Jump to content
The Education Forum

Phantom Shot - New Book Says Only Two Shots Fired in Plaza

Recommended Posts



The problem with the Zapruder film is it contradicts the testimony of all witnesses who heard a rapid, almost overlapping succession of gunshots (which alone is problematic, since the MC [Mannlicher-Carcano] cannot fire this way). The only way there can be a rapid succession of shots AND the Zapruder film be accurate at the same time is if Kennedy was hit in the back with the first shot and the second shot struck Tague, which would have had to have happened just before 313 (maybe around 307 or so).


The many witnesses who said the last two shots were fired in "rapid succession" (in "bang-bang" fashion) are a bit difficult for an "LNer" like myself to explain. In fact, I can't really explain why so many witnesses said they thought the last two shots occurred practically on top of one another. (And I can't utilize the "echoes" argument when it comes to most of those witnesses, because most of them said they only heard THREE total shots. But if they had really been hearing a combination of actual GUNSHOTS plus some ECHOES, then I would think those witnesses would have said they heard more than just THREE shots.)

But I will add this.....

There are several witnesses who said the shots were "evenly spaced" (that is, NOT bunched together at all). I cite each of those witnesses here.



I have spoken to Mike Majerus about the witness perception of the shots because it has always puzzled me that if a shot has two loud composite elements - sound barrier and muzzle blast, why did not more people say they heard four or six shots - as in an even number?

His take on this is that shot 1 caught people by surprise and that it registered as a firecracker or shot ....."count 1".....then as people were alerted and more focused, they then heard the two elements of the second shot and counted it as two making a total of three...in their minds when in fact it was only two.

I am not convinced, but I think it is possible. I tend to favour an early missed shot because we have the "sparks" and we have the Tague nick.......but Mike Majerus is very persuasive over the JFK Back shot being the first shot in examining witness testimony.

Tina Towner contradicts him though as she said she heard the first shot right "after the turn".....I wonder how much time is "after the turn"......I think Phil Willis also stated he took one of his photos as a result of a shot which also came right after the turn onto Elm.

It is simply not possible to determine the exact sequence of events in respect of these shots. One has to consider the "missed shot" and the rather odd notion that an assassin would hit with shots 1 and 3 and miss the car completely with shot 2. This I believe is compelling that if there was a missed shot it was fired early and missed because it struck a tree branch.

I also think we cannot dismiss out of hand that a missed shot could have been fired after the fatal shot as Charles Brehm seemed to think, but on balance I would personally consider that to be remote - but what do I know...I was not there.


Hi Patrick,

I suppose it's possible that Mike Majerus could be correct regarding his "2 Shots" theory, but I think it is an extremely remote and highly UNlikely possibility.

A "three shots fired" scenario seems to be compelling on all fronts---including the massive number of "3 Shots" earwitnesses, which, as I mentioned in a previous post, includes the nearly unanimous statements supplied mostly in March of 1964 in Commission Document No. 706 by all 73 Book Depository employees (and it might actually BE completely unanimous among those who gave a firm opinion as to the number of shots they heard).

And with exactly three shells littering the Sniper's Nest on the sixth floor, coupled with this pie chart below, it's hard to imagine just TWO shots actually being fired in Dealey Plaza. (But I would certainly never say with 100% certainty that Mike Majerus, author of "Phantom Shot", is positively wrong. Maybe he's right. But I tend to doubt it.)


Another reason I tend to doubt the "2 Shots Were Fired" theory is a pretty big reason too --- John Connally's unwavering testimony and statements about hearing the first shot, which he took to be "a rifle shot", but not being hit by that bullet, and then Connally being hit by Shot #2 (the SBT bullet, of course), and then the Texas Governor saying he was definitely NOT struck by bullet #3 (the head shot that killed President Kennedy).

John Connally's testimony concerning the shooting sequence and timing of the shots would certainly NOT favor Mr. Majerus' theory of there being only two shots fired overall.



That is quite interesting [referring to these remarks made earlier by DVP]. It certainly adds weight to the take of all shots from the TSBD and none to from the Knoll.

I would want to be overly confident of the source being correct as to what was accurately recorded of the interviews and that the recording of the interviews can be given a high weight as to reliability of being correct.

I say this because this is the first I've heard of this information and I think I should have. One reason for not hearing this is I just haven't seen enough of any of this to have come across it. Another reason could be this source has been discredited.

The reason I think I should have heard this information is because of the possible high value both sides would give it. For those who want to show a very good solid example of how witnesses could get it wrong that day about where those shots were fired from, it isn't going to get much better than this example.


What I would like to see is a re-enactment which places a few people in the doorway/entrance area of the Book Depository and then have somebody fire a Carcano rifle three times out of the sixth-floor window directly above those doorway witnesses. And then we'd ask those witnesses: Where did those shots come from?

I'd be willing to bet that nearly all of them (just like the many real witnesses we find in the statements in CD706) would say they thought the shots came from down around the Triple Underpass.




Beats me. Since no shots came from the Knoll, we'll never know.

But that would make for another good "re-enactment".

Have you read all 73 statements in CD706, Ben? Not all of them gave an opinion as to the direction of the shots, but, as I said before, it's virtually unanimous when it comes to the witnesses who were standing in the TSBD front entrance who gave an opinion as to the location of the gunman --- those witnesses thought (incorrectly, of course) that ALL of the shots came from the Knoll/Underpass/Railroad Yard area.

Now, Ben, how would you evaluate and analyze those "Doorway" witnesses? Would you conclude they were correct and that ALL shots really did come from the Knoll/Underpass area?

Or would you use a tiny bit of common sense (and other evidence) and conclude those witnesses were fooled by the Dealey Plaza acoustics and that those three shots* that were heard by those "doorway" witnesses had very likely all originated from right above their heads--from the Sniper's Nest window on the sixth floor of the Depository (which is where we know, via other evidence and eyewitnesses, a gunman was firing a rifle at the President)?

* And I believe I'm also correct in saying that every one of those witnesses who gave an opinion as to the number of shots they heard said they heard precisely THREE shots fired. See Commission Document No. 706 to verify.

David Von Pein
September 24-26, 2015



An interesting theory is brought forth in the 2013 book "PHANTOM SHOT" -- a theory that has Lee Harvey Oswald firing only TWO shots, instead of three.

I, however, reject this "2 Shots" theory for a variety of reasons, but it is an intriguing theory nonetheless. (At least the authors of the book realize that Oswald was the lone assassin.)

But those authors (via the book summary offered below) are putting forth some of the same incorrect information that conspiracy theorists do---such as: claiming that Oswald had "less than six seconds" to fire three shots. Not true at all, of course.

And the authors believe the myth about the "dented" shell casing, saying that that bullet shell could not possibly have had a live round fired from it on November 22. Totally untrue, as proven by the HSCA and many other Carcano owners who have fired a shot that resulted in the casing being dented.

Perhaps the biggest reason to discount the "2 Shots" theory is John Connally's testimony, which is very clear and unambiguous -- he HEARD the first shot but WAS NOT HIT by that bullet. He then was hit by the "SBT" bullet (which he did not hear), and then Connally heard the third shot (the head shot that killed JFK).

Yes, there were several witnesses who said they heard only two shots. But a much larger percentage said they heard exactly three. The "Phantom Shot" authors have elected to go with the minority number of "2 Shots" witnesses to support their theory.

The theory of only two shots being fired by Oswald is definitely incorrect, IMO, but some people here might like to check out this book and the associated website....



David Von Pein

January 24, 2015

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one here knows how many shots were fired in DP.

No one here knows how many wounds of entrance there were on JFK's body.

No one here knows hardly any verifiable fact about the events in DP.

The only verifiable facts of note are that JFK traveled through DP and was declared dead by Parkland physicians at about 1:00 p.m., November 22, 1963.

One does best working with verifiable facts.

Truth is, I don't care about opinion or conclusion. I care only about verifiable facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...