The First Shot

[Dan O'meara]

Fact finding is an iterative process. One has to examine all the evidence and try to fit it all together, set preliminary findings, go back and compare the evidence to those findings, make revised findings, go back and examine again etc until you reach firm conclusions of fact or conclude that firm conclusions cannot be reached.

So, after showing you why the preponderance of evidence leads me to conclude that the head shot was the third and last shot, I am puzzled why you suggest that I just arbitrarily assumed that was the case and that I worked backward with the shot pattern to determine when the first shot occurred. 

I know you're puzzled, Andrew.
So let me clarify - as I stated, there is plenty of witness testimony for both positions. You have arbitrarily chosen to accept the witness testimony of those who support the head-shot as the last shot. There is no evidence, other than witness testimony, that supports the head-shot as the last shot.
Unless I'm mistaken.
Am I mistaken?
What evidence for the head-shot being the last shot, other than witness testimony, have you used?
What evidence have you used to determine between the two groups of contradictory witness testimony?

You're kidding, right? Ernest Brandt who heard 8 shots over 5 minutes? Jean Hill who heard 4 to 6 shots?  Doesn't really fit the shot pattern that we both agree on.

Oh dear, you really are puzzled, aren't you Andrew.
Ernest Brandt is, by far, one of the best witnesses for a 3-shot scenario with a shot after the head-shot.
His incredibly precise recollections of the shooting are compelling, to say the least.
I believe you're talking about A J Millican.
And so what If Jean Hill was confused by echoes. The shot and echoes she heard came after the head-shot.

So, Jean Hill's slightly confused memory of shots and echoes after the head-shot is the only point you can raise in your counter-argument against the partial list of witnesses I have provided who directly testify there was a shot after the head-shot.
That's it.
You're kidding, right?
You think the collective witness testimony regarding a shot after the head-shot can be dismissed by making such a piss-weak point?

Of course you do.

2 shot witnesses only if you buy Jerry's notion that the first horrible ear shattering noise did not register as a shot.

Altgens, for example is not a 2 shot witness at all. He simply wasn't sure how many shots there were between the first and last but he was sure about two things: his #5 photo was after the first and before any other shots and the headshot was the last shot.

And apart front Altgens, they are all 3 shot witnesses.

How many shots did Clint Hill hear?

I don't know why you would say that, especially when you acknowledge there is plenty of evidence to support my position. What evidence have I not examined?

How can I know what evidence you haven't examined.
But, to take an educated guess based on the bogus arguments you come up with, I would say you haven't examined any evidence beyond the witness testimony. And looking at your complete lack of knowledge concerning Ernest Brandt, you haven't examined the witness testimony too thoroughly either.

I hope you realize that you just admitted doing the very thing you accused me, wrongly, of doing.

 
You really are puzzled Andrew.
I think you should go back and read the post again, maybe a couple of times.

Just because you are not persuaded doesn't mean an argument is bogus. It is, as you acknowledge, based on real evidence. A bogus argument is an argument based on a complete falsehood, like the argument that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.

Just because you are not persuaded doesn't mean an argument is bogus.

That's very true Andrew.
Very obvious and very true.
What is also true is that the above point doesn't mean you're arguments aren't bogus.
What is also true is that I'm not persuaded by your arguments because they are bogus.

It is, as you acknowledge, based on real evidence.

The word "it" in the above sentence refers to 'a bogus argument'.
So you are saying - "A bogus argument is, as you acknowledge, based on real evidence."
This sentence is, in a mind-bending piece of breaking-the-fourth-wall irony, a bogus argument.
Nowhere have I ever acknowledged, or even thought to acknowledge, that a bogus argument is based on real evidence.
You then follow up your point about a bogus argument being based on real evidence with this beauty:

A bogus argument is an argument based on a complete falsehood...

Wow.
If I didn't know this stupendous nonsense was just a product of your puzzlement I'd be inclined to think you were some kind of Ironical genius.
"A bogus argument is based on a complete falsehood" - there could be no better way to sum up your approach to dealing with the mass of evidence I have presented for a first shot at z222/z223.

[Andrew Mason]

I know you're puzzled, Andrew.
So let me clarify - as I stated, there is plenty of witness testimony for both positions. You have arbitrarily chosen to accept the witness testimony of those who support the head-shot as the last shot. There is no evidence, other than witness testimony, that supports the head-shot as the last shot.
Unless I'm mistaken.
Am I mistaken?

Yes.

There is visual evidence that Connally was hit before the head shot because he has fallen back onto his wife before the head shot. There is also trajectory evidence that shows that the bullet passing straight through JFK's neck without deflection could not possibly have hit JBC in the right armpit at any time.  That is not based on anything other than a 3D recreation of the car position and relative position of the two men. There is also physical evidence that the bullet did not strike anything capable of causing a perceptible deflection in passing through JFK's neck and striking the tie know on the left side, let alone a significant deflection to the right.  All that together means that Connally must have been hit on a shot that was after JFK's neck shot (#1) and before the headshot (#3) ie. #2.

There is also the absence of any kind of explanation why a shooter, after clearly hitting the bullseye would keep shooting and an absence of any bullet evidence or impact evidence of a shot that missed.  But I digress.

What evidence have you used to determine between the two groups of contradictory witness testimony?

I do what juries and judges do when asked to determine facts from evidence.  I weighed the evidence and applied reasoning to conclude that it is far more likely that the head shot was the last shot.

Oh dear, you really are puzzled, aren't you Andrew.

Ernest Brandt is, by far, one of the best witnesses for a 3-shot scenario with a shot after the head-shot.His incredibly precise recollections of the shooting are compelling, to say the least. I believe you're talking about A J Millican. 

It was a late night....you are right. I confused Brandt with Millican.  Brandt, of course, is the other witness along the north side of Elm wearing a hat (a fedora, not the hard hat).  He did not give any statements to the WC.  But he did give interviews much later.  He says that he was 15 feet away from JFK when the first shot occurred and that JFK reacted as we see him reacting to the neck shot. This certainly conflicts with an early first shot miss.  But he said he never saw the head shot so I am not sure what "incredibly precise recollections of the shooting" with "a shot after the head shot" you are referring to.  At least in this interview given in November 2012, he said he did not see the head shot:
    "But John stayed right there on the curb and he saw that 3rd shot hit Kennedy’s head and he saw Kennedy’s head explode. But I didn’t see that."

And so what If Jean Hill was confused by echoes. The shot and echoes she heard came after the head-shot.

So, Jean Hill's slightly confused memory of shots and echoes after the head-shot is the only point you can raise in your counter-argument against the partial list of witnesses I have provided who directly testify there was a shot after the head-shot.
That's it.

No one was confused by echos. There was reverberation caused by reflection of sound from many different surfaces in Dealey Plaza.  Jean Hill was obviously not counting the shots.  She was simply saying that she had the impression there were more than 3 but fewer than 7 shots.

You're kidding, right?
You think the collective witness testimony regarding a shot after the head-shot can be dismissed by making such a piss-weak point?

Of course you do.

No. I base my conclusion on an assessment of all the evidence as I have explained many times. Besides, my urine flow is rather strong, actually. 

How many shots did Clint Hill hear?

How many did he recall hearing or how many shots did he accept had occurred? He recalled hearing only two but he accepts, based on what other agents told him, that there was a shot just after he stepped off the car.  At that point he was highly focused on trying to reach the President's car.  He was also lower down and between motorcycles and the QM engine. See: Gerald Blaine, The Kennedy Detail, ch. 12 "Six Seconds in Dallas":

    "He leapt off the running board of Halfback, as he’d done countless times
    before, his body reacting as it had been trained. In that terrible, unforgettable
    moment, Clint Hill had but one purpose: he had to reach Mrs. Kennedy and the
    president, and shield them. His powerful legs propelled him toward the pink hat
    that seemed to be moving farther and farther away each time his foot landed on
    the pavement. If only he could reach the back of the car, his legs knew the exact
    height of the rear step; his hands knew exactly where to grasp the hand grip. As
    he bounded toward the limousine, which had slowed to about seven miles an
    hour around the corner but was starting to pick up speed, he had to run at the
    breakneck speed of nearly fifteen miles an hour to adjust for the speed and the
    distance between the two cars. As his feet propelled him toward the moving car,
    Clint Hill was so focused on reaching his target that he didn’t even hear the
    second shot. "

Clint Hill agreed with this scenario:  See this youtube interview/discussion with Clint Hill and Gerald Blaine conducted by the late Gary Mack, curator of the Sixth Floor Museum (beginning at 32:45):

How can I know what evidence you haven't examined.

Exactly.

But, to take an educated guess based on the bogus arguments you come up with, I would say you haven't examined any evidence beyond the witness testimony. And looking at your complete lack of knowledge concerning Ernest Brandt, you haven't examined the witness testimony too thoroughly either.

You got me there on Brandt. But, if I were you, I wouldn't hang my conclusion that there was a shot after the head shot on a guy who admits he was ducking for cover and never saw the head shot at all.

[Jerry Organ]

There is also trajectory evidence that shows that the bullet passing straight through JFK's neck without deflection could not possibly have hit JBC in the right armpit at any time.

Based on your 3D "analysis" and some gut feeling you share with Kooks that Connally was not far enough left to account for the SBT. Sure, you know better than the WC, Itek, the HSCA, PBS-Frontline and professional 3D artists since Dale K. Myers.

That is not based on anything other than a 3D recreation of the car position and relative position of the two men.

When it comes to your 3D recreation, it's lacks reality. You have shown no improvement in SketchUp for years, so you either stopped practicing or never had the knack to begin with.

[Dan O'meara]

Yes.

There is visual evidence that Connally was hit before the head shot because he has fallen back onto his wife before the head shot. There is also trajectory evidence that shows that the bullet passing straight through JFK's neck without deflection could not possibly have hit JBC in the right armpit at any time.  That is not based on anything other than a 3D recreation of the car position and relative position of the two men. There is also physical evidence that the bullet did not strike anything capable of causing a perceptible deflection in passing through JFK's neck and striking the tie know on the left side, let alone a significant deflection to the right.  All that together means that Connally must have been hit on a shot that was after JFK's neck shot (#1) and before the headshot (#3) ie. #2.

There is also the absence of any kind of explanation why a shooter, after clearly hitting the bullseye would keep shooting and an absence of any bullet evidence or impact evidence of a shot that missed.  But I digress.
I do what juries and judges do when asked to determine facts from evidence.  I weighed the evidence and applied reasoning to conclude that it is far more likely that the head shot was the last shot.

I've asked, what evidence other than witness testimony is there for a head-shot.

There is visual evidence that Connally was hit before the head shot because he has fallen back onto his wife before the head shot.

This is witness testimony.

There is also trajectory evidence that shows that the bullet passing straight through JFK's neck without deflection could not possibly have hit JBC in the right armpit at any time.  That is not based on anything other than a 3D recreation of the car position and relative position of the two men

This is not evidence that the head-shot was the last shot

There is also physical evidence that the bullet did not strike anything capable of causing a perceptible deflection in passing through JFK's neck and striking the tie know on the left side, let alone a significant deflection to the right.

This is not evidence the head-shot was the last shot

It was a late night....you are right. I confused Brandt with Millican.  Brandt, of course, is the other witness along the north side of Elm wearing a hat (a fedora, not the hard hat).  He did not give any statements to the WC.  But he did give interviews much later.  He says that he was 15 feet away from JFK when the first shot occurred and that JFK reacted as we see him reacting to the neck shot. This certainly conflicts with an early first shot miss.  But he said he never saw the head shot so I am not sure what "incredibly precise recollections of the shooting" with "a shot after the head shot" you are referring to.  At least in this interview given in November 2012, he said he did not see the head shot:
    "But John stayed right there on the curb and he saw that 3rd shot hit Kennedy’s head and he saw Kennedy’s head explode. But I didn’t see that."

 
I must have had a late night as well because I meant Templin.
So, that's Templin, Brehm, Moorman, Hill, Holmes, Foster, Jack Franzen, Malcolm Summers, Emmett Hudson,  who all believe there was a shot after the head-shot.
Speer lists dozens of other witnesses whose testimony can reasonably be interpreted as supporting a shot after the head-shot.
It is ironic that someone like Marylin Willis first stated there was a shot after the head-shot but eventually ended up singing from Papa Willis' hymn sheet.

Why do you ignore all this witness testimony?

No one was confused by echos. There was reverberation caused by reflection of sound from many different surfaces in Dealey Plaza.  Jean Hill was obviously not counting the shots.  She was simply saying that she had the impression there were more than 3 but fewer than 7 shots.

There is a large section on Pat Speer's website about how echoes played a large part in what people reported.
Bottom line - Hill reports hearing at least one shot after the head-shot

How many did he recall hearing or how many shots did he accept had occurred? He recalled hearing only two but he accepts, based on what other agents told him, that there was a shot just after he stepped off the car.  At that point he was highly focused on trying to reach the President's car.  He was also lower down and between motorcycles and the QM engine. See: Gerald Blaine, The Kennedy Detail, ch. 12 "Six Seconds in Dallas":

    "He leapt off the running board of Halfback, as he’d done countless times
    before, his body reacting as it had been trained. In that terrible, unforgettable
    moment, Clint Hill had but one purpose: he had to reach Mrs. Kennedy and the
    president, and shield them. His powerful legs propelled him toward the pink hat
    that seemed to be moving farther and farther away each time his foot landed on
    the pavement. If only he could reach the back of the car, his legs knew the exact
    height of the rear step; his hands knew exactly where to grasp the hand grip. As
    he bounded toward the limousine, which had slowed to about seven miles an
    hour around the corner but was starting to pick up speed, he had to run at the
    breakneck speed of nearly fifteen miles an hour to adjust for the speed and the
    distance between the two cars. As his feet propelled him toward the moving car,
    Clint Hill was so focused on reaching his target that he didn’t even hear the
    second shot. "

So Hill heard two shots, that's all you had to say.
Altgens only heard two shots.

How many shots did Landis hear?

[Jack Nessan]

This thread is about when the first shot occurred.
That's it.
If you have a contribution to make towards that, go for it.
I have presented a very strong case for this happening at z222/z223 using all kinds of evidence to support it.
If you want a discussion about how many shots there were, start your own thread.
I can't recall a single contribution you've made regarding the topic of this thread.

This thread is about when the first shot occurred.

This thread went off the rails within 6 hours of its beginning. Apparently proving there ever actually was a third shot is a little frightening

I can't recall a single contribution you've made regarding the topic of this thread.



Au contraire. Again, the witnesses tell the story as to the exact location of the first shot, it only requires that you believe them.

2 and ½ years later and 134 pages of repetitious postings and basically it still is still the same worn- out story, trying to see what unseeable event transpired behind the sign. Somehow you have convinced yourself you know the exact location of the first shot based on the Zapruder film itself. 

Here are the witness statements again as to the exact location of the first shot.

 

It is best to just read the witness statements. They give the location of the car in relationship to where they were standing when they heard the first shot. Jean Newman states it was just after it had passed her and the Chisms state it was just before them. Mary Woodward states it was when JFK looks forward again which is after Z204. The four secretaries state it happened in front of them.
 
Mary Woodward:   After acknowledging our cheers, he [JFK] faced forward again and suddenly there was a horrible, ear-splitting noise coming from behind us and a little to the right. My first reaction, and also my friends', was that as a joke someone had backfired their car. Apparently, the driver and occupants of the President's car had the same impression, because instead of speeding up, the car came almost to a halt...I don't believe anyone was hit with the first bullet. The President and Mrs. Kennedy turned and looked around, as if they, too, didn't believe the noise was really coming from a gun...Then after a moment's pause, there was another shot and I saw the President start slumping in the car. This was followed rapidly by another shot. Mrs. Kennedy stood up in the car, turned halfway around, then fell on top of her husband’s body…
 
Ann Donaldson (11-22-63 first person account published in the Washington Evening Star, Second Extra Edition. Note: this article was apparently picked up from a Jackson, Mississippi paper.) "I was standing 70 feet from President Kennedy when he was assassinated today and saw him fall under the bullet that killed him. Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy threw herself over his body as the President's car speeded up as soon as the driver realized what had happened. The crowd began to scream and wail and people standing nearby began to throw their children on the ground for safety. I heard two shots. The first shot sounded like a firecracker and the President heard it. He turned to look, as did everyone else, and then the second shot sounded.
 
-------------------------------
 
Chisms, Newman, and Secretaries
 
John Chism :  "And just as he got just about in front of me, he turned and waved at the crowd on this side of the street, the right side; at this point I heard what sounded like one shot,"
 
Jean Newman : "The motorcade had just passed me when I heard that I thought was a firecracker at first, and the President had just passed me, because after he had just passed, there was a loud report"
 
 
Gloria Calvery : "The car he was in was almost directly in front of where I was Standing when I heard the first shot."
 
 Karan Hicks : "The car he was in was almost directly in front of where I was standing when I heard the first explosion. I did not immediately recognize this sound as a gunshot"
 
Karen Westbrook :  "The car he was in was almost directly  in front of where I was standing when I heard the first explosion. I did not immediately recognize this sound as a gun shot ."
 
------------------------------------
 
JBC describes his location in his WC statement:
 
The only children on the right side of the street was first the Chisms and then the Newmans.
 
Mr. SPECTER. When you turned to your right. Governor Connally, immediately after you heard the first shot. what did you see on that occasion?
Governor CONNALLY. Nothing of any significance except just people out on the grass slope. I didn't see anything that was out of the ordinary, just saw men, women, and children.

 

--------------------------------------

Where is the doubt about SBT?

In Nellies WC Statement she references JBC cried out Oh No No No after being struck by the first shot. The same as what Jackie stated.
 
Mrs. CONNALLY. …….Then I don't know how soon, it seems to me it was very soon, that I heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the right.
I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck.
 
Mrs. CONNALLY. -----------------------------------As the first shot was hit, and I turned to look at the same time, I recall John saying, "Oh, no, no, no."

 

Again and again and again it is stated there were only two shots. How about actually proving there were three shots, other than presenting a selected few dubious statements.

[Dan O'meara]

This thread is about when the first shot occurred.

This thread went off the rails within 6 hours of its beginning. Apparently proving there ever actually was a third shot is a little frightening

I can't recall a single contribution you've made regarding the topic of this thread.



Au contraire. Again, the witnesses tell the story as to the exact location of the first shot, it only requires that you believe them.

2 and ½ years later and 134 pages of repetitious postings and basically it still is still the same worn- out story, trying to see what unseeable event transpired behind the sign. Somehow you have convinced yourself you know the exact location of the first shot based on the Zapruder film itself. 

Here are the witness statements again as to the exact location of the first shot.

 

It is best to just read the witness statements. They give the location of the car in relationship to where they were standing when they heard the first shot. Jean Newman states it was just after it had passed her and the Chisms state it was just before them. Mary Woodward states it was when JFK looks forward again which is after Z204. The four secretaries state it happened in front of them.
 
Mary Woodward:   After acknowledging our cheers, he [JFK] faced forward again and suddenly there was a horrible, ear-splitting noise coming from behind us and a little to the right. My first reaction, and also my friends', was that as a joke someone had backfired their car. Apparently, the driver and occupants of the President's car had the same impression, because instead of speeding up, the car came almost to a halt...I don't believe anyone was hit with the first bullet. The President and Mrs. Kennedy turned and looked around, as if they, too, didn't believe the noise was really coming from a gun...Then after a moment's pause, there was another shot and I saw the President start slumping in the car. This was followed rapidly by another shot. Mrs. Kennedy stood up in the car, turned halfway around, then fell on top of her husband’s body…
 
Ann Donaldson (11-22-63 first person account published in the Washington Evening Star, Second Extra Edition. Note: this article was apparently picked up from a Jackson, Mississippi paper.) "I was standing 70 feet from President Kennedy when he was assassinated today and saw him fall under the bullet that killed him. Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy threw herself over his body as the President's car speeded up as soon as the driver realized what had happened. The crowd began to scream and wail and people standing nearby began to throw their children on the ground for safety. I heard two shots. The first shot sounded like a firecracker and the President heard it. He turned to look, as did everyone else, and then the second shot sounded.
 
-------------------------------
 
Chisms, Newman, and Secretaries
 
John Chism :  "And just as he got just about in front of me, he turned and waved at the crowd on this side of the street, the right side; at this point I heard what sounded like one shot,"
 
Jean Newman : "The motorcade had just passed me when I heard that I thought was a firecracker at first, and the President had just passed me, because after he had just passed, there was a loud report"
 
 
Gloria Calvery : "The car he was in was almost directly in front of where I was Standing when I heard the first shot."
 
 Karan Hicks : "The car he was in was almost directly in front of where I was standing when I heard the first explosion. I did not immediately recognize this sound as a gunshot"
 
Karen Westbrook :  "The car he was in was almost directly  in front of where I was standing when I heard the first explosion. I did not immediately recognize this sound as a gun shot ."
 
------------------------------------
 
JBC describes his location in his WC statement:
 
The only children on the right side of the street was first the Chisms and then the Newmans.
 
Mr. SPECTER. When you turned to your right. Governor Connally, immediately after you heard the first shot. what did you see on that occasion?
Governor CONNALLY. Nothing of any significance except just people out on the grass slope. I didn't see anything that was out of the ordinary, just saw men, women, and children.

 

--------------------------------------

Where is the doubt about SBT?

In Nellies WC Statement she references JBC cried out Oh No No No after being struck by the first shot. The same as what Jackie stated.
 
Mrs. CONNALLY. …….Then I don't know how soon, it seems to me it was very soon, that I heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the right.
I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck.
 
Mrs. CONNALLY. -----------------------------------As the first shot was hit, and I turned to look at the same time, I recall John saying, "Oh, no, no, no."

 

Again and again and again it is stated there were only two shots. How about actually proving there were three shots, other than presenting a selected few dubious statements.

How about actually proving there were three shots, other than presenting a selected few dubious statements..

How about you starting your own thread to discuss how many shots there were?
This thread is called "The First Shot", it doesn't matter if there were two, three or fifty shots. That is not the topic under discussion.
And I have to laugh at - "...other than presenting a selected few dubious statements..", which is exactly what you've done in your post.
Remember this:

This is the problem, endless gibberish about what people are reading into witness statements.

That's all you do. In fact, in the post you wrote the above sentence, you went on to re-interpret a 3-shot witness into a 2-shot witness!

This thread went off the rails within 6 hours of its beginning.

I have seen to it that this thread has stayed on track for over 140 pages. Your little statement has no basis in fact.

Where is the doubt about SBT?

Just to clarify, I don't accept the SBT because a part of it is that CE 399 was the bullet that passed through both men.
Both men were shot through at the same time, but not by CE 399.
And if you think there is a less dubious witness than Nellie Connally regarding the shooting I'd like you to point them out.
You honestly think one statement by someone who wasn't even looking at either JFK or JBC at the time of the first shot has any weight on it's own? Without corroboration?
Of course you do.

I have to say this, though - while reading your post it dawned on me I hadn't done a most basic piece of analysis.
In the numerous arguments I have presented throughout this thread ,demonstrating the first shot was around z222/223, I have not done a basic analysis of the statements of those witnesses who give an approximate location of the limo at the time of the first shot.
I feel very stupid.

I'm going to get stuck into that right now. Will this analysis uphold my proposition for a first shot at z222/z223?
Watch this space

[Andrew Mason]

I've asked, what evidence other than witness testimony is there for a head-shot.

There is visual evidence that Connally was hit before the head shot because he has fallen back onto his wife before the head shot.

This is witness testimony.

The Zapruder film is witness testimony?  We have physical evidence that he was shot. We can also see the blood in the later frames. According to the physical evidence (no reliance on JBC or Nellie or any witness), the bullet entered his right armpit and exited under his right nipple.  It was impossible for any bullet to pass through him like that after he was reclined back as he certainly was by z300.   The only conclusion, based on the fact that he was shot from the back to the front, that he has been shot in the chest before the head shot. I don't think one needs Nellie to say that she did not shoot him in the back while he was lying down on top of her.  Maybe you do. I don't.

There is also trajectory evidence that shows that the bullet passing straight through JFK's neck without deflection could not possibly have hit JBC in the right armpit at any time.  That is not based on anything other than a 3D recreation of the car position and relative position of the two men

This is not evidence that the head-shot was the last shot

Why not?  After concluding from the Zfilm that he was shot before the head shot, the only question then is whether he was hit by the same shot that passed through JFK.  That can be resolved by eliminating the SBT, which I can do simply based on the trajectory through JFK not coming close to JBC's right armpit.  There is also a complete absence of any evidence that he was hit in the back on the first shot.  That is not relying on any witness.

There is also physical evidence that the bullet did not strike anything capable of causing a perceptible deflection in passing through JFK's neck and striking the tie know on the left side, let alone a significant deflection to the right.

This is not evidence the head-shot was the last shot

Again, why not?  This evidence relates to the trajectory.

I must have had a late night as well because I meant Templin.

Templin was not a WC witness either so perhaps you can provide a reference to the statements you rely on.  But you still have a big problem.  John Templin was standing with Ernest Brandt and Brandt said he witnessed two shots before ducking for cover and missed seeing the head shot, which John Templin saw.  So Brandt is still a witness for three shots, the first two not being the head shot.

So, that's Templin, Brehm, Moorman, Hill, Holmes, Foster, Jack Franzen, Malcolm Summers, Emmett Hudson,  who all believe there was a shot after the head-shot.
Speer lists dozens of other witnesses whose testimony can reasonably be interpreted as supporting a shot after the head-shot.
It is ironic that someone like Marylin Willis first stated there was a shot after the head-shot but eventually ended up singing from Papa Willis' hymn sheet.

Why do you ignore all this witness testimony?

For the umpteenth time, I do not ignore it. First of all, I don't think the evidence, apart from Brehm perhaps, provides evidence of a shot after the head shot.  In any event, I am just not persuaded by any of it (see below) it in light of the much better, clearer and consistent evidence of the many witnesses close by, including the Connallys, Secret Service, Dave Powers, Mary Woodward, Gayle Newman, Altgens etc. 

As I mentioned, Templin saw the head shot as the last shot.

Brehm said he pulled his son down after the third shot after he realized that they were shots.  He didn't think JFK's head exploding was enough to persuade him that they were shots?

Emmett Hudson gave conflicting statements. In his first statement on 22Nov63 he said he heard 3 shots but did not say which one hit JFK in the head. In his 26Nov63 statement he also did not mention the head shot but said the first one caused him slump to one side.  It was only in his WC testimony taken 8 months after the events that he first mentioned the head shot and insisted there was a shot after. And then Liebeler gets him to say that JFK was hit again after he got hit in the head!  (7 H 561).

Summers in his 23Nov63 statement, which is the only one I can find, described only 2 shots and said that after the second he hit the ground.  So I don't see where he ever described the head shot let alone a shot after the head shot.

The Franzens do not state which of the shots hit JFK in the head. Mr. Franzen says that after the second and third shots he noticed blood on the top and sides of JFK's head.

In Foster's only statement, taken 4 months after the events he seems to suggest initially that the second shot was the head shot but then he says that he "felt the third shot struck the President as he heard the second shot that was fired".It sounds to me like he heard two shots in rapid succession and saw JFK's head explode some time during those two shots.

Moorman gave two statements on 22Nov63.  In the first she said there 3 or 4 shots but to the FBI she said she heard 2 or 3.  I don't see anywhere where she specifically says there was a shot after the headshot.  Due to the uncertainty as to the number of shots, I don't think much weight can be attributed to any suggestion that there was a shot after the head shot.

There is a large section on Pat Speer's website about how echoes played a large part in what people reported.
Bottom line - Hill reports hearing at least one shot after the head-shot

So Hill heard two shots, that's all you had to say.

Clint or Jean?  You are confusing me.  Clint Hill recalled only two shots.  Jean Hill wasn't sure how many shots there were and thought there were more than 3 but fewer than 7. How else can you interpret "4-6 shots"?

Altgens only heard two shots.

You need to re-read his evidence (7 H 517-518). 

I wasn’t keeping track of the number of pops that took place, but I could vouch for No. 1, and I can vouch for the last shot, but I cannot tell you how many shots were in between. There was not another shot fired after the President was struck in the head. That was the last shot-that much I will say with a great degree of certainty.
Mr. LIEBELER. What makes you so certain of that, Mr. Altgens?
Mr. ALTGENS. Because, having heard these shots and then having seen the damage that was done on this shot to the President’s head, I was aware at that time that shooting was taking place and there was not a shot-I looked-I looked because I knew the shot had to come from either over here, if it were close range, or had to come from a high-powered rifle.
Mr. LIEBELER. When you say “over here,” you indicate.

How many shots did Landis hear?

In both his Nov. 27/63 and Nov 30/63 statements he said he recalled hearing only two shots, the head shot being the last shot. His Nov. 30 statement is a bit confusing because he although he refers to another shot after the first: "It must have been another second or two before the next shot was fired" but later says the time lapse between the first and second shots must have been about four or five seconds. 

[Andrew Mason]

Based on your 3D "analysis" and some gut feeling you share with Kooks that Connally was not far enough left to account for the SBT. Sure, you know better than the WC, Itek, the HSCA, PBS-Frontline and professional 3D artists since Dale K. Myers.

When it comes to your 3D recreation, it's lacks reality. You have shown no improvement in SketchUp for years, so you either stopped practicing or never had the knack to begin with.

You have yet to show the view from Zapruder's position of the two men in the car as you have positioned them.  Myers refuses to show us what distances he uses in determining their positions. Itek stated that their analysis was based on the gap between the right jump seat and the car door being 15 cm (6 HSCA 49) even though they refer to the Hess & Eisenhardt drawing showing that this distance is only 2.5" or 6.4 cm. They concluded that Connally was sitting 4 to 8 inches (10.2 to 20.3 cm) inboard of JFK.

I maintain that my 3D scale drawing is accurate.  But that just helps show what can be easily calculated.  We just have to use a bit of trigonometry using distances from the scale drawing of the limo (bottom drawing of CE 872 or a clearer version at 6 HSCA 50):


I have shown that JBC was sitting in the middle of his seat in z193 and that JFK was sitting to the right side of his seat but with his right shoulder inside the car.  His rib cage not pressed against the car.  So there are at least 2 inches between the armpit and the side wall of the compartment.  His right elbow was out to the right and leaning on the top of the car.    His right armpit is 8 inches from his spine.  So JFK's midline would have been at least 10 inches inside the car. 

The rear and jump seat compartment widths and distances of JFK and JBC's midlines from the sides:: [/b]

The width of the compartment between the doors is 53.25" according to the drawing.  The 60" dimension across the back seat includes the outer trim which is about the same width as the space between the left jump seat and the door (2.25"), so the rear compartment is 60-2x2.25=55.5".  That makes the jump seat compartment 2.25 inches narrower than the width of the rear bench seat compartment (53.25" as opposed to 55.5").  That puts the middle of JBC's car seat 10.25+2.5 = 12.75 inches inside the right wall of the middle jump seat compartment and, therefore, 1.125" farther ie. 13.875 inches inside of the right wall of the rear bench seat compartment. So, JBC's spine was 3.875 inches left of JFK's spine if he was sitting up straight facing forward. That is 10 cm which fits with the range that Itek determined.

The horizontal distance between the men:

JBC's shoulders were turned right at z193 at an angle to the car that was greater than the angle of Zapruder's line of sight to the car direction, which was 27 degrees. To do that, he is leaning forward, away from the seat back.  That may not make a difference in the left-right location of the spine but it puts it some distance - I would say about 4 inches forward of  the jump seat back.

The scale plan drawing of the limo shows 29" horizontal distance between the bottom of the back of the rear bench seat and the bottom of the back of the jump seats. So if they were sitting the same way in their seats, there should be 29 inches between them.  However, JFK's seat leans back significantly.  JFK's shoulders are slumped forward a bit but his thoracic spine appears to be against the inclined seat back in Croft's photo.  I would suggest that this puts the horizontal position of the neck exit point a few inches at most in front of the bottom of the seat back. Three inches would put the exit wound around 26" horizontal distance from the bottom of the jump seat back.  So if Connally's back is 4 inches away from the seat back, that puts his spine 30 inches horizontally from the exit point on JFK which was on the left side of his tie, half an inch to the left of his midline.

The right to left distance travelled by the bullet after exiting JFK before passing JBC's midline:

So a bullet travelling through JFK on a right to left trajectory angle of 13 degrees exiting 10.5 inches from the right wall of the rear seat compartment will pass Connally's midline 30 inches in horizontal distance from the JFK exit point a further 30tan13=30 x 2.3=6.9 inches farther left than the exit point, or 17.4 inches from the side of the rear compartment. JBC's midline was 13.875" this is 3.5 inches to the left of JBC's midline.  With JBC turned right about 30 degrees, the bullet misses the back or perhaps grazes the back of his jacket.  But it definitely does not go anywhere close to his right armpit. :



So just using the limo dimensions and simple trigonometry you can see that the SBT trajectory at z193 does not begin to work. At z223 the angle of the car to the SN has decreased to about 9 degrees but JBC's position has changed as his shoulders are not turned.  So that puts his spine about 27 inches from the JFK neck exit point which means that if the neck shot occurred there it would have hit him 9.5 + 27 tan 9= 9.5+27 x 1.58 = 9.5+4.3=13.8 inches inside the rear seat compartment and 12.675 inches inside the jump seat compartment - essentially hitting him right in the spine - or about 8 inches left of the wound in the right armpit.  (Mind you, I am not changing JFK's position at all and at z225 his right shoulder appears to have moved farther inboard from the right wall of his seating compartment, which would but the bullet striking JBC even farther left). 

When it comes to your 3D recreation, it's lacks reality. You have shown no improvement in SketchUp for years, so you either stopped practicing or never had the knack to begin with.

I do have a day job, Jerry.  Besides, I use the free version.  How about I send mine to you and you can fix it up?