemed like there was another loud noise in the matter of a few seconds [
Comment: Betzner loud noise no. 2]. I looked down the street and I could see the President's car an another one and they looked like the cars were stopped. Then I saw a flash of pink like someone standing up and then sitting back down in the car. Then I ran around so i could look over the back of a monument and I either saw the following then
or when I was standing back down on the corner of Elm Street. I cannot remember exactly where I was
when I saw the following:
I heard at least two shots fired and
I saw what looked like a firecracker going off in the president's car. My assumption for this was because I saw fragments going up in the air. "...
Now what is quite clear from that is that photo no. 3 was taken BEFORE loud noise no. 1. What is less clear, and I would say it is immaterial, is how many he heard after that. I don't see how this is really material to whether the first shot occurred before or after his photo no. 3 (but you apparently do).
Nevertheless, a reasonable case can be made that he was reporting two additional shots after the first shot. He said that after taking his photo no. 3, he started to wind his camera to take another when he says he heard the first shot (which he said sounded like a firecracker). He does not describe where he was looking at the time. Then, later in his statement he says: "when I saw the following" followed by "I heard at least two shots fired" followed by "and I saw" suggests that the two shots he heard occurred when he saw what he was describing (what looked like a firecracker going off in the president's car). This is consistent with the many reports that the last two shots were close together. As I say, it is not crystal clear, but that is not an unreasonable interpretation of his statement. What
is an unreasonable interpretation is that he heard the loud noise BEFORE he took his photo no. 3.
This is an example of "Where have I "insisted" all the 2-shot witnesses "forgot" about the first shot or failed to hear it?"
Well, I seem to be explaining the divide over how the "two-shot" witnesses are handled. I'm not "insisting" on anything. Is "overlooked or not as distinctively recalled" the same as "forgot"? And where am I saying a witness failed to hear all three shots?
On March 18, 2018,
post #49, you said: "A three-shot scenario would simply mean Betzner heard a third shot but had no reason to remember it, which in turn argues for an earlier shot (before the shot Betzner heard after taking his Z186 photo) that many witnesses dismissed as a backfire or firecracker."
Perhaps you could enlighten us on the distinction between not recalling because he "had no reason to remember" and "forgot".
There's a recurring hair flutter that Hickey couldn't see during the Z270s.
Yet he reported seeing something that you say he could not see but which we can see in the zfilm. Amazing! And, by the way, it is not recurring. It happens only once where just JFK's hair flies up: z273-z276.
She {Mary Woodward} also said the President wasn't injured on the first shot and that he only slumped on the second shot.
Well, she did preface that comment by: "Things are a little hazy from this point"
