Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

This is what Mary Moorman said, Backes, on November 22, 1963.

She said that as she snapped the picture of President Kennedy she heard a shot ring out. She didn't mention any shot occurring before that. Doesn't it seem like she would have included it if she had heard a shot before she took her picture? Why would she leave that out? Then she said she heard another shot ring out. That's after she took the picture. But, the picture is a picture of Kennedy after all the shots had rang out. 

This isn't that hard to understand, Backes. I'm sure middle school students would have no trouble understanding it. We have a picture of Kennedy after all the shots had been taken. Mary Moorman took a picture, but she said she heard shots after she took her picture. Therefore, her picture can't be the picture that was taken after the final shot. Again, the logic of this is not that difficult. It is not difficult at all. 

Then she spoke of doing something after she heard 3 shots ring out. So surely that means a) the shot she heard while she was photographing him, b) the shot she heard in conjunction with Jackie jumping up and saying, "My God, he's been hit. and c) a shot after that which preceded Mary falling to the ground. All of that is contained in plain English in her statement, and it is not ambiguous. 

Why, why, why do you have to be so stupid, Backes? Mary Moorman's statement does NOT support the idea that she took her picture after the final shot. It contradicts it. It refutes it. And you are just too damn stupid to realize it.