BANG........BANG-BANG

[Gil Jesus]

Was the sound of the shots proof of a second gunman ?

By Gil Jesus ( 2023 )

One of the pieces of evidence crucial to the Warren Commission's conclusion of a lone gunman was the sequence of the shots.

The Commission, in its report, stated that the minimum time required to operate the bolt of the CE 139 rifle and fire a shot was 2.25 seconds.

That means that any sound emanating from the rifle as a result of firing around throught it, would also take a minimum of 2.25 seconds.

The speed of sound is affected by temperature, the warmer it is, the faster sound travels. Since it was 70 degrees in Dallas that day, the speed of sound in Dealey Plaza was about 1,129 feet per second ( 344 m/s ).

http://artsites.ucsc.edu/EMS/music/tech_background/TE-01/soundSpeed.html#:~:text=At 21 degrees C


Suffice it to say that while the position of witnesses in Dealey Plaza was relevent to WHEN the sound of the shots reached their positions, it had no bearing on the number of shots they heard nor did it have any bearing on the sequence of those shots.

For example, if one stood under the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository, one should hear the sounds of the shots spaced apart at a minimum of 2.25 seconds, the time the Warren Commission's expert, FBI Agent Lyndal Shaneyfelt, said it took to fire a shot and cycle the bolt on the CE 139 rifle. ( 5 H 153 )

And if one stood further down on Elm St., one should hear the shots with the same 2.25 second spacing since the speed of sound was the same down by the triple underpass as it was under the sixth floor window.

The timing of WHEN you first heard the shots would be different because of your position, but the sequence would be the same because the speed of sound was a constant.

Unless of course, the unlikely possibility that the temperature changed drastically between shots.

To prove this point, many of the witnesses described a shot sequence that was incompatable with three shots being fired from the CE 139 rifle. These witnesses were scattered around Dealey Plaza and yet described the same shooting sequence with a first shot, a pause and then two shots right on top of each other.

Witness testimony and accounts can be a reliable tool for investigators when those accounts corroborate each other.

So what did the witnesses say ?

In 1966, Mark Lane interviewed Lee Bowers, a railroad employee who had been in a 14 foot tower in the parking lot behind the picket fence. He recreated the sequence he heard:

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/lee-bowers-sequence.mp4
 

Patsy Paschall shot her film from the third floor of the old red courthouse. This is what she said she heard:
 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/patsy-paschall-sequence.mp4
 

Newspaper reporter Mary Woodward stood on the north side of Elm St. This is what she heard:
 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/mary-woodward-sequence.mp4

 

And these are not the only witnesses who heard the first shot, a pause and the last two shots close together. So close, in fact, that they could not have been fired from the CE 139 rifle.

Witness Victoria Adams watched the motorcade from an office on the fourth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. She testified that, "we heard a shot and then it was a pause and then a second shot and then a third shot." ( 6 H 388 )

Witness Bonnie Ray Williams was also inside the Texas School Book Depository on the fifth floor. He testified that, "... there was two shots rather close together. The second shot and the third shot was closer together than the first shot and the second shot, as I remember." ( 3 H 175 )

Secret Service Agent, Roy Kellerman, who rode in the front seat of the Presidential limo, described the first shot as a firecracker and the last two as shots, describing them as "...like a double bang----bang, bang." ( 2 H 76 )

Those were the witnesses who testified before the Warren Commission and whose testimony the Commission chose to ignore.
 

But there were other witnesses who the FBI interviewed and whose accounts corroborated those witnesses who testified. The FBI made sure these witnesses were kept off the witness list and never appeared before the Warren Commission.

Witnesses like Carolyn Walther, who stood on the east side of Houston St, just 17 feet from the intersection of Elm. She told the FBI that, "there was a pause after this first report, then a second and third report almost at the same time". ( CD 7, pg.25 )

Secret Service Agent George Hickey, who rode in the back seat of the follow-up car behind the President's limo and reported that he heard, "two reports....in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them." ( 18 H 762 )

And Mrs. Pearl Springer, who stood with Carolyn Walther on the east side of Houston St.. She told the FBI that, "after the first shot there was a pause and then two more shots were fired close together." ( CD 7, pg. 26 )

This is a diverse group of nine witnesses who positions varied. Some were inside the building, some were outside but in close proximity of the building. One was near the grassy knoll. One was behind the building in a tower. One was in the front seat of the limo. One was in the old courthouse.

But they all heard the same thing; a double bang for the second and third shots, a proven physical impossibility for a single gunman firing the CE 139 rifle.

Edited January 24, 2023 by Gil Jesus

[Jake Hammond]

I used to think that the shots were Bam......... bam...bam. However, technically the spread of witnesses didn't actually say this and I was schooled by a researcher who had spent a lot of time collating people testimonies ( over 100). In essence there is a slight bias to a Bam........ bam.. bam. but not much. most said they were evenly spaced, which is backed up by Zapruda.  HOWEVER I argued back with three points ...

 1) There were a significant amount of good witnesses who immediately after the event stated that the second two shots were closer together who seem to be very sure of what they heard. This is important because quoting people FBI taken testimony or statement months later, or using the Warren commissions records just isn't a reliable method of analysing this. 

2) Sonic Booms, impacts, detonations and potentially a silencer. Remembering the Las Vegas shooting.... it was possible to identify three separate bangs from one shot. If a shot was fired, went over your head and then hit something solid behind you you would then hear three bangs. Bullets leave a sonic cone behind them and anyone under this cone would hear two bags very close together. It is my thinking that the ones who heard ' the second and third on top of each other ' heard just that and missed the first because it was drowned out somewhat by the crowd and Bikes as they turned on to Elm. Adding a silencer in makes a mess of everything but three shots may well be all there were, which years ago I never thought I'd be saying. 

3) The reactions of the limo passengers - They just don't match the timing of the shots very well. I.e Jacky doesn't react to JFK being hit in the neck but jumps out of her skin not long after, as do the SS men in the front. You can explain these reactions to an extent but at least at face value they seem off. 

 Disclaimer - I am a ' single bullet' convert and assume a similar position to the official story. Having not watched the film ' JFK' until recently and having the fortune of not getting in to JFK until around 10 years ago I had the opportunity to watch a stabilised, cleaned up Z film and not be influenced by Media on the number of shots. I understand all the arguments against the single shot and have countered them all. I advise others to keep an open mind here , those who can. 

 Hope this helps. 

[Chris Davidson]

Moved to a different topic.

Edited January 24, 2023 by Chris Davidson

[Evan Marshall]

20 years with Detroit PD including twice assigned to the tac unit, twice to homicide, csi, trained&qualifed as a sniper and the original firearms instructor for Detroit SWAT I can assure you that most ear and eyewitnesses are useless.

[Gil Jesus]

41 minutes ago, Evan Marshall said:

20 years with Detroit PD including twice assigned to the tac unit, twice to homicide, csi, trained&qualifed as a sniper and the original firearms instructor for Detroit SWAT I can assure you that most ear and eyewitnesses are useless.

LOL. So if you had an eyewitness to a rape you wouldn't bring charges against a suspect because "most eyewitnesses are useless" ? What kind of department were you in ?  My goodness.

Witness accounts are unreliable only when they don't corroborate each other. When you have a number of witnesses whose accounts corroborate each other, the information they supply becomes more reliable.

But being a police officer, you knew that, right ?

Funny how all of the witnesses who had evidence against Oswald were considered by the Warren Commission as unimpugnable.  Some of the weakest and uncorrborated eyewitness accounts were taken as gospel by the Commission. These you believe ?

But corroborating witness accounts you have a problem with ?

<SMH>

Edited January 24, 2023 by Gil Jesus

[Evan Marshall]

I said most not all. When witnesses are not separated before being interviewed, they cross pollinate each other. Sarcasm about something you know nothing about is unbecoming!

[Gerry Down]

Gil is correct here. 

[Chris Bristow]

If the last two shots were almost simultaneous as Greer and others said I would expect some witnesses to hear those two shots as one.  But if the shots were evenly spaced should we expect  many witnesses to mistakenly hear them as very close together?  The first possibility seems unavoidable but I don't know how people would mistake two shots that are 5 seconds apart as being almost simultaneous.
  I don't think echoes could be an explanation as the first shot was heard by virtually everyone as a single lone shot. If echos had been an issue I would think most people would have reported closer to 6 shots. The few that did report echos knew they were echos and reported them as such.
  Greer and Kellerman could hear the shots zinging into the limo as well as any sonic crack or muzzle blast. As an example Kellerman said he heard the shot come in and hit JFK's head with a thump. I think they are especially qualified witnesses because they were so close to JFK, because they are trained with weapons and because their job is to recognize threats like gunfire and react.
  There are too many witnesses hearing the last two shots as close together and imo no way to explain it.
 

[Pat Speer]

From patspeer.com, Chapter 9...

 

And now the moment we’ve been waiting for (at least the moment I’ve been waiting for)…the results of our eyewitness analysis. With 70 witnesses out of the plaza or to the south of Elm Street, 70 witnesses in the motorcade, and 154 assorted witnesses on bridges, along Elm Street, or in the School Book Depository, we’ve looked at the words of 294 witnesses to see if they add up to something. Of this 294, 89 failed to tell us much that would indicate when and how the shots were fired. Of the remaining 205, 102 made statements suggesting there were three shots fired, with the first shot being heard between Z-190 and Z-224 and the last 2 shots being heard in rapid succession after a short pause. Another 57 made statements suggesting that the first shot was heard between Z-190 and Z-224, but made no statements indicating the last two shots were bunched together. Another 13 heard the last two shots fired closely together, and yet another could only swear to hearing two shots, but thought there may have been a third, which was wholly consistent with the last two being fired closely together. This means that 173 of the 205 witnesses described the shots in a relatively consistent manner. Of the remaining 32, 18 heard four or more shots, and another 3 made statements indicating there was a shot after the head shot. This leaves just 11 witnesses whose statements can reasonably be seen as supporting the shooting scenario theorized by John Lattimer, Gerald Posner and Dale Myers. And 8 of these 11, once their words are compared to the various photographs and films, can be used to argue for a different scenario. This leaves just 3 witnesses who can be used to support the LPM scenario over other scenarios—J.M. Head, Mrs. Robert Reid and Geneva Hine. Well, Head told us nothing about the timing of the shots, other than that there was a bigger gap before the last shot. (I mean, he may have thought the first two shots were bang-bang with a two second gap before the last shot--we don't know). And Reid testified in a manner supporting that the first shot was fired after frame 160. Now that leaves Hine, who didn't even see the impact of the shots. She merely described the shooting in a manner more consistent with a first shot at frame 160 than at 190. That’s it. The TV simulations depicting a first shot miss and a five second gap between the second and third shots are therefore incredibly at odds with the available evidence. No matter how many shooters fired on the motorcade, no matter who fired the fatal bullet, the statements of the eyewitnesses indicate THE SHOOTING DID NOT HAPPEN AS PURPORTED BY LATTIMER, POSNER, MYERS, AND BUGLIOSI.

[Ken Davies]

Great analysis Pat!

[Gil Jesus]

11 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

If the last two shots were almost simultaneous as Greer and others said I would expect some witnesses to hear those two shots as one.  But if the shots were evenly spaced should we expect  many witnesses to mistakenly hear them as very close together?  The first possibility seems unavoidable but I don't know how people would mistake two shots that are 5 seconds apart as being almost simultaneous.
  I don't think echoes could be an explanation as the first shot was heard by virtually everyone as a single lone shot. If echos had been an issue I would think most people would have reported closer to 6 shots. The few that did report echos knew they were echos and reported them as such.
  Greer and Kellerman could hear the shots zinging into the limo as well as any sonic crack or muzzle blast. As an example Kellerman said he heard the shot come in and hit JFK's head with a thump. I think they are especially qualified witnesses because they were so close to JFK, because they are trained with weapons and because their job is to recognize threats like gunfire and react.
  There are too many witnesses hearing the last two shots as close together and imo no way to explain it.
 

Chris, you make a great point about echoes. If the witnesses were hearing echoes, why didn't they hear an echo with the FIRST shot ? They heard the first shot, a noticeable pause with no mention of an echo, then two distinct shots timed close together. Echoes are reflections of sound. How could Lee Bowers hear an echo when the TSBD building was between his tower and the alleged sniper's nest ? How did the sound waves penetrate the building to allow him to hear the reflection of the sound off of the buildings on Houston St. ?

And it's a fact that the farther way you are from the solid object the sound wave hits, the longer it takes for an echo to return to you. So how is it that the witnesses in different locations all heard the same sequence ?

Those witnesses didn't hear an echo.

 

[Jake Hammond]

There are several important questions. 

 1) Were echoes confused with shots.

   - No, I don't think that there is any evidence of people hearing echoes and mistaking them for shots. 

 2) were the last two shots closer spaced ?

    - As Pat has outlined and a YouTuber I got into a long argument ( Pat ?!) with also.... it seems not. There were several good witnesses who stated they were close together but in summary they may well have heard sonic cracks of the third shot and assumed that the second shot was the first. Not conclusive but worth considering. 

3) Why was the first shot not heard as clearly and sounded like a firecracker ?

 - Well it was fired at the turn on to elm where the motorcycles were a bit closer bunched and may well have been revving to accelerate and gain speed once turned on to elm. In addition the crowd there was denser and there may have been an increase of wind on the corner reducing the impact of the noise. In addition it seems that the bullet fragmented, either on the pavement or from hitting a sign and therefore created a secondary ' firecracker' sound which may well have stuck in peoples memory. A combination of these most likely explains the ' firecracker' phenomenon. 

4) Why don't the reactions of the Limo passengers and SS men match the timing of the shots impacting them. ?

    The inference here is that there were two shooters, one silenced or quieter weapon being involved. The best analysis of this I've seen is Robert Harris' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv7Lz25Xyno , there are several similar videos supporting this in his other 'videos' . I can imagine that the main larger reaction by the passengers and SS men was due to someone clearly saying something loudly, like ' we're being shot at' etc... which was probably GJC. I do find it strange though that Jackie doesn't react to JFK being shot in the neck behind the Stemmons sign and is only casually looking at him until the very clear reaction at Z285  (when there was no shot). Although you wouldn't see a reaction there of course as its hidden, unfortunately. 

 

[Gil Jesus]

4 hours ago, Jake Hammond said:

There are several important questions. 

 1) Were echoes confused with shots.

   - No, I don't think that there is any evidence of people hearing echoes and mistaking them for shots. 

 2) were the last two shots closer spaced ?

    - As Pat has outlined and a YouTuber I got into a long argument ( Pat ?!) with also.... it seems not. There were several good witnesses who stated they were close together but in summary they may well have heard sonic cracks of the third shot and assumed that the second shot was the first. Not conclusive but worth considering. 

3) Why was the first shot not heard as clearly and sounded like a firecracker ?

 - Well it was fired at the turn on to elm where the motorcycles were a bit closer bunched and may well have been revving to accelerate and gain speed once turned on to elm. In addition the crowd there was denser and there may have been an increase of wind on the corner reducing the impact of the noise. In addition it seems that the bullet fragmented, either on the pavement or from hitting a sign and therefore created a secondary ' firecracker' sound which may well have stuck in peoples memory. A combination of these most likely explains the ' firecracker' phenomenon. 

4) Why don't the reactions of the Limo passengers and SS men match the timing of the shots impacting them. ?

    The inference here is that there were two shooters, one silenced or quieter weapon being involved. The best analysis of this I've seen is Robert Harris' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv7Lz25Xyno , there are several similar videos supporting this in his other 'videos' . I can imagine that the main larger reaction by the passengers and SS men was due to someone clearly saying something loudly, like ' we're being shot at' etc... which was probably GJC. I do find it strange though that Jackie doesn't react to JFK being shot in the neck behind the Stemmons sign and is only casually looking at him until the very clear reaction at Z285  (when there was no shot). Although you wouldn't see a reaction there of course as its hidden, unfortunately. 

 

There were hundreds of people in Dealey Plaza. Name the witness who heard a sonic crack.

[Matthew Koch]

A rifle will makes a sound like Ka-Boom. The Ka which is quieter part is the gun firing the bullet, the Boom is the bullet breaking the sound barrier once it leaves the barrel of the gun and strikes the air. What people are describing is the Crack-Crack of two rifles being fired which is a different sound becuase it is spaced further apart. As we see in the dictablet and witness statements, we hear a bang half second pause and then another bang. 

 

[Joe Bauer]

The last few posted responses make important valid point sense imo.

Why no echo reported by any witnesses regards the first shot? It was supposedly fired from the same location as the last two and almost all the earwitnesses were in their same locations for all 3.

Kellerman's Warren Commission testimony regards what he heard sitting in the same car as JFK and Connally could be given a different weight than others imo.

He stated shots were "raining in." He even heard the thud of the head shot to JFK?

He felt there could easily have been more than three shots fired into the limo.

However, the shot sequence "time factor" on his part ( with motorcycles rumbling next to him ) is probably not as clear as others more out in the open imo.

Often there are "no" eye or earwitnesses to gun firing/killing crimes.

If one or two or three come forward in the beginning stages of an investigation the police consider this a super valuable gift.  Even if their accounts vary to some degrees, if these eyewitnesses can prove they were in the right locations at the right time to see the crime, their accounts will still provide much needed facts to help paint at least a partially better picture of what happened.

Still photo and filmed video of an actual shooting crime is an even greater investigation gift.

On 11,22,1963 we have well over "200" eye and earwitnesses all around Dealey Plaza all focusing their viewing attention on the Presidential limo and JFK and Jackie during the entire 3 shot sequence.     200! 

All seeing ( or filming ) what they saw right in front of their eyes in the most bright sunbathed light of mid-day!

A criminal investigator's eye and earwitness dream...no?

Yet, this great number eye and earwitness situation has been turned into more a negative than a positive fact concluding dynamic. All because of the proposed "varying account" argument?

The fact that it was proven no human could fire the Carcano faster than 2.6 seconds one shot after another says something very telling here.

If the "Bang-Bang" reporting ear witnesses were sat down and shown with the use of a stopwatch and loud hand slaps on a tabletop with 2.6 seconds elapsing between the two, I would think most of them could reasonably discern whether this was the time space they heard between the last two shots. In my common sense opinion anyway.

Count off 2.6 seconds between a tabletop or hand clap yourself.

Does that seem like a close together "Bang-Bang" to you?

Not to me.

And the minimum 2.6 second time frame needed to shoot a Carcano, eject a shell and then refire was the absolute shortest time frame only top, top expert marksmen could duplicate. 

Just watching video of people ( experts ) re-enacting that firing and bolt action reloading and refiring action it looks as if it took great skill and physical coordination effort.

The Warren Commission had no problem deciding Oswald could do this as well as the experts.

Not to also mention and consider how much that excited physical action would disrupt and throw off the shooter's sight aligning aim and require a whole new realigning aim effort again. And with a cheap, reportedly misaligned telescopic scope?

Re-aiming itself would take another second or two in the least wouldn't you think?

Making the time gap of the last two shots another one or two seconds more than the 2.6 seconds one?

And especially at a 10 inch by 8 inch target at 265 feet distance and moving itself away, down a grade and "sideways" toward Jackie as JFK's upper body was doing right after the first hit shot.

3 moving dynamics all while the shooter is frantically ejecting a shell and reloading and re-aiming?  And then to make a perfect bullseye into that small moving target to boot?

As the Huey Long character ( Walter Matthau ) tells the Jim Garrison character ( Kevin Costner ) in the film "JFK" during a shared seat plane flight to Washington D.C. ...

"that dog don't hunt."

 

 

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Joe Bauer