Oswald's shot-1 ricochet was at Z113 or Z105.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

For what it's worth, Hickey might have been propped against the cases, with his feet on the floor, up against the jump-seat.

Here is a pix of the cases.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

There is no evidence of a second gunman @Dealey.

We can start with 5 bits of evidence that there was a second gunman.
[1] What about the dent in the chrome trim – made by the second-last shot of Hickey's accidental auto burst – the last shot hitting JFK in the head.
[2] The dent shows that it was made by the direct hit of a soft-nosed slug (eg a hollow point).
[3] The hole in JFK's head shows that it was made by a soft nosed slug (eg a hollow point).
[4] The remnant slug exited JFKs head at an angle & cracked the windshield.
[5] A slug hit Main St near Tague, a fragment of pavement hit Tague in lower left cheek.
None of these 5 can be credibly explained as belonging to Oswald's shot-1 or shot-2.
Tague said that [5] wasnt at shot-1 nor shot-2.
And, Oswald fired only 2 shots.
Re [4], if Oswald fired a shot-3, it would had to have veered almost 20 deg in JFKs small head (to crack the windshield), impossible.
Re [5], if Oswald fired a shot-3, it is unlikely that a fragment of lead would (after exiting JFK's head) clear the windshield & hit Tague.
Re [4], the crack could not have been made when CE567 & CE569 or remnant slug ricocheted off the signal arm, koz the lean of the glass in the windshield angled up to approx the ricochet point on the signal arm, ie the glass was almost parallel to the needed traject  -- no, the crack was made by the remnant head-shot slug from the AR15 going parallel to the road, or nearly.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Hi Andrew.  I agree with you, there were dozens of witnesses who referred to the final two shots being closer than the first two.  There is an important issue about whether the head shot was the last shot, and what exactly the gap was between the final two shots.  For example, some witnesses you mentioned in your analysis referred to a ratio of 2 to 1 between the gap lengths, so this could be 3 seconds and 1.5 seconds, or 6 seconds and 3 seconds (as suggested by Ralph Yarborough and Arnold Rowland respectively).  In the Zapruder film we see the gap between JFK being hit by the two shots is about 5-7 seconds depending on exactly when he was hit during Z190-Z220, which suggests that if Arnold Rowland was close to the truth then the final shot was fired around Z360-Z400 which went wild as the Presidential limo was accelerating out of danger at that point (maybe this was the bullet which hit Tague via the kerb on Main Street?).

By contrast we have other witnesses who say that the two shots fired were both fired so rapidly they were almost simultaneously fired at the time of the head shot (as suggested by George Hickey and Sam Holland).  It's hard to know the exact time frame, but it seems too rapid for a single bolt action gun to have been used (a pair of shots fired in less than 2-3 seconds probably means a second gunman was involved).

Clearly dozens of witnesses did not hear a shot after the head shot, but by contrast many definitely did hear a shot after the head shot (such as Charles Brehm and Emmett Hudson who were very close to the limo and saw the explosion we see at Z313).  In addition, some witnesses like Mary Moorman and Jean Hill heard two shots after the head shot, so I am fairly certain there was at least one shot well after what we see at Z313 in the Zapruder film.  I think many witnesses failed to register this final shot (or two) because they were running away in terror and were simply unaware of events due to the unfolding chaos (including a very loud siren being emitted from the Secret Service follow up car).

In summary, I find it hard to be 100% certain about whether there were 3 or more shots fired in total due to the very split witnesses.  However, I am 100% certain that there were only 3 bursts of gunfire as nobody reported a fourth burst.  Even AJ Millican who reported 8 shots grouped them into a pattern of 3-2-3.  Naturally lone nut believers say he was confused by echoes, and conspiracy believers say each burst had a pair of shots in it.  Without concrete physical evidence either way it feels rather moot, so I find it difficult to commit either way on the total number of shots fired.

Here are the timings for Oswald's shot-1 & shot-2 & for a faux shot-3.
87 ft is the horizontal dist scaled by me, 106 ft is the hypotenuse dist allowing for vertical dist estimated by me.

Oswald Shot ----------- hit at ------ fired at  ------ sound hit JFK at – Carcano = 2170 ft per sec.
1 --- 87 ft = 106 ft ----- Z113 ------ Z112.1 ---------- Z113.9 ----- camera runs at 18.3 frames per sec.
2 --- 184 ft = 197 ft---- Z218 ------- Z216.3 --------- Z219.6
3 --- 255 ft = 266 ft ---- Z313 -------- Z310.8 --------- Z315.2 -------- Oswald did not have a shot-3.
The time tween shot-1 & shot-2 is 104.2 frames, which is 5.7 sec. Holland reckoned that shot-1 was at Z106, which is an extra 7 frames, or 0.4 sec, which makes it 6.1 sec.
The time tween shot-2 & faux shot-3 is 94.5 frames, which is 5.2 sec.
Adding to 10.9 sec.

Here are the timings for Hickey's auto burst, based on there being 6 shots.
Hickey Shot ------------- hit at ------ fired at  ------ sound hit JFK at -------
6 ---- 26 ft---------------- Z313 -------- Z312.8 ---------- Z313.2 --- hit JFK in head & cracked windshield.
5 ---- AR15 = 3250 ft per sec------------ Z310.0 ---------- hit chrome trim on windshield.
4 ---- sound = 1100 ft per sec ----------- Z307.25 -------- went over the windshield, hit Elm St.
3 ---- probly 400 rpm= 6.67 rps --------- Z304.5 ---------- went over the windshield, hit Elm St.
2 ------------------------------------------- Z301.8 ----------- went over the windshield, hit Elm St.
1 ------------------------------------------- Z299.0 ---- probly hit Main St pavement & then kerb near Tague.

[Andrew Mason]

It's just that most of your "didn't see the President smile" witnesses were behind the President. So--from a defense attorney standpoint--you're "correct". Mary Woodward was off to the side and said the President didn't slump until the second shot.

No. She said:

• "Things are a little hazy from this point, but I don't believe anyone was hit by 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."

She qualified her statement by saying that things were hazy after the first shot and just stated what she believed rather than what she distinctly recalled seeing.  Besides you are cherry-picking her statement.  One thing she was very clear on was that the last two shots were closer together.  That necessarily means that JFK reacted to the first shot.  She also made it clear that the first shot occurred a second or two after they had engaged the President with their cheers as he passed by.  They were standing opposite JFK at about z190.

Since it was a little hazy in her mind, the slumping she referred to may have been the slump after the head shot.  As she said in her later statement to the FBI:
7Dec63 - FBI statement

• "Just as President and Mrs. Kennedy went by, they turned and waved at them.  Just a second or two later, she heard a loud noise.  At this point, it appeared to her that President and Mrs. Kennedy were about 100 feet from her.  There seemed to be a pause of a few seconds, and then there were two more loud noises which she suddenly realized were shots, and she saw President Kennedy fall over....
  

If you count a second or two after JFK turns (z161-165) toward Mary Woodward's group and he begins to wave (z173), that would put the first shot between z191 (z173+18) and z198 (161+37)

    "While it is true that a majority of ear-witnesses reported that the second and
     third shots were closer than the first and second, only 39% of respondents
     mentioned the spacing of the shots at all. Sixty-one percent didn’t mention
     (or were never asked about) the spacing of the shots. Of those who did,
     5% thought the first two were closer together, 25% thought the last two were
     closer together, and 9% though the shots were evenly spaced.
        One-quarter is hardly a meaningful percentage given the great pool of total
     ear-witnesses"

          — Dale K Myers (Dec20-2007)

I am not sure what qualifies Myers to provide statistics but if as many as 39% of ear witnesses specifically mentioned the shot spacing (my numbers are 61 out of 178) that just tells us that they may have thought other things were more important like the number of shots.  Many who did not state a pattern, nevertheless grouped the shots as one and then two more. Many may have recalled the number of shots precisely because they recalled it in two groups like that.  Myers should give us his numbers. I get 45 who  heard 1......2...3.  That may be 45 out of 178 total witnesses but it is 75% of those who recalled a pattern.

Hold on, cowboy. It's your interpretation of the evidence that I find wrong.

I am avoiding interpretation. I am taking their statements at face-value.  That is not an interpretation.

I've explained that to you countless times. If the witnesses arrived in Dealey Plaza anticipating they were about to hear three loud reports and to register in their minds the time span between each one, then that "shot pattern" consensus might have some footing. And aren't you saying the even-spacing and longer-pause-between-one-and-two witnesses are mistaken?

Look at their statements.  The ten who thought they were "about equally spaced" or the six who thought that they heard the reverse pattern were vague about it and/or very close to the events.

Why would anyone begin to take stock of the length of time between shots one and two, if most (it seems) thought the first shot was just a "backfire" or "firecracker"? No reason whatsoever to anticipate a second loud report. But when they heard the second loud report, naturally their cognizant functions heightened. They're weren't dumbstruck or anything; just when questioned later on, arrived at a perfectly understandable false memory. There's also the question of whether the siren was activated between shots two and three, which--with all the other stuff unfolding--could make the one-to-two shot span seem pretty ordinary and remote.

This just goes to show that it is you who is doing the interpretation and not taking the evidence at face value.  Your arguments are not evidence.

No. What I showed was empirical evidence that Linda Willis could not possible see the President when he was between her and the Stemmons sign. The empirical evidence shows she could see without obstruction the President when he was between her and the Thornton sign. I'm sorry this undermines your Pet Theory.

So Linda Willis was lying?  Why could she not see the President? She was standing up on a step.  She was 14 years old.

BTW, you're so anti-SBT, you might as well come out of the closet and be a conspiracy nut. 

That only makes sense IF the SBT was essential to the LN conclusion. It isn't.  It was the biggest mistake of the WC because the lack of evidence for it and the abundant conflicting evidence feeds CTs.  The fact is that a shot at z271 fits Oswald firing all three shots.  4.15 seconds and 2.3 seconds between shots.  And, as I have said many times Jerry, your ad hominem approach just makes your arguments look even weaker.

[Andrew Mason]

Hi Andrew.  I agree with you, there were dozens of witnesses who referred to the final two shots being closer than the first two.  There is an important issue about whether the head shot was the last shot, and what exactly the gap was between the final two shots.  For example, some witnesses you mentioned in your analysis referred to a ratio of 2 to 1 between the gap lengths, so this could be 3 seconds and 1.5 seconds, or 6 seconds and 3 seconds (as suggested by Ralph Yarborough and Arnold Rowland respectively).  In the Zapruder film we see the gap between JFK being hit by the two shots is about 5-7 seconds depending on exactly when he was hit during Z190-Z220, which suggests that if Arnold Rowland was close to the truth then the final shot was fired around Z360-Z400 which went wild as the Presidential limo was accelerating out of danger at that point (maybe this was the bullet which hit Tague via the kerb on Main Street?).

By contrast we have other witnesses who say that the two shots fired were both fired so rapidly they were almost simultaneously fired at the time of the head shot (as suggested by George Hickey and Sam Holland).  It's hard to know the exact time frame, but it seems too rapid for a single bolt action gun to have been used (a pair of shots fired in less than 2-3 seconds probably means a second gunman was involved).

Hickey was looking forward for the last two shots and definitely recalled the last shot striking JFK in the head.  He said that the second shot did not appear to hit JFK.  It appeared to miss.  All he saw was the hair on the right of JFK's head fly up at the time the second shot sounded.  Guess where that occurs?

Brehm does not necessarily describe the headshot as the second shot.  He said that JFK's hair flew up on the second shot.  That is what Hickey saw as well on the second shot. Brehm was never questioned by the WC. It is difficult to determine what he saw.  Hudson gave two statements shortly after the events (November 22 and 25, 1963) and gave a very different statement in his testimony in July 1964.  If you go by his first two statements as being the more accurate, he says that JFK slumped on the first shot and the last two shots were in rapid succession.  He does not say which of the shots hit the President in the head. He does not even mention a shot hitting the President in the head.

Clearly dozens of witnesses did not hear a shot after the head shot,

It was not a matter of not hearing a shot after the head shot.  It is a matter of hearing and/or seeing the head shot as the third of the three shots.  The Connallys, Greer, Hickey, Powers, Bennett, and McIntyre all recalled the head shot as the third shot.  Hill recalled it as the last of two shots that he recalled but believes, based on what other agents said, that there was a second shot while he was running beside the left front of the QM.

[Gerry Down]

The bullet struck the 5th rib. You have drawn it as though the bullet struck the rib on Connalys back rather than his front. I though the bullet broke Connllys rib on the front side of his body?

[Andrew Mason]

The bullet struck the 5th rib. You have drawn it as though the bullet struck the rib on Connalys back rather than his front. I though the bullet broke Connllys rib on the front side of his body?

According to the medical evidence, the bullet struck the fifth rib in the back near the scapula (shoulder blade) and just medial to the right axilla (armpit) fold (Shaw 6H85).  There was a fracture of the fifth rib 4 cm to the right of the spine.  This was noticed by Dr. Shaw afterward from the xrays and is mentioned in his HSCA testimony (1HSCA261).  This fracture was caused by the bullet causing the rib to flex as there was nothing that struck JBC near the spine.  In order to cause the rib to move, the bullet must apply force to the rib for a bit of time.  This is not the result of the bullet passing through the rib but of striking it where it entered and following along the rib until it broke through the bone. Once it broke through the bone, the flexing force on the upper rib ended.

[Andrew Mason]

The graphic is for Mason's Pet Theory only. It shows the entry point where I believe the HSCA showed it.

Sure, move the bullet impact more towards the front of the rib. But not too much or the bullet will be going through the right arm. The trajectory won't work for Mason's Pet Theory no matter where it strikes the rib.

(Personally I think the actual rib strike was more tangential. It's Mason's Pet Theory that has the bullet striking so nose-on.)

Nice graphics, Jerry.  But, as usual, you have everything wrong.

First of all, the bullet missed JFK's head on his right side. 
Second, you do not allow for the fact that JFK had moved significantly to his left by z271.
Third, you seem to think that JBC was turned completely 90 degrees.  But his chest is facing Zapruder so his shoulders are turned about 65-70 degrees.
Fourth, you have his wrist too high. The bullet exited through his right jacket pocket and passed through the end of his jacket cuff and through the french cuff of his shirt.  The wrist is pronated so that the back of his wrist (not the side of his wrist) is pressed against the chest (not his neck as you have it).   The end of his jacket cuff over the back of his wrist cannot be seen as it is pressed against his right jacket pocket.

I know you don't agree with my position, but in order to try to "refute" it, you have to follow the evidence.  You are just making stuff up.  In order to refute the evidence of a second shot around z271 striking JBC you have to recreate the positions of the men accurately. Since the best evidence is a two dimensional low resolution film, we have to estimate a range of possible positions and show the path to the right of JFK's head to JBC's right armpit to the back of his wrist for this range of possible positions.