Jack Nessan Wrote:Bob Mady Wrote:Jack Nessan Wrote:Jack, out of 201 witnesses that provided statements:Bob Mady Wrote:Why waste time on this non-sense.
There were over 129 witnesses that claimed to have heard three or more shots.
This includes 19 sheriff deputies guarding the front steps of their station house located just outside of DP, all heard three rifle shots.
A Person who would propose a phantom shot does not understand all of the evidence available or has failed to put it in context and only concentrate on the few claims of having heard 'firecracker' or 'noise' or 'backfire' which alternately each claim can be provided with more logical and reasonable explanations than reverting to a phantom shot.
As ridiculous as it now is three shots can't explain all of the wounds, two shots certainly does not help to make the scenario any more evident.
I am not sure which witnesses you are referring to but there are a significant number of witnesses that if you trace their statements back to the first one; they originally reported hearing just two shots. What is interesting is the 19 deputies hearing three shots. Their boss, Sheriff Bill Decker, stated he heard only two shots in his statement. He was riding in a car in an open grassy area directly in front of JFK's limo on Elm Street. The deputies were on Houston street standing in front of a tall building. Generally the later the date on an statement the more likely it will state three shots being fired. Even later statements from people who originally stated hearing just two shots then state they heard three shots. The original statements of Jackie, James Altgens, Clint Hill, Paul Landis, DPD James Chaney, DPD Bobby Hargis, and 30 to 40 other eyewitnesses is that they not only heard two shots but also describe the two shots. Two shots can explain the whole assassination; three shots and the timing of the shots with the carcano rifle does not.
137 reported 3 shots
13 x 3+ shots
17 x 2 shots
4 x only talked about hearing a shot did not disclose how many
26 x ? FBI never asked or recorded how many shots these witnesses heard (the most extensive murder investigation of all time)
Are you implying it is justified to disregard 150 witnesses in an attempt to justify the reports of 17 witnesses?
We may disregard 19 SD because the Sheriff only heard 2 shots.
What about the many witnesses that reported the second and third shots to have occurred almost simultaneously, could this account for 17 people hearing two shots?
Also of the people that heard two shot, some were in the process of ducking, like NEWMAN and SUMMERS or like CLINT HILL running to the limo.
Of these 17 witnesses 3 of them reported multiple 'firecracker' like sounds...?
Bob, I have seen this shot breakdown before. I think it is something McAdams worked up but I am not sure, but it is a snapshot in time as these witnesses were changing their stories to match the medias estimate of the number of shots. The correct number of two shot witnesses is really 45 to 50 if the data is taken from the first day before they changed their statements. Then to be considered is that most of the two shot witnesses are eyewitnesses standing by the car and not the larger group of earwitnesses standing by the buildings. There should be a breakdown of just the eyewitnesses alone.
You are on the right track studying the witness accounts. It is important to take each eyewitness and read all the statements they made and take note of the date, and the narrative of the assassination and then you will see a pattern emerge where they add a third shot but the narrative doesn't change. Often the extra shot being added in doesn't fit the narrative. If you are interested here is a list of names to look at to start. Nellie Connally, George Hickey, John Ready, Clint Hill, Bill Newman, Gayle Newman (at station WFAA and at the 50th Oral History in the TSBD), Mary Moorman, Charles Brehm, (Bonnie Ray Williams along with Norman and Jarman), Marilyn Willis, Most of Secret Service. Hickey is a great example, he just makes a slight change to his statement but totally changes the narrative. Jackies testimony is very good because she mentions the noise of the motorcade, the fact that the general consensus is there were three shots and dismisses it all and says there was only two shots. Her and Nellie actually confirm Gov Connally was hit by the first shot by referencing when he says Oh No No No, which is contrary to his statement.
People saying they heard shots two and three as being almost simultaneously are trying to conform a two shot testimony into being a three shot testimony. A number of witnesses state they heard a shot after the head shot except the only problem being is the head shot was the last shot.
You are absolutely right about the FBI not investigating the witnesses except it is far worse than 26. In February and March of 1964 they interviewed 73 of the TSBD employees who were standing by the car on Elm Street and never asked them what did you see and what did you hear. Unless the witness volunteered the information it was never brought up. If they did say what happened they would write down there were three shots, shots or several shots but never two shots. I think that shows what a can of worms the FBI thought the number of reported shots was and they decided to stay away from it. Only three of the seven Warren Commission members supported the three shot conclusion the other 4 felt there was definitely two shots and maybe a third.
If you want FBI statistics: Note reported as FBI reports, there are some witnesses with multiple FBI reports, many of them conflicting.
83 witnesses 3 shots
15 witnesses 3+ shots
15 witnesses 2 shots
6 witnesses 1 shot
9 witnesses didn't know how many shots
34 witnesses were either never asked or didn't say.
If you want FBI statistics pertaining to only employees inside of the TSBD at the time of the shooting
8 witnesses 3 shots
0 witnesses 3+ shots
1 witnesses 2 shots
2 witnesses 1 shot
2 witnesses didn't know how many shots
8 witnesses were either never asked or didn't say.
If you want FBI statistics pertaining to only employees outside of the TSBD at the time of the shooting
29 witnesses 3 shots
1 witnesses 3+ shots
0 witnesses 2 shots
0 witnesses 1 shot
6 witnesses didn't know how many shots
15 witnesses were either never asked or didn't say.
A two shot theory is not supported by a significant amount of testimony.
Now let me ask you again, if there were three shots heard and a significant amount of testimony indicated shot pattern to be bham pause bham.bham in quick succession, would this not be a plausible explanation as to why some individuals discerned only two shots, please also keep in mind two shots fired almost at the same time may have been more difficult to catch if people were doing an action or were hard of hearing, plus the echo patterns may have disguised two shots fired almost simultaneously for some people.
Likewise those that reported more than 3 shots may not have correctly discerned the report from the echoes. There is substantial evidence that supports the interpretation that some people tried to count echoes thinking they were shots.
