Mary Woodward observation first shot

[claviger]

Woodward, Mary Elizabeth December 7, 1963, FBI report
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce2084.htm

According to Mary Woodward the President was in a posture similar to the
following photos at the time of the first shot, the reason why he had
fragmentation wounds on the right side of his face.


THE KENNEDY GALLERY
http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UIwAXXJyQwQ/UoU5MlETO_I/AAAAAAAAwuE/O2-kC41R0UI/s800/JFK-Dallas-Motorcade-11-22-63--003.jpg
[Photo Credit: TIME Magazine]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-REwWiilVtZk/TvQIeSnsZBI/AAAAAAAABSw/zKHQx8HPSrU/s1600/JFK-In-Limousine-At-Love-Field-11-22-63--002.png

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/R8zZ652kGnI/AAAAAAAAAhQ/h4h4DUlT8Y0/s1600/097a.%2BDallas%2BMotorcade.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-P44nKGGeA5s/TZPbM9xGwzI/AAAAAAAATtA/AEkna2wRK-g/s800/JFK%2BIn%2BDallas--11-22-63.jpg

[mainframetech]

There is nothing proved by the photos of JFK. The witness said nothing
about comparing his posture with that of the photos. And further, you
have said nothing whatsoever that proves the origin of the slices in the
right cheek.

There was absolutely NO mention of those slits in the cheek until the
prosectors and the mortician, Tom Robinson, mentioned them. That was past
the time when Humes and Boswell did their clandestine scalpel and bone saw
work on the head. That is about the only time where there was a chance
for scalpels doing that kind of damage resembling slits due to hurrying to
complete their work. Certainly no "fragments" hit JFK in the face and
caused the marks. Absolutely NOTHING refers to it until after the autopsy
gets going.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/14/2015 5:12 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Thursday, June 11, 2015 at 12:13:02 PM UTC-4, claviger wrote:
>> Woodward, Mary Elizabeth December 7, 1963, FBI report
>> http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce2084.htm
>>
>> According to Mary Woodward the President was in a posture similar to the
>> following photos at the time of the first shot, the reason why he had
>> fragmentation wounds on the right side of his face.
>>
>>
>> THE KENNEDY GALLERY
>> http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/
>>
>> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UIwAXXJyQwQ/UoU5MlETO_I/AAAAAAAAwuE/O2-kC41R0UI/s800/JFK-Dallas-Motorcade-11-22-63--003.jpg
>> [Photo Credit: TIME Magazine]
>>
>> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-REwWiilVtZk/TvQIeSnsZBI/AAAAAAAABSw/zKHQx8HPSrU/s1600/JFK-In-Limousine-At-Love-Field-11-22-63--002.png
>>
>> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/R8zZ652kGnI/AAAAAAAAAhQ/h4h4DUlT8Y0/s1600/097a.%2BDallas%2BMotorcade.jpg
>>
>> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-P44nKGGeA5s/TZPbM9xGwzI/AAAAAAAATtA/AEkna2wRK-g/s800/JFK%2BIn%2BDallas--11-22-63.jpg
>
>
>
> There is nothing proved by the photos of JFK. The witness said nothing
> about comparing his posture with that of the photos. And further, you
> have said nothing whatsoever that proves the origin of the slices in the
> right cheek.
>

SHOW me the slices in his right cheek. You are just engaging in wild
speculation. You can never prove anything. Not even your real name.

> There was absolutely NO mention of those slits in the cheek until the
> prosectors and the mortician, Tom Robinson, mentioned them. That was past
> the time when Humes and Boswell did their clandestine scalpel and bone saw
> work on the head. That is about the only time where there was a chance
> for scalpels doing that kind of damage resembling slits due to hurrying to
> complete their work. Certainly no "fragments" hit JFK in the face and
> caused the marks. Absolutely NOTHING refers to it until after the autopsy
> gets going.
>
> Chris

Well then, why don't you claim that Humes did them post mortem?
You're not trying hard enough to get into Fetzer's club.

>
>

[claviger]

This is Mary Woodward's first report of what she saw in Dealey Plaza.
Below are excerpts from this report.

http://www.history-matters.com/analysis/witness/witnessMap/Woodward.htm
DALLAS MORNING NEWS, Mary Woodward: November 23, 1963. Page 3 Suddenly
there was a horrible, ear-shattering noise coming from behind us and a little
to the right.

http://www.history-matters.com/analysis/witness/witnessMap/documents/Woodward_11-22-63_0001a.gif

Woodward --- 11-22-63

(The following eyewitness account was written by a Dallas News staff
writer.)

_____________________________________________

The President was looking straight ahead and we were afraid we would not
get to see his face. But we started clapping and cheering and both he and
Mrs. Kennedy turned and smiled and waved, directly at us, it seemed.

As it turned out, we were almost certainly the last faces he noticed in
the crowd.

After acknowledging our cheers, he faced forward again and suddenly there
was a horrible, ear-shattering 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.

Things are a little hazy from this point, but 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 moments 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 half-way around, then fell on top of her husband's body. Not
until this minute did it sink in what actually was happening. We had
witnessed the assassination of the President.

The cars behind stopped and several men---Secret Service men I
suppose---got out and started rushing forward, obstructing out view of the
President's car.

[claviger]

This is her first statement as a witness to the FBI.

_____________________________________________________

CE 2084 - FBI interview of MARY ELIZABETH WOODWARD
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce2084.htm
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Date December 7, 1963

MARY ELIZABETH WOODWARD, 4812 Alcott, employee, Woman's News, "Dallas
Morning News," Dallas, Texas, advised that she, AURELIA ALONZO, MARGARET
BROWN and ANNE DONALDSON, on November 22, 1963 left the office of the
"Dallas Morning NEWS" just about 12:00 noon to observe the Presidential
Motorcade.

They walked to Elm Street and stopped in front of the Texas School Book
Depository building, but were located a short distance down the street
near the second light post. They were standing in this spot when the
Presidential Motorcade came by. She stated she was watching President and
Mrs. KENNEDY closely, and all of her group cheered loudly as they went by.
Just as the 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 probably were about one
hundred 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 and Mrs. KENNEDY jumped up
and started crawling over the back of the car. She stated that her first
reaction was that the shots had been fired from above her head and from
possibly behind her. Her next reaction was that the shots might have come
from the overpass which was to her right. She stated, however, because of
the loud echo, she could not say where the shots had come from, other than
they had come from above her head. She stated that she had seen about five
or six persons standing on top of the overpass, and possibly this is why
her first reaction was to look at the top of this overpass. She never at
any time saw anything in the hands of the people on the overpass. She
never looked at any time toward the Texas School Book Depository building,
and stated she could not furnish any information regarding anyone who
appeared to be leaving the area, as there was a lot of confusion and
everyone was running around.

She and her friends stayed for a few minutes under a tree on the grounds
of the Texas School Book Depository building, as she thought that she was
going to be sick. After standing under this tree for a few minutes, they
returned to their office. She stated she did not know RUBY or OSWALD and
stated to her knowledge she did not see either RUBY or OSWALD at the scene
of the assassination.

on 12/6/63 at Dallas, Texas File # DL 89-43

By Special Agent HENRY J. OLIVER, DAVID R. BARRY Date Dictated 12/6/63

[OHLeeRedux]

claviger

"A horrible ear-shattering noise . . ." Pretty much demolishes Harris's
claim that nobody heard the first shot because it wasn't loud enough.

[Doctor W]

On Thursday, June 11, 2015 at 12:13:02 PM UTC-4, claviger wrote:

Employing a scaled map, such as the truly excellent scaled Dealey Plaza
evidence, information, and witnesses locations map provided by Donald
Roberdeau
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3966/dppluschartsupdated1111.gif that
provides Mary Woodward's exact location, let us closely examine Woodward's
following witnessed statements:

__________<Woodward QUOTE>

She stated she was watching President and Mrs. KENNEDY closely, and all of
her group cheered loudly as they went by. Just as the President and Mrs.

KENNEDY went by they turned <END QUOTE>

= approximately 39' BEFORE reaching his closest Elm street point to
Woodward, JFK snapped his head 65-degrees rightward, extremely fast,
directly towards Woodward & her friends from Z-155 to 158


(the WC, itself, determined that it was not until Z-166 when the branches
and foliage of the large southern live oak tree next to the Depository
FIRST started to block the view of JFK from anyone in the, supposed, lone
nut snipers lair)


= 25' BEFORE reaching her closest street point to Woodward, Jackie
started turning her head rightward towards JFK and towards Woodward
starting at Z-169 (this was the only time in the Zapruder film, prior to
JFK being wounded, that Jackie turns her head rightward towards Woodward's
side of the street)



__________<Woodward QUOTE>

and waved at them. <END QUOTE>

= 23' BEFORE reaching his closest street point to Woodward, JFK is
smiling and facing rightward towards Woodward & her friends, and he now
starts his last right-handed wave towards Woodward & her friends starting
at Z-171

(many of the DP witnesses who could hear, at least, 3 shots AND could see
that last wave of JFK begin to start have testified and/or stated that
last JFK wave FIRST started, and THEN they heard, at least, 3 shots)



__________<Woodward QUOTE>

Just a second or two later, <END QUOTE>

(after the smiling JFK had already started that Z-171-starting wave
towards Woodward, her friends, and witnesses)



__________<Woodward QUOTE>

she heard a loud noise. <END QUOTE>

= one-second after JFK's Z-171-started wave was Z-189/190, during the
one to two-second range when Woodward stated the first shot (of 3 shots)
she could hear was fired.

= Z-190 is also when the HSCA determined JFK was first impacted with a
bullet.

(Z-208/209 was two-seconds after JFK's Z-171-started wave during the one
to two-second range when Woodward stated the first shot (of 3 shots) she
could hear was fired)


= At Z-194 JFK was 21' from Woodward, and located at his closest point
to her.


(The WC determined that the branches and foliage of the large southern
live oak tree next to the Depository blocked JFK from view/targeting until
Z-210)

[claviger]

A very thorough analysis. After studying the Zapruder film in minute
detail (as you just did) for almost a decade, Howard Donahue came to the
conclusion the first shot took place at Z189.

[Anthony Marsh]

But wait. The acoustical evidence found a shot at Z-190 and the HSCA
said it was the SBT. We are talking about a much earlier shot.
Tell us when YOUR SBT du jour is and then how many seconds between it
and Z-189.

>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Not quite. There were clear shots around the middle 180's.

>

[Sandy McCroskey]

HA HA HA

The "acoustical evidence"!!!!

What a joke.

[claviger]

Yes Z-189 is earlier than Z-190. I suppose it is "much earlier" when
measured in nanoseconds.

Donahue estimated Z229-Z234 based on estimates by Dr Charles Gregory,
indicating 2.2/2.5 seconds apart. Z189-Z224 would be 1.9 sec. During the
HSCA investigation Robert Blakey recycled a MC rifle in 1.5 seconds and
Gary Cornwell in 1.2 seconds.

[Anthony Marsh]

No

[Doctor W]

Not quite.

Investigations determined that there were NOT, "clear shotS around the
middle 180'S."

The investigations determined that there was only a clear shot through the
branches and foliage of the large tree for one frame and one frame only,
for 0.05-second, at only Z-186.

[Anthony Marsh]

Maybe he was trying to hit the tree to "plant" a pristine bullet.

[mainframetech]

Were there clear shots from the Dal-Tex building? Or the Grassy Knoll,
or other locations around Dealey Plaza? There were many bullet strikes in
the plaza that day, morfe than one gun from the TSBD could account for.

Officer 'Steve' Ellis saw a strike on the pavement to the right of the
limousine, and there were 3 shots that hit JFK, one that hit Connolly, one
that hit near James Tague and cut his cheek on the far side of the plaza,
there was a shot that struck the limousine above the windshield on the
chrome bar overhead. There was even a bullet hole through the windshield
seen by 6 people! Too many bullets for just the one MC rifle. But they
all have to be explained.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

The WC couldn't even account for the ones we know about.
That's why they lied and said the chrome topping was already dented.

[Doctor W]

Did Blakey and Cornwell's recycle times additionally include the following
times?:
(I doubt their recycle times included the following)

▶ required rifle recoil rifle movement(s) time?

▶ required times in movements by the assassin and the rifle to
reacquire the target? (especially considering a TSBD assassin HAD to be
STANDING for a theoretical first Z-150 to 166 shot - that supposedly was
fired into the closeby tree, and, while fired with the rifle angled very
steeply downward, and, fired between the only 13" open window space)

▶ required rifle double-pull trigger re-touching and double-pull
trigger activation time?

▶ required bullet flight time from rifle to target?

[Anthony Marsh]

Measured how? In milliseconds?

> ▶ required times in movements by the assassin and the rifle to
> reacquire the target? (especially considering a TSBD assassin HAD to be

They were not firing at targets.

> STANDING for a theoretical first Z-150 to 166 shot - that supposedly was

Maybe standing. No proof.

> fired into the closeby tree, and, while fired with the rifle angled very

I don't think they tried to shoot some poor little innocent tree.

> steeply downward, and, fired between the only 13" open window space)
>

They never even tried to simulate the Dealey plaza conditions.

> ▶ required rifle double-pull trigger re-touching and double-pull
> trigger activation time?
>

Huh? Looney toons.

> ▶ required bullet flight time from rifle to target?
>

Immaterial.
Hey, how did you make those triangles. Very nice? Have you ever made
ASCII art?

[bigdog]

The Warren Commission determined that the minimum time to operate the bolt
and fire an AIMED shot with the Carcano was 2.3 seconds. That includes all
the things you listed accept for the last which isn't relevant to the
question of how quickly the Carcano could be fired accurately. The travel
time of the bullet to the target comes after the shot is fired.

I believe the first shot was fired at or about Z151 although that is far
from a certainty since we have no definitive proof of when that shot was
fired. Dale Myers puts it about a half second later. Max Holland almost 3
seconds earlier. If we go with my best guess, there are 160 frames or 8.75
seconds for all three shots to be fired. So after firing the first shot,
Oswald would have had that much time to aim and fire two more shots. I
believe he took less time between the first and second shots and that
second shot was fired at or about Z221 taking slightly less than two
frames to reach the target. That is about 70 frames or 3.83 seconds
between the first and second shots. That would leave him almost 5 full
seconds to aim and fired the third shot. Easily within the capabilities of
both the Carcano and Oswald. If Myers is right, he would have about a half
second less for the three shots and if Holland is right he would have over
11.5 seconds to fire the three shots.

[claviger]

OK, so Donahue was off by 3/18 of a second, less than 2 deciseconds.

Pretty good guess I would say.

[Doctor W]

Not an accurate statement about the WC tests, bigdog.

For some "reason" - and after the F.B.I. had enhanced the CE-139 rifle's
capabilities before tests - the F.B.I. test fired the CE-139 rifle by
shooting only at stationary targets. (I'm sure you know that)

Their tests determined an average of 2.3 seconds for only the recycle time
of their enhanced rifle.

When the F.B.I. weapons specialist WC-testified and was asked how much
ADDITIONAL time it would have required to re-aim that rifle after
triggering a shot, then, reacquire a moving target, he ESTIMATED it would
require a MINIMUM of at least another half-second.

That additional half-second is another, MINIMUM 9+ Zapruder frames, making
the total F.B.I.-estimated MINIMUM time between shots at 2.8 seconds
(equaling a total MINIMUM of over 51 Zapruder frames between enhanced
CE-139 shots)

In your Z-151, first SL shot belief, was the SL assassin standing, or not,
while firing steeply downward through an only open 13" window space and
firing past the window frame's bricks-extended further outer ledge?

BTW, do you realize (you probably do) that your Z-151 circa shot was 15
Zapruder frames and 0.82-second *BEFORE* the WC-F.B.I.-calculated that the
large, close, tree branches and foliages started to Z-166 hide JFK from
the SL assassin's clear targeting?

At Z-151 and moving at the WC-F.B.I.-calculated 11 MPH, JFK was still over
13' *BEFORE* the large, close, tree branches and foliages started to Z-166
hide JFK from the SL assassin's clear targeting.

You probably do not think that the SL assassin was tracking and targeting
13' ahead of JFK @ the edge of the close tree, nor targeting close to the
front of the limo's engine hood, so, since @ Z-151 JFK was not hidden by
the close tree, what is your opinion of what caused your first, most
unexpected, least defended, Z-151 shot that completely missed hitting the
huge, wide, 21+' long limousine? (being very experienced with weapons, I
think I know what you're going to answer) (BTW, what is your level of
weapons experience?)

If you've read the WC, what is your opinion with regards to that the WC
report admitted that "a substantial MAJORITY" of the actual DP witnesses
it knew of that heard at least 3 shots (or more than 3 shots) also stated
the LAST 2 shots were bunched much closer together than the first 2 they
could hear?

What is your opinion of several of the close DP witnesses who stated that
JFK had already started waving (which JFK lifts his right hand then starts
waving @ Z-171 to 175, after passing under the large tree), and then the
first shot those witnesses could hear was fired? (and most of those "hand
wave started then first shot heard" witnesses stated that he immediately,
dramatically reacted, indicating to them he was hit with that first shot
they heard)

A question: I do not recall at the moment ever reading the following
WC-FBI data; What did the FBI measure (did the FBI measure it?!!) the
pounds of pressure needed for the CE-139 double-pull trigger to fire?
TIA

[Anthony Marsh]

Phony. Others can fire it faster. Mainly by not aiming.
Could that explain 2 misses in Dealey Plaza?

> the things you listed accept for the last which isn't relevant to the
> question of how quickly the Carcano could be fired accurately. The travel
> time of the bullet to the target comes after the shot is fired.
>

Irrelevant.

> I believe the first shot was fired at or about Z151 although that is far
> from a certainty since we have no definitive proof of when that shot was

Close enough for a WC defender. I expect you to change it every week.

> fired. Dale Myers puts it about a half second later. Max Holland almost 3
> seconds earlier. If we go with my best guess, there are 160 frames or 8.75
> seconds for all three shots to be fired. So after firing the first shot,

The WC said it could be 8 seconds or more.
Close enough for government work.

> Oswald would have had that much time to aim and fire two more shots. I

Sure, except that his rifle jammed.

> believe he took less time between the first and second shots and that
> second shot was fired at or about Z221 taking slightly less than two
> frames to reach the target. That is about 70 frames or 3.83 seconds

So you think that shot didn't hit Connally?
Do you know the speed of the bullet?

[Anthony Marsh]

>>> ??? required rifle recoil rifle movement(s) time?
>>>
>>> ??? required times in movements by the assassin and the rifle to

>>> reacquire the target? (especially considering a TSBD assassin HAD to be
>>> STANDING for a theoretical first Z-150 to 166 shot - that supposedly was
>>> fired into the closeby tree, and, while fired with the rifle angled very
>>> steeply downward, and, fired between the only 13" open window space)
>>>

>>> ??? required rifle double-pull trigger re-touching and double-pull
>>> trigger activation time?
>>>
>>> ??? required bullet flight time from rifle to target?

>>
>> The Warren Commission determined that the minimum time to operate the bolt
>> and fire an AIMED shot with the Carcano was 2.3 seconds. That includes all
>> the things you listed accept for the last which isn't relevant to the
>> question of how quickly the Carcano could be fired accurately. The travel
>> time of the bullet to the target comes after the shot is fired.
>
> Not an accurate statement about the WC tests, bigdog.
>
> For some "reason" - and after the F.B.I. had enhanced the CE-139 rifle's
> capabilities before tests - the F.B.I. test fired the CE-139 rifle by
> shooting only at stationary targets. (I'm sure you know that)
>

Enhanced how? WFT are you talking about? Stop with the vague references
and just spit it out.

> Their tests determined an average of 2.3 seconds for only the recycle time
> of their enhanced rifle.
>

No.

> When the F.B.I. weapons specialist WC-testified and was asked how much
> ADDITIONAL time it would have required to re-aim that rifle after
> triggering a shot, then, reacquire a moving target, he ESTIMATED it would
> require a MINIMUM of at least another half-second.
>

Sure. Fun to guess.
Irrelevant.

> That additional half-second is another, MINIMUM 9+ Zapruder frames, making
> the total F.B.I.-estimated MINIMUM time between shots at 2.8 seconds
> (equaling a total MINIMUM of over 51 Zapruder frames between enhanced
> CE-139 shots)
>

Nonsense.
Who said there was any aiming?

> In your Z-151, first SL shot belief, was the SL assassin standing, or not,

What the Hell is SL? Kookspeak? Do you mean SN as in sniper's nest?

> while firing steeply downward through an only open 13" window space and
> firing past the window frame's bricks-extended further outer ledge?
>

Sure, all those obstacles make it more difficult to shoot from that
window. But what if the only purpose was to draw attention TO that
window and AWAY from the grassy knoll?

> BTW, do you realize (you probably do) that your Z-151 circa shot was 15
> Zapruder frames and 0.82-second *BEFORE* the WC-F.B.I.-calculated that the
> large, close, tree branches and foliages started to Z-166 hide JFK from
> the SL assassin's clear targeting?
>

The tree does not block a shot. The leaves and branches obscure a clear
view sometimes.

There is a gap for a clear shot at about Z-185. Seeing the gap can not
be at the same time the shot is fired.
Look into Posner's Magic Twig theory.

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/ce890.jpg

> At Z-151 and moving at the WC-F.B.I.-calculated 11 MPH, JFK was still over

AVERAGE SPEED.

> 13' *BEFORE* the large, close, tree branches and foliages started to Z-166
> hide JFK from the SL assassin's clear targeting.
>

Something like that. Maybe you've never seen an oak tree. You can often
see through the foliage.
It is theoretically possible to shoot someone through the leaves.

> You probably do not think that the SL assassin was tracking and targeting
> 13' ahead of JFK @ the edge of the close tree, nor targeting close to the
> front of the limo's engine hood, so, since @ Z-151 JFK was not hidden by
> the close tree, what is your opinion of what caused your first, most
> unexpected, least defended, Z-151 shot that completely missed hitting the
> huge, wide, 21+' long limousine? (being very experienced with weapons, I
> think I know what you're going to answer) (BTW, what is your level of
> weapons experience?)
>

Who thinks what? You are telling us what to think?

> If you've read the WC, what is your opinion with regards to that the WC
> report admitted that "a substantial MAJORITY" of the actual DP witnesses
> it knew of that heard at least 3 shots (or more than 3 shots) also stated
> the LAST 2 shots were bunched much closer together than the first 2 they
> could hear?
>

I think the word over there is poppycock. Everyone knows they lied about
that. A lot of WC defenders do. Time for you to learn a new word in
English. Plurality. That means more of one choice than another, not a
majority of all choices. Josiah Thompson points out in Six Seconds in
Dallas that a PLURALITY of witnesses said the shots came from the grassy
knoll. And those were only the ones HE could confirm and did not count in
the others who had been threatened to keep quiet about the grassy knoll.
Why do you think the HSCA chose the grassy knoll for its shooting test?
Why not the storm drain or the SS car or the Dal-Tex?

They did their own analysis of the earwitnesses and many said grassy
knoll. Even if the HSCA did lie about their data.

> What is your opinion of several of the close DP witnesses who stated that
> JFK had already started waving (which JFK lifts his right hand then starts
> waving @ Z-171 to 175, after passing under the large tree), and then the
> first shot those witnesses could hear was fired? (and most of those "hand
> wave started then first shot heard" witnesses stated that he immediately,
> dramatically reacted, indicating to them he was hit with that first shot
> they heard)
>

Your sentence is nonsense. What about the witnesses who said aliens did
it? Stop being silly and read the damn documents.

> A question: I do not recall at the moment ever reading the following
> WC-FBI data; What did the FBI measure (did the FBI measure it?!!) the
> pounds of pressure needed for the CE-139 double-pull trigger to fire?
> TIA
>

Silly.
You think no human was strong enough to pull the trigger? Obviously
you've never pulled a trigger in your life.

[Anthony Marsh]

Are you the only being on this planet who counts in deciseconds?
He was entitled to his guess. YOU are not.

[bigdog]

The WC conducted test firings from a tower with targets at varying
distances which would require reaiming for each shot. One of the shooters
scored 2 hits out of 3 shots in 4.6 seconds which established the minimum
firing time for aimed shots. Of course even if we were to accept you
additional half second argument, Oswald's have considerably more than that
minimum time to fire his shots so the point is moot.

> In your Z-151, first SL shot belief, was the SL assassin standing, or not,
> while firing steeply downward through an only open 13" window space and
> firing past the window frame's bricks-extended further outer ledge?
>

He most certainly would have had to raised up to fire downward at that
steep an angle which may be one of the contributing factors for that shot
missing. His rifle rest would have been of little use to steady the rifle
for that shot.

> BTW, do you realize (you probably do) that your Z-151 circa shot was 15
> Zapruder frames and 0.82-second *BEFORE* the WC-F.B.I.-calculated that the
> large, close, tree branches and foliages started to Z-166 hide JFK from
> the SL assassin's clear targeting?
>

Yes I do which makes that shot a plausible time for that shot.

> At Z-151 and moving at the WC-F.B.I.-calculated 11 MPH, JFK was still over
> 13' *BEFORE* the large, close, tree branches and foliages started to Z-166
> hide JFK from the SL assassin's clear targeting.
>
> You probably do not think that the SL assassin was tracking and targeting
> 13' ahead of JFK @ the edge of the close tree, nor targeting close to the
> front of the limo's engine hood, so, since @ Z-151 JFK was not hidden by
> the close tree, what is your opinion of what caused your first, most
> unexpected, least defended, Z-151 shot that completely missed hitting the
> huge, wide, 21+' long limousine? (being very experienced with weapons, I
> think I know what you're going to answer) (BTW, what is your level of
> weapons experience?)
>

The first shot was by far the most difficult even though it was the
shortest sho t. The distance wasn't significant for any of these shots.
All were less than half the distance Oswald qualified at during his USMC
training. In addition to the already mentioned problem of firing downward
at such a steep angle, the relative movement of the target to the line of
fire would have been the greatest for the first shot requiring a greater
lead. In addition he would probably have begun tracking the target as it
was rounding the curve which would add to the difficulty. For the
subsequent shots the target was moving in a straight line almost directly
away from Oswald. While he would have been unlikely to fire a shot through
the tree branches, he could have begun tracking the target before he got a
clear shot. One other factor is Oswald was probably aware that his target
was about to move under the tree so he may have rushed that shot. The
tendency for a right handed shooter when rushing a shot is to pull the
shot to the right. Since JFK was on the extreme right side of the limo,
missing to the right would result in the shot completely missing the limo.

> If you've read the WC, what is your opinion with regards to that the WC
> report admitted that "a substantial MAJORITY" of the actual DP witnesses
> it knew of that heard at least 3 shots (or more than 3 shots) also stated
> the LAST 2 shots were bunched much closer together than the first 2 they
> could hear?
>

I can only speculate as to why that was. I think it is a matter of
perception. After the first missed shot many of the witnesses weren't even
aware it was a rifle shot since it missed and JFK continued waving to the
crowd. When the second shot was fired and JFK was clearly hit, things
might have seemed to be happening faster so the last two shots might have
just seemed to come faster. The people who reported hearing two shots
almost on top of each other were probably hearing multiple sounds from the
head shot, the muzzle blast and the impact of the bullet on JFK's skull
and the windshield frame. Of course if Max Holland's theory is correct.
The last two shots would have been closer together.

> What is your opinion of several of the close DP witnesses who stated that
> JFK had already started waving (which JFK lifts his right hand then starts
> waving @ Z-171 to 175, after passing under the large tree), and then the
> first shot those witnesses could hear was fired? (and most of those "hand
> wave started then first shot heard" witnesses stated that he immediately,
> dramatically reacted, indicating to them he was hit with that first shot
> they heard)
>

I don't put a lot of faith in people accurately remembering exactly what
they saw and heard when witnessing such a startling and unexpected event.
The human mind is not equipped with a DVR. We remember bits and pieces and
when we try to put those pieces back together we don't always get them in
the right order. Again, I think it is a matter of perception. Since JFK
did not react to that first shot, people didn't realize it was a gunshot.
If witnesses could reliably remember exactly what happened, they would all
tell pretty much the same story. Clearly that is not the case. You can
make the case for just about any scenario you want depending on which
witnesses you choose to believe.

> A question: I do not recall at the moment ever reading the following
> WC-FBI data; What did the FBI measure (did the FBI measure it?!!) the
> pounds of pressure needed for the CE-139 double-pull trigger to fire?
> TIA
>

Don't know.

[claviger]

So Mr Grumpy you're now the official time Nazi among all your other
persnickety duties on the Newsgroup? I'm OK with 3/18 of second to
simplify it for your .

[Anthony Marsh]

>>>> ??? required rifle recoil rifle movement(s) time?
>>>>
>>>> ??? required times in movements by the assassin and the rifle to

>>>> reacquire the target? (especially considering a TSBD assassin HAD to be
>>>> STANDING for a theoretical first Z-150 to 166 shot - that supposedly was
>>>> fired into the closeby tree, and, while fired with the rifle angled very
>>>> steeply downward, and, fired between the only 13" open window space)
>>>>

>>>> ??? required rifle double-pull trigger re-touching and double-pull
>>>> trigger activation time?
>>>>
>>>> ??? required bullet flight time from rifle to target?

Yes, you are right about that. An intentional miss by only a few inches is
extremely difficult. Even Annie Oakley was not perfect. How come the WC
couldn't figure that out and state as a fact that the first shot was a
miss? You weren't around to tell them?

> shortest sho t. The distance wasn't significant for any of these shots.

Define significant.

> All were less than half the distance Oswald qualified at during his USMC

Apples and oranges.
With Oswald's rifle the closer the shot the more you miss.

> training. In addition to the already mentioned problem of firing downward
> at such a steep angle, the relative movement of the target to the line of

Wow. So you would have shot from ground level. Is that what they taught
you in sniper school? How about the storm drain?

> fire would have been the greatest for the first shot requiring a greater
> lead. In addition he would probably have begun tracking the target as it

Lead? WFT are you talking about. Oswald was never taught to lead. The
Marines used stationary targets. Oswald couldn't even hit General
Walker, who was a seated stationary target.

So you think the shooter was aiming for the chrome topping? That is a
very difficult shot to make. It's only a couple of inches wide.

> was rounding the curve which would add to the difficulty. For the

The limo had already rounded the corner. Why don't we start another stupid
thread about why not shoot while the limo was on Houston Street.

> subsequent shots the target was moving in a straight line almost directly

Almost.

> away from Oswald. While he would have been unlikely to fire a shot through
> the tree branches, he could have begun tracking the target before he got a

Do you think they intended to shoot through the traffic light?
Or did they not notice it?

> clear shot. One other factor is Oswald was probably aware that his target
> was about to move under the tree so he may have rushed that shot. The

Take a look at the FBI reconstruction which films through the scope. The
shooter would not even notice the tree until it's too late.

> tendency for a right handed shooter when rushing a shot is to pull the
> shot to the right. Since JFK was on the extreme right side of the limo,

You always make ASSuMPTIONS without proving anything. What if the
shooter was shooting left handed?

> missing to the right would result in the shot completely missing the limo.
>

OK, cool. SHOW me the complete miss of the limo. Show me the mark where
that bullet hit. Where? On the moon?

>> If you've read the WC, what is your opinion with regards to that the WC
>> report admitted that "a substantial MAJORITY" of the actual DP witnesses
>> it knew of that heard at least 3 shots (or more than 3 shots) also stated
>> the LAST 2 shots were bunched much closer together than the first 2 they
>> could hear?
>>
>
> I can only speculate as to why that was. I think it is a matter of
> perception. After the first missed shot many of the witnesses weren't even
> aware it was a rifle shot since it missed and JFK continued waving to the

Do you mean the firecracker or the motorcycle backfire?
Someone got their holiday mixed up and decided to use firecrackers to
assassinate the President?

> crowd. When the second shot was fired and JFK was clearly hit, things
> might have seemed to be happening faster so the last two shots might have
> just seemed to come faster. The people who reported hearing two shots

Or maybe the last 2 shots were only separated by seven tenths of a second.

> almost on top of each other were probably hearing multiple sounds from the
> head shot, the muzzle blast and the impact of the bullet on JFK's skull

You're not trying hard enough on behalf of the cover-up.
You could add in the shot hitting the curb. What about people hearing
the shock wave first and then the explosion of the head? Jeez, you're
not worth paying any more.

> and the windshield frame. Of course if Max Holland's theory is correct.
> The last two shots would have been closer together.
>
>> What is your opinion of several of the close DP witnesses who stated that
>> JFK had already started waving (which JFK lifts his right hand then starts
>> waving @ Z-171 to 175, after passing under the large tree), and then the
>> first shot those witnesses could hear was fired? (and most of those "hand
>> wave started then first shot heard" witnesses stated that he immediately,
>> dramatically reacted, indicating to them he was hit with that first shot
>> they heard)
>>
>
> I don't put a lot of faith in people accurately remembering exactly what
> they saw and heard when witnessing such a startling and unexpected event.
> The human mind is not equipped with a DVR. We remember bits and pieces and

Of course it is, but it can have any DVR can have glitches in signals
and errors recording.

> when we try to put those pieces back together we don't always get them in
> the right order. Again, I think it is a matter of perception. Since JFK

Now, I like that excuse much better. Just claim that everyone was having
hallucinations. There was no assassination at all?
Maybe it was mass hypnosis. Now you're cooking.

> did not react to that first shot, people didn't realize it was a gunshot.

Do you mean the firecracker or the railroad torpedo? Both could be
dangerous. Last year some little kid lost a hand to a firecracker.

> If witnesses could reliably remember exactly what happened, they would all
> tell pretty much the same story. Clearly that is not the case. You can

Cueing, consensus, programming.

> make the case for just about any scenario you want depending on which
> witnesses you choose to believe.
>

Exactly, which is eyewitness statement are the most unreliable form of
evidence. Which is why the government uses it all the time to frame
innocent people.

>> A question: I do not recall at the moment ever reading the following
>> WC-FBI data; What did the FBI measure (did the FBI measure it?!!) the
>> pounds of pressure needed for the CE-139 double-pull trigger to fire?
>> TIA
>>
>
> Don't know.
>

Irrelevant. Don't give the kooks an inch.

[Anthony Marsh]

Congratulations. You just invented a new meme no one else had ever been
stupid enough to think up. Time Nazi. I knew about Time Lord, but Time
Nazi must be someone who keeps reminding idiots that they are guilty of
anachronisms, like the guy seen in the assassination film using a
cellphone.

I forget what the term is for morons who see a big word and use it because
it sounds educated but they don't know what it means.

[claviger]

On Wednesday, July 6, 2016 at 10:50:46 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 7/5/2016 12:39 PM, claviger wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 7/2/2016 9:38 PM, claviger wrote:
> >>> On Monday, August 10, 2015 at 3:25:20 PM UTC-5, Doctor W wrote:
> >>>> On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 11:58:34 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The investigations determined that there was only a clear shot through the
> >>>> branches and foliage of the large tree for one frame and one frame only,
> >>>> for 0.05-second, at only Z-186.
> >>> OK, so Donahue was off by 3/18 of a second, less than 2 deciseconds.
> >>> Pretty good guess I would say.
> >> Are you the only being on this planet who counts in deciseconds?
> >> He was entitled to his guess. YOU are not.
> >
> > So Mr Grumpy you're now the official time Nazi among all your other
> > persnickety duties on the Newsgroup? I'm OK with 3/18 of second to
> > simplify it for your .
> Congratulations. You just invented a new meme no one else had ever been
> stupid enough to think up. Time Nazi. I knew about Time Lord, but Time
> Nazi must be someone who keeps reminding idiots that they are guilty of
> anachronisms, like the guy seen in the assassination film using a
> cellphone.

A Time Nazi is a Time Lord with attitude who tries to sound clever with
chippy wisecracks.

> I forget what the term is for morons who see a big word and use it because
> it sounds educated but they don't know what it means.

Marchismo.