Clint Hill - First shot hit the president

[Mike Williams]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WFMYjyhMI&feature=player_embedded

Like many others, including Brehm, Moorman and J Hill, Clint Hill did not hear any of the early shots. Look at him in the Altgens photo, taken at Z255. He is the ONLY agent on the running boards who is not looking back or reacting.

He leaped from the running board almost simultaneous with the shot at 312-313, in reaction to a shot that was immediately prior to that. And he thought (mistakenly of course), that JFK first reacted, almost simultaneous with him jumping,

Representative FORD. Did you see the President put his hands to his throat and chest while you were still on the followup car, or after you had left it?

Mr. HILL. As I was leaving..

Hill jumped from the running board in reaction to the shot at 285, thinking that was the first shot and that JFK had just started to react. Nothing else makes sense.

This is really silly, Robert. If Hill saw Kennedy put his hands to his throat, he saw him BEFORE Z-285, and the shot he heard BEFORE he saw Kennedy reach for his throat was therefore seconds BEFORE Z-285. Your trying to spin him as a witness for a shot at Z-285 just doesn't work.

Hill, like HARGIS and a number of others, heard two shots--an early one to which Kennedy reacted, and a second one they associated with the large head wound. Many more thought there were two shots, bang-bang, around the time Kennedy was struck in the head. If you're gonna argue for a shot at Z-285, your best bet is to argue that it was the first of the two shots people heard as bang-bang, and Hill (and others) heard as one sound.

But that's also problematic. Most of the closest witnesses--Brehm, Moorman, Hill, Hudson, Summers--heard a shot after the headshot, which suggests the headshot was the first of the two shots heard as bang-bang by so many, and not the second.

Your belief that Hill saw JFK with his hands raised prior to 285, is in direct contradiction to what he said. To put it another way, if you want to know what shot Hill heard, then listen to him.

Hill believed that JFK first raised his hands, as he was jumping off the running board, which he did at or a hair prior to 312. Read the citation I posted from his WC testimony.

And he said that he was scanning a small group in a grassy area who were watching the limo pass them.

On the left hand side was a grass area with a few people scattered along it observing the motorcade passing, and I was visually scanning these people when I heard a noise similar to a firecracker.

This is important, Pat. Look at him at frame 223. He is looking slightly to the right and could not possibly be scanning people on the lefthand side of the road. In fact, he NEVER looks to his left while he was visible in the Zfilm.

And while you're looking at him in the wide film, look at his orientation at 247-249, as we lose sight of him. Then look at his orientation a third of a second later in the Altgens photo. He is turning at a fairly rapid pace, to his left, and toward Brehm and the people around him. At that pace, he was scanning those people about a second prior to the shot.

High powered rifle shots are very loud and very startling. Clint Hill did not and could not have heard such a thing and then just stood around for five seconds, picking his nose. We would expect him to react immediately, and when he heard what he believed was a real gunshot, he did.

I agree with you that there was another shot after 312-313, but it was probably fired from a handgun which was subsonic and much weaker than the rifleshot that preceded it by a small fraction of a second. A majority of people never heard it, or wrote it off as an echo.

Robert,

Is this another "smiling and waving" fiasco?

There is no possible way you can tell where Hills eyes are looking.....Hes wearing friggin sunglasses!

Do you ever make any assertions based on facts? Or is conjecture your only strong suit?

[Robert Harris]

Even if one includes Bennett as a firm witness for a first shot miss, however, and arbitrarily dismisses the statements of those hearing only two shots under the assumption they failed to hear the first shot, and the statements of those claiming the first shot was the head shot under the assumption their recollections are just not credible, the score remains 23-1 in favor of statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one hit, vs. statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one missed. Unless someone can come up with a reason why all these witnesses were wrong while Bennett, who was not even asked to testify to clarify his statements, was right, the evidence is overwhelming that the first shot hit.

Pat, you are wrong.

First, do a tally of the witnesses who were watching Jackie durng the early Zfilm. Everyone I am aware of, said she was looking to her left when the first shot was fired - including her. And she began to react by 170, turning toward her husband, never looking to the left side of the road again.

There was a shot fired circa 160 which was heard by some witnesses - perhaps because it made a noise when it shattered on the pavement. We see both Jackie and JFK react to it simultaneously. But no-one heard the shot at 223, including John Connally. That's because the early shots were fired from a suppressed weapon. Nor did they hear the shot that was fired during the Towner film. Now, before anyone laughs at that suggestion, PLEASE watch this video or at least, the first part of it. If JFK was not reacting to a gunshot then, then what was he reacting to??

http://www.jfkhistory.com/ALL/ALL.mov

If is also available on Youtube,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/8/gkAc76n8q44

There may have been a shot fired at 160, but it most definitely was not the first of the three shots heard by most witnesses. The "we know when the shots struck because the occupants of the car turned argument" is a failed one. Mary Woodward said the occupants turned to look at her when she and her friends yelled out. Connally said he turned to his left and back real fast because he was stretching. In short, we don't know why they turned, and pretending we can discern shots by the reactions of but a few people, when dozens of witnesses, including those whose reactions we are judging, disagree with the conclusion the first shot was fired at frame 160, and that Kennedy calmly resumed waving to his right after the first shot, is silly.

The first shot miss at frame 160 is an absolute myth. I discuss this throughout chapters 5 thru 9b. A quick summary was already posted on this thread. In chapter 9b I go through Bugliosi's witnesses for a first shot miss, and show how he lies about almost all of them. You may want to take a look.

In trying to determine when shots were fired during a silent film, our most valuable resource is to study the visible reactions of the victims and the people around them.

JFK's first reactions was during the Towner film. He started to wave and within a half of a second, snapped his hand back, balling it into a fist. Then, within a fraction of a second, he dropped to his left and then straightened back up.

Have you looked at my presentation on this? What is your opinion about it?

[Robert Harris]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WFMYjyhMI&feature=player_embedded

Like many others, including Brehm, Moorman and J Hill, Clint Hill did not hear any of the early shots. Look at him in the Altgens photo, taken at Z255. He is the ONLY agent on the running boards who is not looking back or reacting.

He leaped from the running board almost simultaneous with the shot at 312-313, in reaction to a shot that was immediately prior to that. And he thought (mistakenly of course), that JFK first reacted, almost simultaneous with him jumping,

Representative FORD. Did you see the President put his hands to his throat and chest while you were still on the followup car, or after you had left it?

Mr. HILL. As I was leaving..

Hill jumped from the running board in reaction to the shot at 285, thinking that was the first shot and that JFK had just started to react. Nothing else makes sense.

This is really silly, Robert. If Hill saw Kennedy put his hands to his throat, he saw him BEFORE Z-285, and the shot he heard BEFORE he saw Kennedy reach for his throat was therefore seconds BEFORE Z-285. Your trying to spin him as a witness for a shot at Z-285 just doesn't work.

Hill, like HARGIS and a number of others, heard two shots--an early one to which Kennedy reacted, and a second one they associated with the large head wound. Many more thought there were two shots, bang-bang, around the time Kennedy was struck in the head. If you're gonna argue for a shot at Z-285, your best bet is to argue that it was the first of the two shots people heard as bang-bang, and Hill (and others) heard as one sound.

But that's also problematic. Most of the closest witnesses--Brehm, Moorman, Hill, Hudson, Summers--heard a shot after the headshot, which suggests the headshot was the first of the two shots heard as bang-bang by so many, and not the second.

Your belief that Hill saw JFK with his hands raised prior to 285, is in direct contradiction to what he said. To put it another way, if you want to know what shot Hill heard, then listen to him.

Hill believed that JFK first raised his hands, as he was jumping off the running board, which he did at or a hair prior to 312. Read the citation I posted from his WC testimony.

And he said that he was scanning a small group in a grassy area who were watching the limo pass them.

On the left hand side was a grass area with a few people scattered along it observing the motorcade passing, and I was visually scanning these people when I heard a noise similar to a firecracker.

This is important, Pat. Look at him at frame 223. He is looking slightly to the right and could not possibly be scanning people on the lefthand side of the road. In fact, he NEVER looks to his left while he was visible in the Zfilm.

And while you're looking at him in the wide film, look at his orientation at 247-249, as we lose sight of him. Then look at his orientation a third of a second later in the Altgens photo. He is turning at a fairly rapid pace, to his left, and toward Brehm and the people around him. At that pace, he was scanning those people about a second prior to the shot.

High powered rifle shots are very loud and very startling. Clint Hill did not and could not have heard such a thing and then just stood around for five seconds, picking his nose. We would expect him to react immediately, and when he heard what he believed was a real gunshot, he did.

I agree with you that there was another shot after 312-313, but it was probably fired from a handgun which was subsonic and much weaker than the rifleshot that preceded it by a small fraction of a second. A majority of people never heard it, or wrote it off as an echo.

Robert,

Is this another "smiling and waving" fiasco?

There is no possible way you can tell where Hills eyes are looking.....Hes wearing friggin sunglasses!

Do you ever make any assertions based on facts? Or is conjecture your only strong suit?

I have no idea what "smiling and waving" fiasco you are talking about Michael. Sounds like it's long past Miller time for you, eh:-)

And your argument that we cannot tell which direction Hill was facing, because he was wearing sunglasses, it just goofy. Even if he wasn't wearing them, we could not see his eyes from that distance. But it is obvious, that his head was turned to the right then, and that he was not scanning people on the south side of the road.

[Mike Williams]

Even if one includes Bennett as a firm witness for a first shot miss, however, and arbitrarily dismisses the statements of those hearing only two shots under the assumption they failed to hear the first shot, and the statements of those claiming the first shot was the head shot under the assumption their recollections are just not credible, the score remains 23-1 in favor of statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one hit, vs. statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one missed. Unless someone can come up with a reason why all these witnesses were wrong while Bennett, who was not even asked to testify to clarify his statements, was right, the evidence is overwhelming that the first shot hit.

Pat, you are wrong.

First, do a tally of the witnesses who were watching Jackie durng the early Zfilm. Everyone I am aware of, said she was looking to her left when the first shot was fired - including her. And she began to react by 170, turning toward her husband, never looking to the left side of the road again.

There was a shot fired circa 160 which was heard by some witnesses - perhaps because it made a noise when it shattered on the pavement. We see both Jackie and JFK react to it simultaneously. But no-one heard the shot at 223, including John Connally. That's because the early shots were fired from a suppressed weapon. Nor did they hear the shot that was fired during the Towner film. Now, before anyone laughs at that suggestion, PLEASE watch this video or at least, the first part of it. If JFK was not reacting to a gunshot then, then what was he reacting to??

http://www.jfkhistory.com/ALL/ALL.mov

If is also available on Youtube,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/8/gkAc76n8q44

There may have been a shot fired at 160, but it most definitely was not the first of the three shots heard by most witnesses. The "we know when the shots struck because the occupants of the car turned argument" is a failed one. Mary Woodward said the occupants turned to look at her when she and her friends yelled out. Connally said he turned to his left and back real fast because he was stretching. In short, we don't know why they turned, and pretending we can discern shots by the reactions of but a few people, when dozens of witnesses, including those whose reactions we are judging, disagree with the conclusion the first shot was fired at frame 160, and that Kennedy calmly resumed waving to his right after the first shot, is silly.

The first shot miss at frame 160 is an absolute myth. I discuss this throughout chapters 5 thru 9b. A quick summary was already posted on this thread. In chapter 9b I go through Bugliosi's witnesses for a first shot miss, and show how he lies about almost all of them. You may want to take a look.

In trying to determine when shots were fired during a silent film, our most valuable resource is to study the visible reactions of the victims and the people around them.

JFK's first reactions was during the Towner film. He started to wave and within a half of a second, snapped his hand back, balling it into a fist. Then, within a fraction of a second, he dropped to his left and then straightened back up.

Have you looked at my presentation on this? What is your opinion about it?

I think that Roy Truly was correct in that the limo braked and came hard left to avoid the curb. I see no reaction from anyone that could even remotely be considered in reaction to a shot.

[Mike Williams]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WFMYjyhMI&feature=player_embedded

Like many others, including Brehm, Moorman and J Hill, Clint Hill did not hear any of the early shots. Look at him in the Altgens photo, taken at Z255. He is the ONLY agent on the running boards who is not looking back or reacting.

He leaped from the running board almost simultaneous with the shot at 312-313, in reaction to a shot that was immediately prior to that. And he thought (mistakenly of course), that JFK first reacted, almost simultaneous with him jumping,

Representative FORD. Did you see the President put his hands to his throat and chest while you were still on the followup car, or after you had left it?

Mr. HILL. As I was leaving..

Hill jumped from the running board in reaction to the shot at 285, thinking that was the first shot and that JFK had just started to react. Nothing else makes sense.

This is really silly, Robert. If Hill saw Kennedy put his hands to his throat, he saw him BEFORE Z-285, and the shot he heard BEFORE he saw Kennedy reach for his throat was therefore seconds BEFORE Z-285. Your trying to spin him as a witness for a shot at Z-285 just doesn't work.

Hill, like HARGIS and a number of others, heard two shots--an early one to which Kennedy reacted, and a second one they associated with the large head wound. Many more thought there were two shots, bang-bang, around the time Kennedy was struck in the head. If you're gonna argue for a shot at Z-285, your best bet is to argue that it was the first of the two shots people heard as bang-bang, and Hill (and others) heard as one sound.

But that's also problematic. Most of the closest witnesses--Brehm, Moorman, Hill, Hudson, Summers--heard a shot after the headshot, which suggests the headshot was the first of the two shots heard as bang-bang by so many, and not the second.

Your belief that Hill saw JFK with his hands raised prior to 285, is in direct contradiction to what he said. To put it another way, if you want to know what shot Hill heard, then listen to him.

Hill believed that JFK first raised his hands, as he was jumping off the running board, which he did at or a hair prior to 312. Read the citation I posted from his WC testimony.

And he said that he was scanning a small group in a grassy area who were watching the limo pass them.

On the left hand side was a grass area with a few people scattered along it observing the motorcade passing, and I was visually scanning these people when I heard a noise similar to a firecracker.

This is important, Pat. Look at him at frame 223. He is looking slightly to the right and could not possibly be scanning people on the lefthand side of the road. In fact, he NEVER looks to his left while he was visible in the Zfilm.

And while you're looking at him in the wide film, look at his orientation at 247-249, as we lose sight of him. Then look at his orientation a third of a second later in the Altgens photo. He is turning at a fairly rapid pace, to his left, and toward Brehm and the people around him. At that pace, he was scanning those people about a second prior to the shot.

High powered rifle shots are very loud and very startling. Clint Hill did not and could not have heard such a thing and then just stood around for five seconds, picking his nose. We would expect him to react immediately, and when he heard what he believed was a real gunshot, he did.

I agree with you that there was another shot after 312-313, but it was probably fired from a handgun which was subsonic and much weaker than the rifleshot that preceded it by a small fraction of a second. A majority of people never heard it, or wrote it off as an echo.

Robert,

Is this another "smiling and waving" fiasco?

There is no possible way you can tell where Hills eyes are looking.....Hes wearing friggin sunglasses!

Do you ever make any assertions based on facts? Or is conjecture your only strong suit?

I have no idea what "smiling and waving" fiasco you are talking about Michael. Sounds like it's long past Miller time for you, eh:-)

And your argument that we cannot tell which direction Hill was facing, because he was wearing sunglasses, it just goofy. Even if he wasn't wearing them, we could not see his eyes from that distance. But it is obvious, that his head was turned to the right then, and that he was not scanning people on the south side of the road.

Oh Robert you are a wonder.

You have no idea what I am talking about in regard to the smiling and waving fiasco? Really? I would think this through if I were you.

So you make my point and agree that it is impossible to determine where Hill is looking? You readily admit you can not see his eyes, so you are making an assumption based on a slight angle of the head, even though the eyes are capable of seeing nearly 180 degrees with no head movement?

You may have a future in comedy.

[Mike Williams]

Tell me where you believe Hill is looking in this frame?

[Robert Harris]

Even if one includes Bennett as a firm witness for a first shot miss, however, and arbitrarily dismisses the statements of those hearing only two shots under the assumption they failed to hear the first shot, and the statements of those claiming the first shot was the head shot under the assumption their recollections are just not credible, the score remains 23-1 in favor of statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one hit, vs. statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one missed. Unless someone can come up with a reason why all these witnesses were wrong while Bennett, who was not even asked to testify to clarify his statements, was right, the evidence is overwhelming that the first shot hit.

Pat, you are wrong.

First, do a tally of the witnesses who were watching Jackie durng the early Zfilm. Everyone I am aware of, said she was looking to her left when the first shot was fired - including her. And she began to react by 170, turning toward her husband, never looking to the left side of the road again.

There was a shot fired circa 160 which was heard by some witnesses - perhaps because it made a noise when it shattered on the pavement. We see both Jackie and JFK react to it simultaneously. But no-one heard the shot at 223, including John Connally. That's because the early shots were fired from a suppressed weapon. Nor did they hear the shot that was fired during the Towner film. Now, before anyone laughs at that suggestion, PLEASE watch this video or at least, the first part of it. If JFK was not reacting to a gunshot then, then what was he reacting to??

http://www.jfkhistory.com/ALL/ALL.mov

If is also available on Youtube,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/8/gkAc76n8q44

There may have been a shot fired at 160, but it most definitely was not the first of the three shots heard by most witnesses. The "we know when the shots struck because the occupants of the car turned argument" is a failed one. Mary Woodward said the occupants turned to look at her when she and her friends yelled out. Connally said he turned to his left and back real fast because he was stretching. In short, we don't know why they turned, and pretending we can discern shots by the reactions of but a few people, when dozens of witnesses, including those whose reactions we are judging, disagree with the conclusion the first shot was fired at frame 160, and that Kennedy calmly resumed waving to his right after the first shot, is silly.

The first shot miss at frame 160 is an absolute myth. I discuss this throughout chapters 5 thru 9b. A quick summary was already posted on this thread. In chapter 9b I go through Bugliosi's witnesses for a first shot miss, and show how he lies about almost all of them. You may want to take a look.

In trying to determine when shots were fired during a silent film, our most valuable resource is to study the visible reactions of the victims and the people around them.

JFK's first reactions was during the Towner film. He started to wave and within a half of a second, snapped his hand back, balling it into a fist. Then, within a fraction of a second, he dropped to his left and then straightened back up.

Have you looked at my presentation on this? What is your opinion about it?

I think that Roy Truly was correct in that the limo braked and came hard left to avoid the curb. I see no reaction from anyone that could even remotely be considered in reaction to a shot.

Then why was JFK the only one to react? And if the limo braked, why would that cause him to ball his hand into a fist and then fall toward Jackie??

Please be specific.

As for your ridiculous claim that his reaction could not have been to a gunshot, I don't think you believe that at all. You simply jump on any opportunity to fabricate a subjective opinion that contradicts me, without the slightest regard for the truth.

That's all part of your little campaign to follow me around from forum to forum and thread to thread, trolling and running resistance, even when you have to make a total fool out of yourself to do it.

In fact, JFK reacted EXACTLY as we would expect anyone to react if they had been pelted by debris from a missed shot.

[Robert Harris]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WFMYjyhMI&feature=player_embedded

Like many others, including Brehm, Moorman and J Hill, Clint Hill did not hear any of the early shots. Look at him in the Altgens photo, taken at Z255. He is the ONLY agent on the running boards who is not looking back or reacting.

He leaped from the running board almost simultaneous with the shot at 312-313, in reaction to a shot that was immediately prior to that. And he thought (mistakenly of course), that JFK first reacted, almost simultaneous with him jumping,

Representative FORD. Did you see the President put his hands to his throat and chest while you were still on the followup car, or after you had left it?

Mr. HILL. As I was leaving..

Hill jumped from the running board in reaction to the shot at 285, thinking that was the first shot and that JFK had just started to react. Nothing else makes sense.

This is really silly, Robert. If Hill saw Kennedy put his hands to his throat, he saw him BEFORE Z-285, and the shot he heard BEFORE he saw Kennedy reach for his throat was therefore seconds BEFORE Z-285. Your trying to spin him as a witness for a shot at Z-285 just doesn't work.

Hill, like HARGIS and a number of others, heard two shots--an early one to which Kennedy reacted, and a second one they associated with the large head wound. Many more thought there were two shots, bang-bang, around the time Kennedy was struck in the head. If you're gonna argue for a shot at Z-285, your best bet is to argue that it was the first of the two shots people heard as bang-bang, and Hill (and others) heard as one sound.

But that's also problematic. Most of the closest witnesses--Brehm, Moorman, Hill, Hudson, Summers--heard a shot after the headshot, which suggests the headshot was the first of the two shots heard as bang-bang by so many, and not the second.

Your belief that Hill saw JFK with his hands raised prior to 285, is in direct contradiction to what he said. To put it another way, if you want to know what shot Hill heard, then listen to him.

Hill believed that JFK first raised his hands, as he was jumping off the running board, which he did at or a hair prior to 312. Read the citation I posted from his WC testimony.

And he said that he was scanning a small group in a grassy area who were watching the limo pass them.

On the left hand side was a grass area with a few people scattered along it observing the motorcade passing, and I was visually scanning these people when I heard a noise similar to a firecracker.

This is important, Pat. Look at him at frame 223. He is looking slightly to the right and could not possibly be scanning people on the lefthand side of the road. In fact, he NEVER looks to his left while he was visible in the Zfilm.

And while you're looking at him in the wide film, look at his orientation at 247-249, as we lose sight of him. Then look at his orientation a third of a second later in the Altgens photo. He is turning at a fairly rapid pace, to his left, and toward Brehm and the people around him. At that pace, he was scanning those people about a second prior to the shot.

High powered rifle shots are very loud and very startling. Clint Hill did not and could not have heard such a thing and then just stood around for five seconds, picking his nose. We would expect him to react immediately, and when he heard what he believed was a real gunshot, he did.

I agree with you that there was another shot after 312-313, but it was probably fired from a handgun which was subsonic and much weaker than the rifleshot that preceded it by a small fraction of a second. A majority of people never heard it, or wrote it off as an echo.

Robert,

Is this another "smiling and waving" fiasco?

There is no possible way you can tell where Hills eyes are looking.....Hes wearing friggin sunglasses!

Do you ever make any assertions based on facts? Or is conjecture your only strong suit?

I have no idea what "smiling and waving" fiasco you are talking about Michael. Sounds like it's long past Miller time for you, eh:-)

And your argument that we cannot tell which direction Hill was facing, because he was wearing sunglasses, it just goofy. Even if he wasn't wearing them, we could not see his eyes from that distance. But it is obvious, that his head was turned to the right then, and that he was not scanning people on the south side of the road.

Oh Robert you are a wonder.

You have no idea what I am talking about in regard to the smiling and waving fiasco? Really? I would think this through if I were you.

So you make my point and agree that it is impossible to determine where Hill is looking? You readily admit you can not see his eyes, so you are making an assumption based on a slight angle of the head, even though the eyes are capable of seeing nearly 180 degrees with no head movement?

You may have a future in comedy.

No, I have no idea what you are talking about. But if I made such a fool out of myself, then why are you so bashful about explaining it to everyone in detail???

Tell us about my "fiasco" Michael. Why are you being so bashful?

I stated that Hill could not have been "scanning" people on the South side of Elm, as any idiot can easily see. I can't believe that even you would dispute that fact.

You're not making any sense at all tonight, Michael.

[Mike Williams]

Even if one includes Bennett as a firm witness for a first shot miss, however, and arbitrarily dismisses the statements of those hearing only two shots under the assumption they failed to hear the first shot, and the statements of those claiming the first shot was the head shot under the assumption their recollections are just not credible, the score remains 23-1 in favor of statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one hit, vs. statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one missed. Unless someone can come up with a reason why all these witnesses were wrong while Bennett, who was not even asked to testify to clarify his statements, was right, the evidence is overwhelming that the first shot hit.

Pat, you are wrong.

First, do a tally of the witnesses who were watching Jackie durng the early Zfilm. Everyone I am aware of, said she was looking to her left when the first shot was fired - including her. And she began to react by 170, turning toward her husband, never looking to the left side of the road again.

There was a shot fired circa 160 which was heard by some witnesses - perhaps because it made a noise when it shattered on the pavement. We see both Jackie and JFK react to it simultaneously. But no-one heard the shot at 223, including John Connally. That's because the early shots were fired from a suppressed weapon. Nor did they hear the shot that was fired during the Towner film. Now, before anyone laughs at that suggestion, PLEASE watch this video or at least, the first part of it. If JFK was not reacting to a gunshot then, then what was he reacting to??

http://www.jfkhistory.com/ALL/ALL.mov

If is also available on Youtube,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/8/gkAc76n8q44

There may have been a shot fired at 160, but it most definitely was not the first of the three shots heard by most witnesses. The "we know when the shots struck because the occupants of the car turned argument" is a failed one. Mary Woodward said the occupants turned to look at her when she and her friends yelled out. Connally said he turned to his left and back real fast because he was stretching. In short, we don't know why they turned, and pretending we can discern shots by the reactions of but a few people, when dozens of witnesses, including those whose reactions we are judging, disagree with the conclusion the first shot was fired at frame 160, and that Kennedy calmly resumed waving to his right after the first shot, is silly.

The first shot miss at frame 160 is an absolute myth. I discuss this throughout chapters 5 thru 9b. A quick summary was already posted on this thread. In chapter 9b I go through Bugliosi's witnesses for a first shot miss, and show how he lies about almost all of them. You may want to take a look.

In trying to determine when shots were fired during a silent film, our most valuable resource is to study the visible reactions of the victims and the people around them.

JFK's first reactions was during the Towner film. He started to wave and within a half of a second, snapped his hand back, balling it into a fist. Then, within a fraction of a second, he dropped to his left and then straightened back up.

Have you looked at my presentation on this? What is your opinion about it?

I think that Roy Truly was correct in that the limo braked and came hard left to avoid the curb. I see no reaction from anyone that could even remotely be considered in reaction to a shot.

Then why was JFK the only one to react? And if the limo braked, why would that cause him to ball his hand into a fist and then fall toward Jackie??

Please be specific.

As for your ridiculous claim that his reaction could not have been to a gunshot, I don't think you believe that at all. You simply jump on any opportunity to fabricate a subjective opinion that contradicts me, without the slightest regard for the truth.

That's all part of your little campaign to follow me around from forum to forum and thread to thread, trolling and running resistance, even when you have to make a total fool out of yourself to do it.

In fact, JFK reacted EXACTLY as we would expect anyone to react if they had been pelted by debris from a missed shot.

And yet, there is not damage to the Limo from your imaginary shot, there is no evidence of anyone being hit by this debris, and there is not one piece of testimony that would concur that a shot had happened at this time.

Do you eve have any proof that his hand balls into a fist?

Do you have any evidence that he falls to his left?

Yep this is another Harris hallucination.

As for following you from forum to forum, I am a member here and at Duncan's place, is it not the purpose of a forum to debate and discuss ideas? I know that you would prefer I remain quiet, and not make you look so foolish, but that just is not going to happen.

History deserves accuracy, not fool-hearty assumptions.

smiling and waving?:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15782&view=findpost&p=190063

Edited June 17, 2010 by Mike Williams

[Robert Harris]

Even if one includes Bennett as a firm witness for a first shot miss, however, and arbitrarily dismisses the statements of those hearing only two shots under the assumption they failed to hear the first shot, and the statements of those claiming the first shot was the head shot under the assumption their recollections are just not credible, the score remains 23-1 in favor of statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one hit, vs. statements indicating that three shots were fired and the first one missed. Unless someone can come up with a reason why all these witnesses were wrong while Bennett, who was not even asked to testify to clarify his statements, was right, the evidence is overwhelming that the first shot hit.

Pat, you are wrong.

First, do a tally of the witnesses who were watching Jackie durng the early Zfilm. Everyone I am aware of, said she was looking to her left when the first shot was fired - including her. And she began to react by 170, turning toward her husband, never looking to the left side of the road again.

There was a shot fired circa 160 which was heard by some witnesses - perhaps because it made a noise when it shattered on the pavement. We see both Jackie and JFK react to it simultaneously. But no-one heard the shot at 223, including John Connally. That's because the early shots were fired from a suppressed weapon. Nor did they hear the shot that was fired during the Towner film. Now, before anyone laughs at that suggestion, PLEASE watch this video or at least, the first part of it. If JFK was not reacting to a gunshot then, then what was he reacting to??

http://www.jfkhistory.com/ALL/ALL.mov

If is also available on Youtube,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/8/gkAc76n8q44

There may have been a shot fired at 160, but it most definitely was not the first of the three shots heard by most witnesses. The "we know when the shots struck because the occupants of the car turned argument" is a failed one. Mary Woodward said the occupants turned to look at her when she and her friends yelled out. Connally said he turned to his left and back real fast because he was stretching. In short, we don't know why they turned, and pretending we can discern shots by the reactions of but a few people, when dozens of witnesses, including those whose reactions we are judging, disagree with the conclusion the first shot was fired at frame 160, and that Kennedy calmly resumed waving to his right after the first shot, is silly.

The first shot miss at frame 160 is an absolute myth. I discuss this throughout chapters 5 thru 9b. A quick summary was already posted on this thread. In chapter 9b I go through Bugliosi's witnesses for a first shot miss, and show how he lies about almost all of them. You may want to take a look.

In trying to determine when shots were fired during a silent film, our most valuable resource is to study the visible reactions of the victims and the people around them.

JFK's first reactions was during the Towner film. He started to wave and within a half of a second, snapped his hand back, balling it into a fist. Then, within a fraction of a second, he dropped to his left and then straightened back up.

Have you looked at my presentation on this? What is your opinion about it?

I think that Roy Truly was correct in that the limo braked and came hard left to avoid the curb. I see no reaction from anyone that could even remotely be considered in reaction to a shot.

Then why was JFK the only one to react? And if the limo braked, why would that cause him to ball his hand into a fist and then fall toward Jackie??

Please be specific.

As for your ridiculous claim that his reaction could not have been to a gunshot, I don't think you believe that at all. You simply jump on any opportunity to fabricate a subjective opinion that contradicts me, without the slightest regard for the truth.

That's all part of your little campaign to follow me around from forum to forum and thread to thread, trolling and running resistance, even when you have to make a total fool out of yourself to do it.

In fact, JFK reacted EXACTLY as we would expect anyone to react if they had been pelted by debris from a missed shot.

And yet, there is not damage to the Limo from your imaginary shot, there is no evidence of anyone being hit by this debris, and there is not one piece of testimony that would concur that a shot had happened at this time.

Do you eve have any proof that his hand balls into a fist?

Do you have any evidence that he falls to his left?

Yep this is another Harris hallucination.

As for following you from forum to forum, I am a member here and at Duncan's place, is it not the purpose of a forum to debate and discuss ideas? I know that you would prefer I remain quiet, and not make you look so foolish, but that just is not going to happen.

History deserves accuracy, not fool-hearty assumptions.

How did you determine that there was no damage or scratches on the limo Michael. Please be specific.

And when do you intend to answer my questions.

If JFK was reacting to the driver braking, why did that cause him to ball his hand into a fist and then fall toward Jackie?

And why didn't any of the other limo passengers react as he did?? I don't see Jacking balling her hand into a fist. Why not???

As for proof that he balled his hand into a fist, of course I have absolute proof in the Towner film. You can watch it here.

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/8/gkAc76n8q44

As for the fact that you are a xxxxx, the quality of your arguments and logic, proves that. You don't even defend your arguments from one thread to the next, because you have no position. You only look for excuses to attack and insult me and endlessly spew out excrement that you don't believe for a millisecond.

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.

Edited June 17, 2010 by Robert Harris

[David Andrews]

Weren't there any witnesses at the east corner of Elm who recalled any movement by JFK, as is conveniently missing from Towner and the other film?

I don't see anything in any film that shows Greer nearly hitting the curb. There were people standing there, and that would have caused a ripple in the crowd. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing cars veering toward unsuspecting bystanders to compare reactions with.

I think Greer misperceived which street he was supposed to turn down and had to correct at the last second, which would have been a couple feet later than if he had not made his mistake. Locals in the crowd probably did a silent "Oops!" in their heads, knowing what almost happened. But do we see anyone in the crowd reacting with any concern in Towner? Kennedy seems the only person fazed by by any part of the turn...we'll never really know if he's reacting to a missed shot, or if he gave a little "Oops!" at the short turn himself, feeling the way one does when one misses a step on the stairs.

Any bets on whether JFK's dropped wave is a reaction to a pavement hit, or to the short turn? Either way, it's a significant moment that deserves exploration, and I'm glad Bob Harris brought it up.

Edited June 17, 2010 by David Andrews

[Mike Williams]

How did you determine that there was no damage or scratches on the limo Michael. Please be specific.

Mr. SPECTER - Mr. Frazier, have you now described all of your findings on the windshield of the Presidential limousine?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; that is concerning the glass itself and not the molding around the windshield.

Mr. SPECTER - Will you then move to the molding around the windshield and state what, if anything, you found there?

Mr. FRAZIER - On the strip of chrome which goes across the top of the- windshield and again on the passenger side of the windshield or the inside surface, I found a dent in the chrome which had been caused by some projectile which struck the chrome on the inside surface.

Mr. SPECTER - Was there one dent or more than one dent or what?

Mr. FRAZIER - One dent.

Mr. SPECTER - Will you identify what is depicted by a photograph heretofore marked as Commission Exhibit 349?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; this is a photograph which I took of this dent at that time, showing the damaged chrome, just to the right of the rearview mirror support at the top of the windshield.

Mr. SPECTER - Did your examination of the President's limousine disclose any other holes or markings which could have conceivably been caused by a bullet striking the automobile or any part of the automobile?

Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir.

Then Frazier's Shaw trial testimony:

Q: Now, Mr. Frazier, other than the windshield of the automobile, could you tell us what particular examinations were conducted with other parts of this vehicle?

A: Yes, sir. The first examination which was made was of the exterior portions of the vehicle. We examined the outer surface of the hood, the grille area, both front fender areas, all the metal work on the outside of the automobile. The examination was for two purposes, to determine whether there were any bullets or other projectile impact areas on the outside of the car and also to note the presence of the foreign material deposited on it. We found blood and tissue all over the outside areas of the vehicle from the hood ornament, over the complete area of the hood, on the outside of the windshield, also on the inside surface of the windshield, and all over the entire exterior portion of the car, that is, the side rails down both sides of the car, and of course considerable quantities inside the car and on the trunk lid area. We found however, no bullet holes or projectile marks.

Q: Did you find any impact areas on this automobile?

A: Nothing which could be identified as a bullet impact area except the one on the inside of the windshield.

There was no damage to the outside.

If JFK was reacting to the driver braking, why did that cause him to ball his hand into a fist and then fall toward Jackie?

Or more appropriately, how many times do you want me to answer the same question?

You have yet to prove that he made a fist at all, and all you have to support your assumption is a grainy piece of film that at best is inconclusive in supporting your contention. You have zero in the area of witness testimony that supports a shot at this time, and in fact do have a piece of testimony that could well explain an unusual movement. Although you disregard this, as it does not fit your theory.

Mr. TRULY. That is right.

And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.

Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb?

Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.

If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here.

And why didn't any of the other limo passengers react as he did?? I don't see Jacking balling her hand into a fist. Why not???

Hell Robert I don't even see JFK balling his hand into a fist as you say. In fact, in following this, I do not believe I have found another person who believes they see this fist either, although there may be one somewhere.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2332.0.html

As for the fact that you are a xxxxx, the quality of your arguments and logic, proves that. You don't even defend your arguments from one thread to the next, because you have no position. You only look for excuses to attack and insult me and endlessly spew out excrement that you don't believe for a millisecond.

Really? Are you kidding me? Not defending my position? I bet there are many I have debated who would likely disagree Robert, and you should as well, I have been debating you for quite some time, and it seems that most agree with my opinion of the events.

I dont need excuses to attack you Robert, your work offers many opportunities to be attacked, is comes along with the very assumptive nature of your work. You have nothing more than assumptions and conjecture, and try to pass them off as facts.

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.

Are you tugging my leg? DID you really just say that? I fear now that I see the issue. You have problems with eye sight.

JFK's Limo was Midnight Blue and not Black, Robert.

"Many of us recall, from repeated viewings of the Zapruder-film footage of the assassination, that Kennedy's limo was midnight blue. But it's now black. In fact, it's been black since Lyndon Johnson ordered that new paint job in 1964, thinking that the midnight-blue color was too closely associated in the public mind with Kennedy's assassination."

http://autos.aol.com/article/kennedy-presidential-limo/

How in the world can we place any value on what you see in the films, when you can not even see the color of the car??

Good Heavens!

[Jerry Ellis]

Hope I am not hijacking this thread. If so I will start a new one.

Regarding the visual analysis of the films and stills and the discussion of

reaction times to shots -

This is something that has bothered me for decades.

I just bring this up for clarification, and I am merely posing this as a question – I shoot but I am far from an expert -

somewhere in the plaza we have the actual location of the shooter, and hence the path of the rounds on their way to their target. We also have the true location, along the bullets path of the point where the sound emanates from. It is said it isn't actually at the rifle but possibly just in front of the rifle barrel. At any rate we have a rate of travel of a round. Perhaps something like 2200 feet per second. Perhaps more if the sniper is using his own load. Then we have the speed of sound at the atmospheric conditions of the day which is on record at the weather bureau. Then we have the actual location of the witnesses ears in relation to the starting point of the sounds of those shots.

My point is that it seems to me that these rounds have met their destination BEFORE the sound of the shot report reaches the ear of the witness.

Is this taken into account when analyzing the photo record frame by frame?

My question is, for example, how much time delay is there in Mrs. Kennedy visually seeing a reaction from the President and reacting to the SOUND of the gun report, and is she reacting to a motion by Mr. Kennedy or the sound of the shot?

Is this time delay significant and relevant? Just asking as I can't figure how much faster the bullet is from its sound and if this phenomenon is significant is it taken into account with all these analyses?

Also with the same theory in mind, from I believe Mr. Harris' Part One at 2:25 Connolly said he "never heard the shot that hit him" Seems to me that this would be understandable

as the bullet physically impacted him before the sound wave reached his

ear, and his body had time to instantly involuntarily react in shock so that the perception of that sound would be blocked out or forgotten right from the beginning as he was instantly in a trauma state as he was hit.

There might be other things that perhaps my point should be taken into account when considering.

Opinions?

[Robert Harris]

Weren't there any witnesses at the east corner of Elm who recalled any movement by JFK, as is conveniently missing from Towner and the other film?

I don't see anything in any film that shows Greer nearly hitting the curb. There were people standing there, and that would have caused a ripple in the crowd. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing cars veering toward unsuspecting bystanders to compare reactions with.

I think Greer misperceived which street he was supposed to turn down and had to correct at the last second, which would have been a couple feet later than if he had not made his mistake. Locals in the crowd probably did a silent "Oops!" in their heads, knowing what almost happened. But do we see anyone in the crowd reacting with any concern in Towner? Kennedy seems the only person fazed by by any part of the turn...we'll never really know if he's reacting to a missed shot, or if he gave a little "Oops!" at the short turn himself, feeling the way one does when one misses a step on the stairs.

Any bets on whether JFK's dropped wave is a reaction to a pavement hit, or to the short turn? Either way, it's a significant moment that deserves exploration, and I'm glad Bob Harris brought it up.

Thanks David.

I think if JFK's reaction had been to the limo striking the curb or braking, he might have been thrown forward, but not to his left, toward Jackie. And the others riding with him would have reacted similarly. Nor would he have balled his hand into a fist.

Those reactions were unique. JFK never reacted like that during the motorcade previously or undoubtedly, any other time in his life. And the reactions began JUST as the limo pulled in front of the Daltex building and the window that was partially broken out on the third floor.

In the past, people blew off the notion that there was a shot then, because most witnesses said they never heard shots until later. But we have ignored the possibility that a suppressed weapon was used, which not only explains why most people never heard that shot, but why shots were fired wildly, missing the entire limousine. Suppressors are notorious for causing problems like that. And the mafia had been using suppressors for decades prior to 1963. There is no reason at all that they wouldn't have used them in the attack on JFK - when the limo was relatively close.

[Mike Williams]

Hope I am not hijacking this thread. If so I will start a new one.

Regarding the visual analysis of the films and stills and the discussion of

reaction times to shots -

This is something that has bothered me for decades.

I just bring this up for clarification, and I am merely posing this as a question – I shoot but I am far from an expert -

somewhere in the plaza we have the actual location of the shooter, and hence the path of the rounds on their way to their target. We also have the true location, along the bullets path of the point where the sound emanates from. It is said it isn't actually at the rifle but possibly just in front of the rifle barrel. At any rate we have a rate of travel of a round. Perhaps something like 2200 feet per second. Perhaps more if the sniper is using his own load. Then we have the speed of sound at the atmospheric conditions of the day which is on record at the weather bureau. Then we have the actual location of the witnesses ears in relation to the starting point of the sounds of those shots.

My point is that it seems to me that these rounds have met their destination BEFORE the sound of the shot report reaches the ear of the witness.

Is this taken into account when analyzing the photo record frame by frame?

My question is, for example, how much time delay is there in Mrs. Kennedy visually seeing a reaction from the President and reacting to the SOUND of the gun report, and is she reacting to a motion by Mr. Kennedy or the sound of the shot?

Is this time delay significant and relevant? Just asking as I can't figure how much faster the bullet is from its sound and if this phenomenon is significant is it taken into account with all these analyses?

Also with the same theory in mind, from I believe Mr. Harris' Part One at 2:25 Connolly said he "never heard the shot that hit him" Seems to me that this would be understandable

as the bullet physically impacted him before the sound wave reached his

ear, and his body had time to instantly involuntarily react in shock so that the perception of that sound would be blocked out or forgotten right from the beginning as he was instantly in a trauma state as he was hit.

There might be other things that perhaps my point should be taken into account when considering.

Opinions?

Jerry,

Sometime ago I wrote an article called first shot first hit. Not knowing at the time of Barbs piece. I used bullet travel times wtc to examine the shooting, and I will look for that as I should post it to my ballistics website www.jfkballistics.com.

Also your observation about JBC is correct. When a bullet strikes the body it is not unusual for the body to experience an overload of sorts, of the central nervous system. As they say you never hear the one that gets you. Harris and I discussed this sometime ago and I posted some examples.

Ill try and dig those up as well.

Mike