The "Headshots"

[Bill Miller]

Tom must be 'old-school' because the government has since came to the conclusion that there were two shooters.

[Thomas Graves]

Tom must be 'old-school' because the government has since come to the conclusion that there were two shooters.

________________________________

Bill,

Exactly!

--Thomas

________________________________

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Rosemary Willis, the running girl in Zapruder, was recently interviewed for a Japanese documentary. She described the shots as bang .................. bang, bang ........ bang (4 in total)

Wim

As did Mr. Robert West, who's opinions I value greatly.

Along with S.M. Holland and considerable others.

None of which negates the fact that virtually all persons who were in a position where their hearing would not be inteferred with by echo patterns, clearly reported having heard three shots.

Bang:---------------------------------Bang:------Bang

Tom,

Maybe it was this way:

Bang..........................Bang.Bang........Bang (4 shots)

This author may be Correct?

If not where & how so?

Proving Conspiracy

Look at the Zapruder Film

In Chapter 5, I mentioned that my curiosity had been aroused by Christian David’s description—in The Men Who Killed Kennedy—of the shots fired at President Kennedy and John Connally. According to David, there were "three guns, four shots, three hits, and one miss." Two shots hit Kennedy, one hit Connally, and one missed the car completely. Furthermore, two shots were fired simultaneously which explains why witnesses heard three shots.

After studying the Zapruder film, I have concluded that David’s version is absolutely correct. Not only is it correct, I realized that the Zapruder film alone proves in a legal sense that there was a conspiracy. All one has to do is look at the Zapruder film.

I highly recommend that anyone interested in the Kennedy assassination go to the nearest video store and rent the Zapruder film. Before viewing it, purge your mind of any pre-conceived notions. Forget what the so-called experts have told you and look at it with an open mind. You will see—as I did—two important things rarely discussed by the so-called assassination experts. First of all, it is quite obvious that Kennedy’s neck wound was caused by a different bullet than Connally’s wounds because there was a four second delay between the time Kennedy grabbed his neck and the time Connally reacted to being hit. The Warren Commission concluded that one bullet hit Kennedy in the neck and caused all of Connally’s wounds. This is known as the "Single Bullet Theory." Simply stated, the Warren Commission’s Single Bullet Theory is impossible.

Secondly, the Zapruder film shows that there must have been at least two gunmen because there was only a one-second delay between the time Connally reacted to being hit in the back and the time Kennedy was shot in the head. That simply was not enough time for one gunman to fire two shots. The Warren Report stated that a minimum of "2.3 seconds" is "necessary to operate the [Mannlicher-Carcano] rifle" to fire two consecutive shots.1 Using the government’s own logic, there had to have been two gunmen because Kennedy was hit in the head less than 2.3 seconds after Connally was hit. According to the government, this would be impossible for one gunman. Using this logic, the shot that caused Kennedy’s head wound could have come from the front or the back, but two gunmen would still have been required because of the one second delay between Connally’s shot in the back and Kennedy’s shot in the head.

The one-second delay between the second and third shots was corroborated by the eye-witness account of Mary Woodward, a junior reporter on the Dallas Morning News at the time of the assassination. In fact she wrote an article describing the assassination before it was even announced that Kennedy had died. The following is Woodward’s description— from an interview years later for The Men Who Killed Kennedy—of the shots she observed:

…One thing I am totally positive of in my own mind is how many shots there were. And there were three shots. The second two shots were immediate. It was almost as if one were an echo of the other, they came so quickly. The sound of one did not cease until the second shot. …

(The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Cover-up, N. Turner)

We have an eye-witness account and a film of the assassination; both clearly indicate that the second and third shots immediate. As Mary Woodward stated, "It was almost as if one were an echo of the other." Again, the Warren Report stated that a minimum of 2.3 seconds delay is required between two consecutive shots from the alleged murder weapon, a Mannlicher-Carcano.

Keep in mind that Woodward’s observation that she heard three shots does not refute Christian David’s claim that there were actually four shots fired. David also stated that two shots were fired almost simultaneously. Hence, witnesses heard only three shots.

These facts are not complicated. They do not require an expert’s analysis. Any reasonable person of average intelligence can understand them. Yet the sponsors of Kennedy’s murder have trained the public to rely on expert "interpretation" of these simple facts. After viewing the Zapruder film for yourself, it will become clear that most of the so-called assassination researchers have confused the public for years on the notion of conspiracy. The sponsors of Kennedy’s murder have created a general state of public confusion by expressing from all sides so many complex opinions that the public has decided to have no opinion of any kind in matters of conspiracy.

1. The great majority of witnesses heard three shots.

2. Of those witnesses, the great majority stated: bang:--------------------------------bang:---------bang!

3. Three empty shell casings were found on the sixth floor of the TSDB.

4. Witnesses directly below the sixth floor window, in a "high" position, heard only three shots.

Mr. BALL. How many shots did you hear?

Mr. NORMAN. Three.

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

Mr. WILLIAMS. I heard three shots. But at first I told the FBI I only heard two--they took me down- -because I was excited, and I couldn't remember too well. But later on, as everything began to die down, I got my memory even a little better than on the 22d, I remembered three shots, because there was a pause between the first two shots. There was two real quick. There was three shots.

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

Representative FORD - You distinctly recall three shots?

Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.

Representative FORD - McCloy said you had been in the army 8 years, two 4-year hitches. Was there any doubt in your mind that this was a gunshot, either one of the three?

Mr. JARMAN - Not after the second shot. I didn't have any doubt in my mind then.

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

5. JFK incurred wounds created by three different bullets. One of which passed through his head on a downward angle and which intact bullet exited.

There was only one other location within the Presidential Limousine that an intact bullet struck.

That being the right rear shoulder of JBC.

For all that I know there could have been a half-dozen shots fired in Dealy Plaza on 11/22/63.

However, the great majority of witness testimony establishes that three shots were fired.

the great majority of testimony establishes the shot sequence as: bang,-------------------bang,----bang!

I have three bullets striking JFK

1. At approximately Z2-4/206. BANG!

2. Some 5.8 to 5.9 seconds later, a second shot strikes JFK in the cowlick of the skull at Z313.

3. Some 1.8 to 1.9 seconds later, a third and final shot strikes JFK in the EOP region of the skull, directly in front of James Altgens position, exits the head of JFK and strikes JBC in the right rear shoulder.

So! Why would I waste time looking for something which never existed to begin with?

Sort of like looking for mythololgical multiple assassins; body snatching wound alteration specialists; unicorns; the golden fleece; and rabbits that wear big tall funny hats.

As you may have deriived by now, I have a realtive decent understanding of the evidence, and therefore do not have to dream up non-existent beings, etc; in order to answer what are in reality quite simple questions to the events of the assassination.

Three Shots!

Three Hits!

And a big fat WC Lie about "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

Which never ceases to amaze me that anyone actually believed!

[Bill Miller]

Bang:---------------------------------Bang:------Bang

There were also witnesses who said the first two shots were close together. What is being left out of the equation is that when the movie 'JFK' was filmed ... over 32/33 test firings were done and it was noticed that not all the shots were being heard and from where they were being fired. In other words a total of 6 shots could be fired and depending on where someone stood ... they may have only heard three or four and from only one direction.

This information was made known to me by Robert Groden.

[Thomas Graves]

[...]

I have three bullets striking JFK

1. At approximately Z204/206. BANG!

2. Some 5.8 to 5.9 seconds later, a second shot strikes JFK in the cowlick of the skull at Z313.

3. Some 1.8 to 1.9 seconds later, a third and final shot strikes JFK in the EOP region of the skull, directly in front of James Altgens position, exits the head of JFK and strikes JBC in the right rear shoulder.

[...]

_______________________________

Tom,

Where on the Z-film is your #3 shot?

Thanks,

--Thomas

_______________________________

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Bang:---------------------------------Bang:------Bang

There were also witnesses who said the first two shots were close together. What is being left out of the equation is that when the movie 'JFK' was filmed ... over 32/33 test firings were done and it was noticed that not all the shots were being heard and from where they were being fired. In other words a total of 6 shots could be fired and depending on where someone stood ... they may have only heard three or four and from only one direction.

This information was made known to me by Robert Groden.

Unfortunately, you also believed that one can do Blood Spatter/Splatter analysis by looking at the Z-film.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

[...]

I have three bullets striking JFK

1. At approximately Z204/206. BANG!

2. Some 5.8 to 5.9 seconds later, a second shot strikes JFK in the cowlick of the skull at Z313.

3. Some 1.8 to 1.9 seconds later, a third and final shot strikes JFK in the EOP region of the skull, directly in front of James Altgens position, exits the head of JFK and strikes JBC in the right rear shoulder.

[...]

_______________________________

Tom,

Where on the Z-film is your #3 shot?

Thanks,

--Thomas

_______________________________

Where on the Z-film is your #3 shot?

Ahah! The $64.00 question!

Additionally, although I will most assuredly take claim for having pointed out that Z313 WAS NOT the last/third shot fired, the third shot is also not "mine".

Anyhow, I have, due to various anomalies in the Z-film, avoided actually giving a Z-frame label to the exact point.

But, since you asked.

If one goes by the alignment drawn from Zapruder's position to the 4+95 position which was surveyed in, then one comes up with the impact results having been found by the SS, just as JFK approached the leading edge of the yellow curb mark which was just a few feet past James ALtgens position.

In that regards, this can vary by a frame or two of the film in either direction, based strictly on exactly where one would chose to plot/plat Abraham Zapruder's exact position on the pedastal, on the WC Survey Plat which I utilize for such exercises.

Now to the answer.

My opinion is that the impact was at some point between Z349

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z349.jpg

And the somewhat "doctored" frame Z350

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg

Which, if one bases on Z-frame numbers = (349 minus 313 = 36/18.3 = 1.96 seconds after Z313 impact.

(350 minus 313 = 37/18.3 = 2.02 seconds)

That would be a "best guess", and personally, I would not think that one would see the color of grass between Clint Hill and the rear of the Presidential limo when in fact the only thing in the background would be the asphalt of Elm St.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg

[Bill Miller]

Unfortunately, you also believed that one can do Blood Spatter/Splatter analysis by looking at the Z-film.

Tom, your bias is not allowing you to see the obvious. The debris being expelled from a bullet impacting the brain is what caused the mist cloud caught in Z313. Sherry has stated that a second bullet to the head would have produced an equal, if not more of an spatter pattern than the first one did. No such explosion of matter is seen and if the Zapruder film was clear enough to see the first explosion of brain matter, then it is clear enough to see an alleged second one IMO. No assassination film shows a second explosion of debris from the head.

If you feel more qualified to tells us what the impact of a second bullet smashing into the head would look like compared to the first and its different than Sherry's, then I'll be happy to hear it. But I must say that you don't make a very convincing argument over how silly 'blood spatter science' is in this case if you have no real background experience or knowledge of the subject.

[David G. Healy]

Unfortunately, you also believed that one can do Blood Spatter/Splatter analysis by looking at the Z-film.

Tom, your bias is not allowing you to see the obvious. The debris being expelled from a bullet impacting the brain is what caused the mist cloud caught in Z313. Sherry has stated that a second bullet to the head would have produced an equal, if not more of an spatter pattern than the first one did. No such explosion of matter is seen and if the Zapruder film was clear enough to see the first explosion of brain matter, then it is clear enough to see an alleged second one IMO. No assassination film shows a second explosion of debris from the head.

If you feel more qualified to tells us what the impact of a second bullet smashing into the head would look like compared to the first and its different than Sherry's, then I'll be happy to hear it. But I must say that you don't make a very convincing argument over how silly 'blood spatter science' is in this case if you have no real background experience or knowledge of the subject.

opinion - pure and simple.... won't hold up in a court of law... as for you hearing it? What? Who cares what you hear....?

[Bill Miller]

As you may have deriived by now, I have a realtive decent understanding of the evidence, and therefore do not have to dream up non-existent beings, etc; in order to answer what are in reality quite simple questions to the events of the assassination.

Three Shots!

Three Hits!

And a big fat WC Lie about "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

Which never ceases to amaze me that anyone actually believed!

Yes, I am also amazed by what you think you believe. One question .... any idea why someone thought the nick on the curbstone was worthy of being patched over if it wasn't to eradicate the evidence of a missed shot?

[Bill Miller]

opinion - pure and simple.... won't hold up in a court of law... as for you hearing it? What? Who cares what you hear....?

Thanks David for yet another off-the-wall say-nothing response that will have to be ran through the 'babbling meter' to see which you know less about - the JFK assassination or Law.

Aside from the long line of court appearances by experts such as Sherry, Wecht, Lee, and the countless other recorded trials where experts were used and determined the outcome of the trial and/or the simple 'Google Search' that you could have conducted so to know that what you said was in error ... is there anything that you actually based your response on or was it just an uncontrolled response like a nervous twitch or some other disorder???

Edited March 19, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Unfortunately, you also believed that one can do Blood Spatter/Splatter analysis by looking at the Z-film.

Tom, your bias is not allowing you to see the obvious. The debris being expelled from a bullet impacting the brain is what caused the mist cloud caught in Z313. Sherry has stated that a second bullet to the head would have produced an equal, if not more of an spatter pattern than the first one did. No such explosion of matter is seen and if the Zapruder film was clear enough to see the first explosion of brain matter, then it is clear enough to see an alleged second one IMO. No assassination film shows a second explosion of debris from the head.

If you feel more qualified to tells us what the impact of a second bullet smashing into the head would look like compared to the first and its different than Sherry's, then I'll be happy to hear it. But I must say that you don't make a very convincing argument over how silly 'blood spatter science' is in this case if you have no real background experience or knowledge of the subject.

First off, having been "splattered" a few times, as well as being the initiator of some splattering, rest assured that I have far more experience in that matter than do you.

Secondly, you and your advisor can continue to look at the Z-film and make up theories as to what you see in it all day long as far as I am concerned.

After all, from your little bio, you have been doing so for some 25 years now.

Exactly how far have you gotten in that time in resolution of FACTS?

Blood Spatter/Splatter is based on given scientific principals, however, not unlike tumbling bullets striking persons in the back in a base first attitude, there are a variety of extenuating circumstances which affect the final conclusion.

Exactly how many of these additional factors have been taken into consideration in determination of this great revelation?

That you are obviously so limited in your experience and qualifications that you do not recognize and understand the principals of forensic and ballistic sciences, does not mean that I am also so inclined.

So, better yet, why not have Sherry write up this fantastic conclusion and thereafter submit it as a paper to the American Academy of Forensic Sciences.

http://www.aafs.org/

I have no doubt that they would enjoy such a speculative conclulsion based on what is virtually one single piece of evidence./aka the Z-film.

Tom, your bias is not allowing you to see the obvious.

Really!

Actually, I was under the impression that I saw it quite well in that you quite obviously are somewhat lacking in the ability for separate and independent research and thusly have to rely on others to educate you in the search for body snatchers; wound alterers; and persons who utilize the "Amazing Kresgin" techinques for crime scene investigation and resolution.

If I send you a photo of the Pascagoula River, do you suppose that perhaps you can spot the "Pascagoula UFO" in it for me?

You represent the single biggest critic of a few others who have posted here about things which they "think" that they observe in the Z-film and other assassination photographs.

Yet, on the other end of the stick you come out with and expouse that one can conduct blood splatter/spatter analysis by looking at some film in which absolutley none of us even know to what extent it may have been manipulated.

And irrelevant as to whether the film has or has not been manipulated, it is physically impossible and mentally stupid to think that one can look at the Z-film and draw a scientific conclusion as to the origin of shots fired.

With that stated, please go waste someone else's time as your complete lack of research of the forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical facts in your 25 years or so, is quite indicative that you must rely on others to tell you what to think on this subject.

And, my "bias" as it may be is against those who continue to foster BS which is based on such lack of research.

[Bill Miller]

First off, having been "splattered" a few times, as well as being the initiator of some splattering, rest assured that I have far more experience in that matter than do you.

And, my "bias" as it may be is against those who continue to foster BS which is based on such lack of research.

Your attitude is typical IMO of a propagandist. You turn and twist things to invent scenarios that never existed. For instance, so what if you have been splattered ... about everyone has been splattered with something at one time or another. I didn't offer an expert opinion, but rather cited the opinion of a real blood spatter expert. You claim to scoff at 'blood spatter science' and yet you haven't said anything that leads me to think that you can intelligently discuss the blood spatter evidence with someone like Sherry, nor have you mentioned seeking the opinion of someone who could. This brings me to the last sentence you posted concerning ' a lack of research'. Could not one say that you are spreading BS when it comes to a science that you know nothing about, nor do you have the expertise to debate it with someone like a blood spatter expert. I am sure that I am not the only one who thinks this way.

[Antti Hynonen]

Thomas H. Purvis:

However, the great majority of witness testimony establishes that three shots were fired.

the great majority of testimony establishes the shot sequence as: bang,-------------------bang,----bang!

I have three bullets striking JFK

1. At approximately Z2-4/206. BANG!

2. Some 5.8 to 5.9 seconds later, a second shot strikes JFK in the cowlick of the skull at Z313.

3. Some 1.8 to 1.9 seconds later, a third and final shot strikes JFK in the EOP region of the skull, directly in front of James Altgens position, exits the head of JFK and strikes JBC in the right rear shoulder.

So! Why would I waste time looking for something which never existed to begin with?

Sort of like looking for mythololgical multiple assassins; body snatching wound alteration specialists; unicorns; the golden fleece; and rabbits that wear big tall funny hats.

As you may have deriived by now, I have a realtive decent understanding of the evidence, and therefore do not have to dream up non-existent beings, etc; in order to answer what are in reality quite simple questions to the events of the assassination.

Three Shots!

Three Hits!

And a big fat WC Lie about "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

Which never ceases to amaze me that anyone actually believed!

Tom,

How can you support a third (successful) shot that occurs in less than 2 seconds from the previous one?

The entire single shooter theory lies on the weapon having been a Carcano, which is as we all know a bolt action rifle.

With this in mind, that is, the time needed to "recycle" the weapon + the time needed to obtain an accurate aim again, a theorized time of less than 2 seconds, is very very short. On top of this, the third shot must have been by far the hardest shot as at this time the target was the farthest away and the target was partially slumped in the back seat. (Minimal area of head visible to the shooter at this point).

Considering these, I'd say a successful third headshot with these "facts" in mind is virtually impossible.

[Miles Scull]

Thomas H. Purvis:

However, the great majority of witness testimony establishes that three shots were fired.

the great majority of testimony establishes the shot sequence as: bang,-------------------bang,----bang!

I have three bullets striking JFK

1. At approximately Z2-4/206. BANG!

2. Some 5.8 to 5.9 seconds later, a second shot strikes JFK in the cowlick of the skull at Z313.

3. Some 1.8 to 1.9 seconds later, a third and final shot strikes JFK in the EOP region of the skull, directly in front of James Altgens position, exits the head of JFK and strikes JBC in the right rear shoulder.

So! Why would I waste time looking for something which never existed to begin with?

Sort of like looking for mythololgical multiple assassins; body snatching wound alteration specialists; unicorns; the golden fleece; and rabbits that wear big tall funny hats.

As you may have deriived by now, I have a realtive decent understanding of the evidence, and therefore do not have to dream up non-existent beings, etc; in order to answer what are in reality quite simple questions to the events of the assassination.

Three Shots!

Three Hits!

And a big fat WC Lie about "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

Which never ceases to amaze me that anyone actually believed!

Tom,

How can you support a third (successful) shot that occurs in less than 2 seconds from the previous one?

The entire single shooter theory lies on the weapon having been a Carcano, which is as we all know a bolt action rifle.

With this in mind, that is, the time needed to "recycle" the weapon + the time needed to obtain an accurate aim again, a theorized time of less than 2 seconds, is very very short. On top of this, the third shot must have been by far the hardest shot as at this time the target was the farthest away and the target was partially slumped in the back seat. (Minimal area of head visible to the shooter at this point).

Considering these, I'd say a successful third headshot with these "facts" in mind is virtually impossible.

The motion of the head is consistent with a shot from the front.

A shot from behind would have produced the exact opposite motion.