blindzebra
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 12,557
- Reaction score
- 4,446
So you personally spoke to those people? Nope, you are going by what others CLAIMED they said. The records are full of misquotes and outright lies. Not to mention that what is said and what it means requires context.
The Connallys were correct in their saying that he was not hit by the first shot, nobody was, but a piece of curb flew up and hit Tague from when the bullet hit. The reason the conspiracy theorists use the Connally's testimony is because the Warren Report said the second shot missed and there was not enough time to recycle and shoot for Oswald. If you take the witness accounts as to where the limo was at the first shot, it is clear that it occurred just as Zapruder started filming or slightly before. You do this it fits with the Connally's testimony and increases the time to fire by about 4 to 5 seconds.
You do realize the time between 223 and 230 is less than half a second right? Connally's major reaction was when his lung collapsed, that is when his cheeks puff out and his shoulder dropped. That is not an immediate thing, the lung will not collapse just as the bullet passes, it requires time for the pressure outside the lung to be greater than what is inside the lung.
The dent in the chrome and the cracked windshield came from fragments from the headshot. They found them on the floorboard of the front seat and they matched all of the fragments found in the case. It came from the ammo Oswald used.
I'd suggest you do a little research on witness reliability. People that witness an horrific event brains tend to repress what they see. You also have to process short term memory into long term memory which effects what witnesses remember. Memory does not get clearer over time, it fades away but in the case of JFK each passing year memories become better and much more detail comes out, I wonder why? It is the influence of the researchers pushing their conspiracy theories. You saw it with the Parkland doctors who all testified the head wound as going from top to back on the right side of his head, and as the years passed it kept moving down and back until there was no damage at all to the side and top of his head. When confronted with the Zapruder film that clearly shows damage to the right side and top of his head, conspiracy theorists run creaming that the very thing that proved that there was a conspiracy was all faked. Does not matter that every film shows it, and all the witnesses in Dealey Plaza described the right side of his head being blown out. Zapruder himself when interviewed just after described exactly what was seen in his film.
When you look at a case and put it on trial physical evidence is what you want and all of the physical evidence says Oswald did it. Less reliable is witness testimony, but guess what? The majority of witnesses heard three shots. The majority felt they came from behind and from the area of the TSBD. Many saw someone who looked like Oswald shooting from the TSBD, and almost everyone described the right side of his head being blown out, all of which fits the physical evidence.
And just a common sense point. So many conspiracy theorists point to people running up the grassy knoll as proof that is where shots came from...well, you just saw someone get their head blown off right in front of you, what kind of moron runs unarmed TOWARD the shooter? Basic survival instincts would click in and you would either hit the dirt...which many did...or run AWAY from the source of the shots. The knoll is away from the TSBD.
