A Closer Look…

[Dan O'meara]

If one draws a line on a map perpendicular to the direction of Elm Street at the Z133 mark (the location of JFK at the beginning of the Zapruder film segment) Pierce Allman was standing right there on the south side of the street. Here is what Allman said on the radio later that day: "And right after Mr. Kennedy passed right in front of me I heard one big explosion…
The beginnings of the reactions of some of the bystanders as documented on the Zapruder film and highlighted in this thread happen in the Z150s. This would place JFK at about a car length or less past the Z133 mark at which Allman is standing. Now, I ask: do Allman’s words seem to indicate that JFK was a car length or less past him or do they indicate that JFK was 75 or 100 feet past him when he heard the big explosion? Also, Allman’s words never specifically tie JFK’s reaction to the first explosion. About an hour before the radio interview, Allman was on the phone in the TSBD communicating with the radio station. Here is a snip from his live telephone report: And as he went by the Texas School Book Depository headed for the triple underpass, there were three pound reverberating explosions…. Again I ask, do those words “as he wert by” (place yourself in Allman’s position on Elm Street) seem to indicate that JFK was already 75 or 100 feet past Allman when he heard the first explosion? I don’t think so. But you be the judge.

The images presented here in this thread speak for themselves. The lady who Jerry Organ first pointed out (who snapped her head around) and the lady in gold that I pointed out (who jumped and then brings her hand to her mouth), both seem to be having an instinctive reaction to the first loud explosive sound. These types of reactions happen extremely fast (before the conscious mind can even think about it). The amygdala portion deep inside the brain controls the instinctive reactions without the need for conscious thought. The reactions can be measured as to how quickly they happened and how far did she turn or jump. There are at least 13 others who have somewhat similar reactions that have been pointed out earlier in this thread. All of these reactions are the type of reactions that one might expect if a loud explosive sound had just unexpectedly happened. All all of these reactions happened at essentially the same time.
You can see them with your own eyes and believe whatever you wish about them. Or, you can try to twist the words of however many witness accounts you want to in order to try to justify believing whatever you wish. I frankly couldn’t care less.

The images presented here in this thread speak for themselves.

No, they don't. You are speaking for them.
You are applying an incredibly strained interpretation to them that doesn't stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny.
You are ignoring a mass of evidence clearly demonstrating you are wrong on this point, in favour of cherry-picking Allman's testimony.
It's a classic example of picking a moment in the Z-film and assigning meaning to certain actions of a handful of the 100+ people shown in that 26 second clip.
And then cherry-picking a couple of scraps of testimony that can be interpreted to suit.

Do you accept that JFK and Jackie turned to their right because Woodward and her colleagues called out?
Of course you don't. You simply ignore this inconvenience.
Do you accept the testimonies of the various photographers - Betzner, Willis, Altgens - that place the first shot well after the z 160's?
Not a chance.
Or the dozens of witnesses describing JFK reacting adversely to the first shot?
Or the lack of any reaction of the SS agents who we know reacted immediately to the first shot?

And here's some more evidence for you to ignore from Reply#786 of "The First Shot" thread:

I recently came across yet another way to corroborate a first shot around z223 thanks to the work of Pat Speer. It concerns the witness statements of the occupants of the Vice-Presidential car and the Vice-Presidential follow-up car. From these statements it is possible to glean an approximate position for each car at the time of the first shot and from these approximate positions it is possible rule out various theories regarding the first shot.
I will look at a number of theories put forward for when the first shot occurred in relation to the Z-Film:

z133 (and before)
z160
z190
z223 (my own proposal for the first shot)

First, a look at the statements:

VICE PRESIDENTIAL CAR

Hurchel Jacks [Driver] -
"My car had just straightened up from making the left turn. I was looking directly at the President’s car at that time. At that time I heard a shot ring out..."

Rufus Youngblood [Passenger Seat] -
"The motorcade then made a left turn, and the sidewalk crowds
were beginning to diminish in size. I observed a grassy plot to my right in back of a small crowd...I heard an explosion…"
"As we were beginning to go down this incline, all of a sudden there was an explosive noise."
"We had straightened on Elm now and were beginning to move easily down the incline in the wake of the cars ahead. Suddenly there was an explosive noise..."

Senator Yarborough [back left] - 
“as the motorcade went down the slope of Elm Street toward the railroad underpass, a rifle shot was heard by me; a loud blast..."

Lady Bird Johnson [back centre] - 
“we were rounding a curve, going down a hill and suddenly there was a sharp loud report..."
"...suddenly in that brilliant sunshine there was a sharp rifle shot. It  came, I thought, from over my right shoulder."

Lyndon Johnson [back right] - 
"After we had proceeded a short way down Elm Street, I heard a sharp report."

VICE-PRESIDENTIAL FOLLOW-UP CAR

Joe Henry Rich [Driver] -
“We turned off of Houston Street onto Elm Street and that was when I heard the first shot."


Cliff Carter [passenger seat]  - 
"...our car had just made the left hand turn onto Elm and was right along side of the Texas School Book Depository Building when I heard a noise which sounded like a firecracker."

Jerry Kivett [back right] - 
"As the motorcade was approximately 1/3 the way to the underpass, traveling between 10 and 15 miles per hour, I heard a loud noise..."

Warren Taylor [back centre] -
“Our automobile had just turned a corner (the names of the streets are unknown to me) when I heard a bang which sounded to me like a possible firecracker —the sound coming from my right rear."

Thomas (Lem) Johns [back right] - 
"We turned onto Elm Street...We were going downhill...which put the Texas Book Depository on our right, more or less...But we were going down this Elm Street, with my door open. I heard at least two shots.."

10 witnesses in 2 vehicles all corroborating each others statements. Not one or two ambiguous statements open to any kind of interpretation. Every single occupant of both cars are stating, basically, the same thing - at the time of the first shot these cars had turned off Houston Street and were travelling down Elm.
I now turn to the work of Mark Tyler to compare how these statements support or refute the various theories put forward.

Z133



In the image above the Vice-Presidential car is marked 7 and the follow-up car 8. It is obvious from this image that both vehicles are still on Houston at the time of this proposed first shot and, as such, a shot around z133 (or before) is absolutely refuted by the 10 witness statements.

Z160



Again, we can clearly see that, although car 7 is well into it's turn, car 8 is still on Houston. The theory of a first shot around z160 is refuted.

Z190



It can be said that car 7 is now travelling down Elm but car 8 is still to complete the turn as specified by the occupants of this car and, as such, a shot around z190 is refuted by the witness statements.

Z223



My own proposal.
It can be seen from the above image that both cars are now travelling on Elm after having completed the turn off Houston. There can be no doubt that this is the only theory that comes anywhere close to fitting the witness statements of the 10 occupants of these vehicles.
Yet further corroboration, if any were needed, that the first shot was the one that struck JFK in the throat around z223.

[Dan O'meara]

I presented the contexts, asked the questions, and said what I think. Then I said you be the judge, meaning each person should form their own opinions. That is completely different from: you claiming that all those witnesses’ accounts are supposedly confirming that JFK reacted to the first shot. You may have that opinion. But that doesn’t make it true.


But because people can turn their heads for any number of reasons, by itself this is not evidence of a shot.

Please give us your opinion of the reason(s) that over fifteen people reacted at the same moment in time. I suggest that you begin with the extremely quick instinctive head snap reaction we can all see from the lady that Jerry Organ originally pointed out in his excellent clip.

Please give us your opinion of the reason(s) that over fifteen people reacted at the same moment in time.

Every single person in the clips Jerry posted is reacting to the motorcade.
Without exception.
You seem to have forgotten, That is what they are all there to see. That's why they are standing on Elm Street in the first place.
All the people running around the corner, the people straining to get a better viewing position and even the lady who is following the motorcade and briefly looks around at the rest of the motorcade passing by before looking back in the direction of the limo.
The actions of every single person can be understood in terms of what they were all actually doing - watching the motorcade.

[Charles Collins]

This clip that Jerry Organ made to show some of the crowd on the east side of Houston Street seems to show one man (red circle) ducking as he turns away from the motorcade. This morning I also noticed a passenger (blue circle) in the left rear seat of the VP car apparently ducking.




Here’s the clip:



It appears to me that the left arm comes down off of the side of the car and the head ducks downward. Take a look and be your own judge.

[Richard Smith]

I agree completely. So how were the witnesses reliable when it comes to the number of shots but not reliable as to the pattern of the shots, the rapidity of the last two shots, where JFK was when the first shot occurred and how he responded to it?

And all of the evidence that is being rejected as unreliable all fits together:  the shot pattern with the last two close together requires JFK to be hit by the first shot.  The estimated 2:1 ratio recalled by several witnesses would  mean the first shot had to have occurred just before JFK is seen reacting when he emerges from behind the sign, which fits with the witnesses who said that JFK reacted immediately to the first shot.

Perhaps, the more important question is: how is it that all these witnesses were mistaken but in a way that the mistakes are all mutually consistent?

The question of how many shots were fired doesn't require the witness to provide any subjective description or interpretation.  It is a quantitative question and answer.  The witness might be wrong but what is being asked and answered is clear.  When you start asking about "shot patterns" or "reactions" you begin to stray into individual interpretations of events using language that can be interpreted in different ways.  That's not to say that it can't be informative, but the answers are filtered through the witness description of events and whomever is trying to interpret their answers.  Often with a bias.   Most witnesses said three shots were fired.  Three shell casings were found.  That's compelling. 

[Charles Collins]

A bird’s eye view shows us the relative positions of the vehicles around the point in time of all of these reactions. Notice the gap between the queen Mary vehicle (6) and the VP car (7).




Although we don’t see Rosemary Willis in this clip, I believe that we do see Rosemary’s baby um, sister and mother (circled in yellow). Notice that it appears that both mother and daughter have snapped their heads to look towards the upper levels of the TSBD. It appears that they both are holding their right hand up towards that direction. Both of these Willis ladies reacted the same way simultaneously and at the same instant that the lady that Jerry Organ first noticed snapping her head around. The Willis ladies quickly swing their heads back around towards JFK’s direction just like the one that Jerry originally noticed. Rosemary Willis can be seen further along (to the camera right) if we were looking at the entire Zapruder film capture instead of a partial frame closeup. And if I remember correctly Rosemary snaps her head around towards the TSBD at this same moment in time. I believe that Gerda Dunkel did an excellent clip of Rosemary doing just that. So, there are four ladies that we can see snapping their heads around towards the TSBD at the same time. And for those who might think these ladies were waving at someone in the motorcade, there is no one to wave at due to the gap shown above in the birdseye view.











Edit: That is apparently not Mrs Willis. I have been told that she is elsewhere in Dealey Plaza.

[Andrew Mason]

The question of how many shots were fired doesn't require the witness to provide any subjective description or interpretation.  It is a quantitative question and answer.  The witness might be wrong but what is being asked and answered is clear.  When you start asking about "shot patterns" or "reactions" you begin to stray into individual interpretations of events using language that can be interpreted in different ways.  That's not to say that it can't be informative, but the answers are filtered through the witness description of events and whomever is trying to interpret their answers.  Often with a bias.   Most witnesses said three shots were fired.  Three shell casings were found.  That's compelling.

So how is it that so many of those witnesses all made the same mistaken subjective impression that the last two were close together and there was a longer pause between the first two?:


And why would the pattern be more difficult to get right than the number of shots?  Wouldn’t that kind of pattern make it easier to remember how many shots there were?

[Jack Nessan]

So how is it that so many of those witnesses all made the same mistaken subjective impression that the last two were close together and there was a longer pause between the first two?:


And why would the pattern be more difficult to get right than the number of shots?  Wouldn’t that kind of pattern make it easier to remember how many shots there were?

What a truly interesting graph. Horribly misleading but interesting. Can you break it down further and explain how all the numerous variations of these statements were tabulated or was the word “three” the sole parameter even if the witnesses, especially two shot eyewitnesses, had stated a completely different account earlier.

[Andrew Mason]

What a truly interesting graph. Horribly misleading but interesting. Can you break it down further and explain how all the numerous variations of these statements were tabulated or was the word “three” the sole parameter even if the witnesses, especially two shot eyewitnesses, had stated a completely different account earlier.

It is set out here. The evidence relating to shot pattern starts on page 7.