The "Headshots"

[Thomas H. Purvis]

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.

You turn and twist things to invent scenarios that never existed.

Yep! Went back in time and forced all of those witnesses to claim that Z313 was the impact of the SECOND SHOT.

Utilized my CIA connections to force the US Secret Service to tell us that JFK suffered impact of the third shot at some 30-feet farther down Elm St. than was the Z313 impact.

Made Nellie Connally write in her own handwritten notes which were done some 8 or 10 days after the assassination that she and JBC were down in the jumseats with JBC's head in her lap at the time of the last shot impact which blew cerebral tissue forward all over her and JBC.

Altered the survey data merely to confuse you! (and apparantly did an excellent job on that one)

You claim to scoff at 'blood spatter science'

Nope! I state as an absolute fact that anyone who claims that they can look at the Z-film and determine as fact anything in regards to the direction from which shots were fired, is blowing smoke up someone's "A**".

And, quite apparantly you breathed as well as believed the smoke!---Which by the way is your problem, not mine!

Blood Splatter/Spatter is a Forensic Science, which you seem to fail to understand is merely a complementary aspect of the other fields of said science.

That you apparantly do not have the ability to understand that one ABSOLUTELY can not look at the Z-film and determine anything, AS FACT, in regards to directionality of shots fired, is your problem.

So, keep right on chasing body snatchers/wound alterer's as well as multiple assassins shooting from whichever direction you wish to dream up.

And in another 25 years, you will still know as little about the events in Dealy Plaza on 11/22/63, as you apparantly know today.

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

As has been demonsrated for a considerable number of years, common sense as well as verification of claimed facts, were long ago thrown out the window when it came to research into the JFK assassination.

Therefore, not unlike the "body snatch" theory, I have little doubts that we could get a following which thoroughly supported space alein kidnapping as well.

After all, good ole "common sense" americans have believed and followed the likes of Jim Jones; Irvil LeBaron; Charles Manson; David Koresh; Adolph Hitler; and even the Warren Commision.

However, from what I am observing here, there are more and more who now recognize exactly who has and who has not been spreading BS on the subject matter.

So, if you wish to set up a topic in which a "Poll" is taken in regards to exactly how many persons on this forum, or for that matter the entire US, are of the opinion that they can look at the Z-film and state with absolute certainty from which direction the Z313 impact was fired, then be my guest.

However, rest assured that all of society is neither as gullible as you seem to be in this matter, or attempting to win "brownie points" towards some merit badge or whatever it is you are working towards.

The concept of determination of directionality of shots fired in the assassination of JFK, by merely looking at the Z-film, would be laughed out of any court in the US. And most probably even in the digressive judicial system of many third-world nations.

To even state or imply that there is something related to "science" in this ability, would only be applicable if one utilizes the term: SCIENCE FICTION!

Edited March 19, 2008 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

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

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

In order to clear any misunderstandings, it can be stated as absolute fact that Tom is of the "old-school".

Which happens to be the one where they taught us to think for ourselves as well as to conduct our own proper research if we had doubts in the matter.

As opposed to being a "Parrot" who, due to inability of the two above referenced items, must go through life merely repeating what others state, with no knowledge as to whether there exists even the most common sense basis for said repeated statements.

Therefore, I would also assume that you are one of those who raised their hand when I asked; Would everyone who believed "THE SHOT THAT MISSED'" please raise their hand.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

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.

1. The caluclated elapsed time between shots is based strictly on the only evidence available. The number of frames in the Z-film.

Robert Frazier gave the time of approximately 2.3 to 2.4 seconds as required to operate and fire the weapon.

However, if one will check, they will find that this time includes the target acquisition time utilizing the scope.

Numerous persons have demonstraed that the Carcano can be effectively operated and fired, utilizing the open sights, in considerably less time.

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

Specialist Miller used 4.6 seconds on his first attempt, 5.15 seconds in his second attempt, and 4.45 seconds in his exercise using the iron sight.

In fact, even Chad Zimmerman has beat the "2.0" second time for a single shot, if recalled correctly.

Therefore, in the event that a few (as few as 6) frames of the Z-film have been excised* between Z312 to the purported Altgens Impact location, then one would have the full 2.3 to 2.4 seconds of elapsed time which Frazier called for in utilization the rifle scope.

"Snap Shots" with a bolt action rifle are a common part of some shooting events, and it is not uncommon for persons, from the standing position, to operate the bolt and fire in times of 1.5 to 1.9 seconds.

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).

And, just as with the Z313 headshot, this shot too was an almost miss.

Had the vehicle been going slightly slower then this shot too would have most probably gone over the top of JFK's head.

Nevertheless, the shooter had JFK's entire right rear shoulder area as well as the head, and thus the shot had to hit somewhere.

Unless of course one is of the persuasion that there was in fact a "SHOT THAT MISSED", and whoever the shooter was could not even hit the car after having already hit JFK two of two shots previously.

And, let me state as a fact that I am of the opinion that frames have been excised from the Z-film through this period, which in addition to making the vehicle speed appear faster, would decrease the actual elapsed shooting time as it is, and can only be calculated based on Z-frame count.

So, don't confuse some 2.3 to 2.4 seconds of elapsed time utilizing a scope in target re-acquisition with what can also be quite readily achieved in 1.8 to 1.9 seconds of elapsed time utilizing only the fixed iron sights of the weapon.

That 2.3 to 2.4 seconds of elapsed time/aka 42 elapsed frames of the Z-film has most certainly to date kept anyone from looking for any shot fired directly in front of James Altgens.

As well as attempting to resolve exactly how it is that a "slowing" vehicle only appears to speed up in the Z-film.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

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.

Says Who?

Having a pretty good crystal ball myself, it was assumed that this was your pertinent question/comment.

Just wanted a full comittment towards that point.

In actuallity, what is seen in the Z-film is in fact totally consistant with the shot from the rear which began it's exit at approximatley the juncture of the parietal & frontal lobe of the skull, with fragments therafter ripping out a considerable area of the right frontal lobe.

And, if you will hold that thought, for those who actually have interest in this simple answer, I just may make it back to this subject.

Provided of course that Bill Miller can or will cease attempts to divert from factual evidence to mythological abilities to look at the Z-film and determine directionality of bullets based on blood splatter, as well as giant conspiracies related to the Tague Curb impact.

Of which he understands nothing of either.

[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.

Finally! Some good research.

The movie "JFK".

Which kind of gives us a "heads up" as to exactly where you get your research information from.

I heard some rumor that if one watchs re-runs some 13 times, that they can thereafter claim the title of "Master Researcher".

[David G. Healy]

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.

"facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963

[Thomas H. Purvis]

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.

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

"facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963

The question is not whether or not the Z-film has been altered.

The questions are:

1. To what extent it has been altered.

2. To what purpose was this done.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z208.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z209.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z210.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z211.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z212.jpg

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

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

[David G. Healy]

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.

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

"facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963

The question is not whether or not the Z-film has been altered.

The questions are:

1. To what extent it has been altered.

2. To what purpose was this done.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z208.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z209.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z210.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z211.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z212.jpg

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

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

well Tom, I am under-a-bit of scrutiny here these day's, I'm attempting to clean up my act.... LMFAO!

[Bill Miller]

"facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963

I think the same can be said that if you have no signs of alteration, then your paranoia over the films being altered is unwarranted. The last I recall is that you said, 'I have seen no proof of alteration'.

[Bill Miller]

Finally! Some good research.

The movie "JFK".

Which kind of gives us a "heads up" as to exactly where you get your research information from.

I heard some rumor that if one watchs re-runs some 13 times, that they can thereafter claim the title of "Master Researcher".

Please tell this forum what difference does it matter if the movie 'JFK' was being filmed as to how gunshots were heard by the hundreds of people who were there in different areas of the plaza as the firings took place? The fact is that it doesn't mean anything, but I look forward to you trying to make it appear otherwise.

Whether Oliver Stone had a camera rolling or not didn't effect the sounds of gunfire that were heard by those in attendance to hear them. I gave you no information from the movie, but rather from the witnesses who were there and heard the shots during all 32/33 test firings. I am starting to see the same ol' - same ol' and that is when someone tells us that they have figured out the assassination and when confronted with evidence to the contrary - they get defensive and try to stray away from the points being made that debunks their previous conclusion.

[David G. Healy]

"facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963

I think the same can be said that if you have no signs of alteration, then your paranoia over the films being altered is unwarranted. The last I recall is that you said, 'I have seen no proof of alteration'.

Can't prove it..... Nor can you confirm the extant Zapruder film is legit, just a lot of Lone Nut Warren Commission support'in, hop'in and a pray'in.... Healthy paranoia is not only wonderful for the soul but....

In short son, the entire film and photo record concerning Dealey Plaza events on Nov 22nd 1963 is questioned... You need the varsity to dig out of this hole, and that's what we're waiting for... in the meantime, carry on.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

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?

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? [/b

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol21_0253b.htm

If it is of any consolation to your fantastic powers of investigative journalism, I think I believe that the City of dallas would have gotten somewhat upset if a considerable section of their concrete curbing were removed and left unrepaired.

Therefore, might not the term "repaired" and or "replacement section" fit better with the facts at hand.

Furthermore, if you will take the time to review the documented information (as opposed to that look at photographs and derive the facts) you will find that there was in fact no '"nick", and what was present was a lead "smear" on the concrete.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol15_0355b.htm

Now, had someone bothered to further explain, there was considerable discussion on this forum long ago, in which John Dolva was engaged, which even presented a plausible explanation for this lead smear on the concrete.

Which explanation I might add, was completely plausible and possible.

However, that does not mean that I accept either explanation, and I am by far more inclined to believe that the "smear" was in fact the result of a lead fragment impact from the Z-313 impact than being created by John's possible explanation.

Just as I believe that the repetetive rotating marks on the curb are most probably the result of a street sweeping machine getting too close to the curb with it's drum.

Nevertheless, there was NO Nick!, and if one wishes to attempt to impose some sinister connotation to having to repair an area of concrete curbing in which an entire section has been removed, then so be it.

However, again!

1. The Dillard and Underwood photo's which were first taken of this SMEAR, were taken on either November 23.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol21_0248b.htm

2. That section of concrete curbing which was removed and ultimately sent to the FBI Laboratory for examination, was not removed until August 5, 1964.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol21_0250b.htm

Therefore, this "evidence" remained, open for all to see and/or investigate/and/or take photographs of from November 23, 1963 until August 5, 1964. A period in excess of 8-months time.

Looks like there went the "sinister" intent out the window!

3. According to FBI Agent Shaneyfelt Exhibit 26, (unsigned FBI report dated 17 July, 1964) the first attempt to locate this "smear" occurred on July 15, 1964, at which no nick anywhere on the curbing could be located, and neither could any indication of any "smear" be found.**

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol21_0249a.htm

4. Thereafter, a letter signed by JEH, dated August 12, 1964, references location of the smear and removal of the section of curbing which contained the smear.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol21_0250a.htm

All of which, had you demonstrated the ability to do so, you could have found out for yourself and not had to rely upon some "spoonfed" indication of some sinister intent to "patch over" the lead smear found on the concrete curbing.

[David G. Healy]

Finally! Some good research.

The movie "JFK".

Which kind of gives us a "heads up" as to exactly where you get your research information from.

I heard some rumor that if one watchs re-runs some 13 times, that they can thereafter claim the title of "Master Researcher".

Please tell this forum what difference does it matter if the movie 'JFK' was being filmed as to how gunshots were heard by the hundreds of people who were there in different areas of the plaza as the firings took place? The fact is that it doesn't mean anything, but I look forward to you trying to make it appear otherwise.

Whether Oliver Stone had a camera rolling or not didn't effect the sounds of gunfire that were heard by those in attendance to hear them. I gave you no information from the movie, but rather from the witnesses who were there and heard the shots during all 32/33 test firings. I am starting to see the same ol' - same ol' and that is when someone tells us that they have figured out the assassination and when confronted with evidence to the contrary - they get defensive and try to stray away from the points being made that debunks their previous conclusion.

who you talking too Miller, some mythical monster or ogre? If your gonna quote, tell us who your quoting. Certainly don't want lurkers thinking your not accurate, now do we?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

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.

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

"facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963

The question is not whether or not the Z-film has been altered.

The questions are:

1. To what extent it has been altered.

2. To what purpose was this done.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z208.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z209.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z210.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z211.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z212.jpg

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

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

well Tom, I am under-a-bit of scrutiny here these day's, I'm attempting to clean up my act.... LMFAO!

Original omission of various frames of the film, for whatever reason, constitutes "alteration"

Later providing those frames, without the extant complete "sprocket holes" continues to represent "alteration" even if the actual and original frames were provided.

"Tinting" of a previously omitted frame of the film constitutes "alteration".

Just for beginners!

All of which belongs under the topic of Z-film alteration.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Finally! Some good research.

The movie "JFK".

Which kind of gives us a "heads up" as to exactly where you get your research information from.

I heard some rumor that if one watchs re-runs some 13 times, that they can thereafter claim the title of "Master Researcher".

Please tell this forum what difference does it matter if the movie 'JFK' was being filmed as to how gunshots were heard by the hundreds of people who were there in different areas of the plaza as the firings took place? The fact is that it doesn't mean anything, but I look forward to you trying to make it appear otherwise.

Whether Oliver Stone had a camera rolling or not didn't effect the sounds of gunfire that were heard by those in attendance to hear them. I gave you no information from the movie, but rather from the witnesses who were there and heard the shots during all 32/33 test firings. I am starting to see the same ol' - same ol' and that is when someone tells us that they have figured out the assassination and when confronted with evidence to the contrary - they get defensive and try to stray away from the points being made that debunks their previous conclusion.

who you talking too Miller, some mythical monster or ogre? If your gonna quote, tell us who your quoting. Certainly don't want lurkers thinking your not accurate, now do we?

when confronted with evidence to the contrary

Therein appears to lie your major problem! You have little or no concept as to what constitutes evidence of any factual worth, as well as how to evaluate same when it is absolutely provided to you.