Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Post by Anthony MarshPost by John CorbettPost by ***@gmail.comPost by John CorbettPost by donald willisPost by John CorbettPost by donald willisPost by John CorbettPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Post by ***@gmail.comI check in rarely these days, but when I do I always find a recent smear
from BT George. This time it was, "I am glad you didn't pull a full Bob
Harris. (He always addressed everything he wanted to, but ignored anything
even he couldn't wriggle or bluff his way out of.)"
I have to give BT credit for creativity though. Amongst the many personal
insults I received in this group, no one, to the best of my recollection
ever accused me of either wriggling or bluffing.
My primary case has been very simple, actually. It is based on the WC's
conclusion that most witnesses who described the shots, heard one of the
early shots and then two close together at the end.
"..a substantial majority of the witnesses stated that the shots were not
evenly spaced. Most witnesses recalled that the second and third shots
were bunched together."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10752298&postcount=2869
Don't you remember my pointing out that the sound of the impact on the
head could have been one of the two almost-simultaneous sounds that the
witnesses reported at the end of the shooting?
A single shot can produce multiple sounds. In addition to the muzzle blast
there is the sound of the impact which if it hits something hard, like a
skull can be quite loud. In addition, a supersonic bullet will produce a
mini-sonic boom which could be mistaken as a separate shot by someone near
the path of the bullet. In this case there would also be the sound of the
fragments from the head shot striking various objects inside the limo.
This is likely the metalic sound Clint Hill said he heard. Anyone near the
limo at the time the head shot struck would have heard these sounds a
split second before the muzzle blast from the sniper's nest because the
muzzle velocity of a Carcano bullet is about twice the speed of sound. The
bullet and the sounds it generated would have reached the vicinity of the
limo about a tenth of a second before the muzzle blast. It is easy to
understand why people might think there were two shots almost on top of
one another.
Which explanation would be anathema to LNs, because it would indicate a
second shooter. Oddly enough, however, the ear-witnesses who said that
there were 3 shots total were right, apparently, even though their ears
deceived them. By that I mean that the (apparently) false 3rd shot is
compensated for by the not-heard first (missed) shot.
I'm sure just about everybody in Dealey Plaza heard all three shots but
the first shot miss wasn't recognized by some as a gunshot and so didn't
enter their memory banks.
Then they heard/thought they heard four shots, because they thought the
last "double report" was two shots + the unrecognized miss + the
in-between shot....
There are countless permutations for shots people heard and what they
remembered hearing. Depending on which witness you choose, you can come up
witg any number of shots. We have physical evidence that there were three
shots. That physical evidence allows the possibility of just two shots if
Oswald started with an empty shell in the chamber but I find that
unlikely. The strongest argument for 3 shots is Connally's clear
recollection that he heard a shot several seconds before feeling the one
that struck him. That was followed by his recollection of being showered
with blood and brain tissue from a subsequent shot. It's hard to resolve
that with a two shot scenario.
Post by donald willisPost by John CorbettPost by donald willisI mistrust that possible scenario, though, because the sound of a shot
would not, I would think, be like, in kind, the sound of fragments hitting
something inside the limo or a bullet hitting a skull. Yes, it might be
loud, but it wouldn't sound quite the same. Yes, I guess the ears could,
again, be misled....
I told this story about five years ago. I was out walking my dogs in the
woods behind my house. The path is roughly an oval. My neighbor was target
shooting in the ravine next to my property. Depending on my location in
relation to the shots, I would hear a single shot (BOOM), a double shot
(B-BOOM), or two distinct shots (BOOM-BOOM). I not sure of the reason but
it may have been how I was receiving the echo. My neighbor was firing a
muzzle loader so there is no chance he could have been firing multiple
shots at a time. I suspect what people heard in Dealey Plaza was a product
of where they were standing.
Post by donald willisBut if the ear-witnesses were RIGHT about two near-simultaneous shots,
then there were two shooters.
That is true but other than that perception, there is no evidence to
support a second shooter. It's a near certainty that they heard a double
report from the same shot.
So, as I said, they were right and they were wrong.
That is usually the case when there are multiple witnesses. We have
multiple accounts but the shooting happened only one way.
Post by donald willisThey took the "double
report" as two different shots. Which means, doesn't it, that although
most witnesses said Three shots, they only really heard two. So most
witnesses were witnesses to... two shots....
As I said at the beginning, there are countless permutations you could
come up with for perceived and actual shots. That's why the most
compelling evidence for the number of shots is the three spent shells and
the fact those shells and the two recovered bullets all came from the same
rifle which was found on the sixth floor.
You cherry picked the ONLY limo passenger who did not hear both of the
shots at 285 and 313. Now how could that be? Do you suppose the fact that
he was just a few seconds from passing out might have had something to do
with it:-)
Connally is the only one in the limo whose account dovetails with the
Z-film. If he told a story that didn't fit with what we observe, I
wouldn't believe him either.
So you believe that Kennedy was hit first by one bulet and then Connally
was hit by the next bullet. Can you name the frames?
Post by John CorbettPost by ***@gmail.comAnd you left out the fact that that by his own words, Connally never
heard the shot that hit him at 223. That and the one circa 160 would
have been
False. He never said that.
Just to clarify. You're claiming Connally never said he didn't hear the
shot that hit him?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/conn_j.htm
== QUOTE ==
Governor CONNALLY. Well, in my judgment, it just couldn't conceivably have
been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot, In the first
place, don't know anything about the velocity of this particular bullet,
but any rifle has a velocity that exceeds the speed of sound, and when I
heard the sound of that first shot, that bullet had already reached where
I was, or it had reached that far, and after I heard that shot, I had the
time to turn to my right, and start to turn to my left before I felt
anything.
It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first
bullet, and then I felt the blow from something which was obviously a
bullet, which I assumed was a bullet, and I never heard the second shot,
didn't hear it. I didn't hear but two shots. I think I heard the first
shot and the third shot.
== UNQUOTE ==
What part of "I never heard the second shot, didn't hear it..." did you
fail to understand?
Hank
You are absolutely correct!! Maybe there is a god after all:-)
But you forgot to mention that no one else heard that shot either.
Asserted but not established. We'll await the evidence of a silenced
weapon used.
The evidence is the fact that no one heard it. Silenced shots are that way.
Hilarious! You know what else is that way? No silenced weapon whatsoever.
This is a great example of the logical fallacy of cirular reasoning. It
was silenced because no one heard it, and no one heard it because it was
silenced, right? Do you understand you are supporting the conclusion with
the premise, and the premise with the conclusion?
Now, how did you determine there was a silenced weapon as opposed to no
silenced weapon?
You have no sighting of a silenced weapon by a witness in Dealey Plaza.
You have no hearing of a silenced weapon by any witness in Dealey Plaza.
You have no damage caused by any bullet from any silenced weapon per the
autopsy doctors, the HSCA pathology panel, or Connally's doctors.
You have no recovered bullet(s) or fragment(s) fired from any weapon
not bearing the serial number C2766.
You have no recovered weapon not bearing the serial number C2766.
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Please name the witnesses who saw this silenced weapon.
I don't know their names. Jim Braden is probably one.
Quote the witnesses who saw this silenced weapon.
Quote Jim Braden saying anything about a silenced weapon.
We both know he never did and you are blowing smoke.
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Please show us images of the silenced weapon recovered shortly after the
assassination.
Sure, let me show you the pictures that were taken during the search of
the Daltex.
You have no such photos. We both know you have nothing along those lines
and you are blowing smoke.
Post by ***@gmail.comOh wait! There was no search of the Daltex.
Right. This is NOT evidence of silenced shots from the Dal-Tex building.
This is evidence of no shots from the Dal-Tex building. Why? Because no
witness in Dealey Plaza came forward to say they saw a shooter in the
building, no witness in Dealey Plaza came forward to say they heard shots
from the building, and no witness in the Dal-Tex came forward to say they
heard shots from within the building. We have all three for the
Depository. Nothing for the Dal-Tex. The lack of evidence meant the
Dal-Tex was never searched. You don't get to convert the lack of evidence
of a shooter (and the resultant lack of a search) into affirmative
evidence for a shooter in the Dal-Tex, but that is exactly what you're
trying to do.
Post by ***@gmail.comAre you REALLY all that shocked that professionals don't leave their weapons laying around after a hit?
I'm not really shocked at your bizarre logic, nor your logical fallacies,
no. Here you're begging the question and assuming that which you must
prove... that professionals with rifles were in the Dal-Tex building and
didn't leave the weapons behind. There's no evidence there were any
professionals with weapons in the Dal-Tex. You don't get to convert the
lack of evidence of a shooter into affirmative evidence for a shooter in
the Dal-Tex, but that is exactly what you're trying to do.
Post by ***@gmail.comYou seem desperate to ridicule when you have no grounds whatsoever.
There is no ridicule above. Here's the ridicle: There is as much evidence
for a shooter in the Dal-Tex as there is for a pink unicorn spotter
working in concert with that shooter. None!
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)And while you're at it, please establish the existence of
those pink unicorn spotter(s) working in concert with the silenced weapon
sniper(s). There is, after all, as much evidence for the pink unicorn
spotter(s) as their is for the silenced weapon sniper(s) ... none.
Instead of giving you the 7th grader arguments, how about if I ask you a
relevant, and incredibly important question?
No, you don't get to shift the burden of proof. This is your theory we're
discussing. You need to establish your theory through evidence. Not
through circular reasoning, not through begging the question, not through
assuming what you need to prove, and certainly not through shifting the
burden of proof
Post by ***@gmail.comWhy did no one hear the shot at 223? At the very least, why did one in the
limo hear it, and among law enforcement officers, not even one, claimed to
have heard early shots that were closer together than the final ones.
Why is that, Hank?
Asked and Answered. Clint Hill for one appears to have heard it. He heard
two shots, he said, one was the head shot, and one was the first one he
heard, about five seconds prior to the head shot. Now, when I do the math,
I find 4.9 seconds between the two shots at Z223 and Z313 (90 frames /
18.3 frames per second). What do you get when you do the math?
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Your argument as I understand it, is circular. We know there was a
silenced weapon because no one heard the shot at Z223-ish. We know no one
heard the shot at Z223-ish because the weapon was silenced.
Yeah, kind of like the grass is wet because it rained and we know it
rained because the grass is wet.
What a silly notion:-)
What's silly about it, except you're back to begging the question and assuming what you need to prove?
There are a multitude of reasons the grass could be wet, including but not limited to:
1. High humidity and cool temperatures leading to condension (dew) on the grass.
2. The kids were playing with the garden hose again.
3. The sprinklers went off at 5am as programmed to wet the grass.
4. A flock of sheep urinatesd on the grass...
5. An underground water pipe broke and flooded the area.
You get the idea. You don't get to assume the answer, then use the assumed answer to support the original premise. You don't get to simply assume a silenced weapon because no one heard a silenced weapon, and then turn around and argue no one heard a weapon because it was silenced. You need to prove a silenced weapon, and you don't do that by the lack of evidence for a silenced weapon, but that's exactly what you are trying to do here.
Post by ***@gmail.comPretty much, unless you have a better explanation for why no one heard the
223 shot and no one reacted to the early shots as they did, following 285
and 313.
You are begging the question thrice over in the above.
1. "No one heard the 223 shot" - I already cited one witness to the contrary (there are others). Your claim is false.
2. "...no one reacted to the early shots as they did, following 285 and 313". - You are assuming there were both early shots (plural) and later shots (plural) but you haven't established that.
3. "285 and 313" - You are assuming a shot at Z285, but haven't established that.
Post by ***@gmail.comWhy don't you give us your explanation for that, Hank?
I did. You're attempting to shift the burden of proof by asking a
thrice-loaded begged question. An classic example of this is "Do you still
beat your wife?"
The funniest part of all this is that we covered all this ground five
years ago on the International Skeptics forum, and you're still resorting
to loaded questions, begged questions, shifting the burden of proof,
circular reasoning and a host of other logical fallacies.
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Post by ***@gmail.comConnally DID hear the shot prior to that, probably around 150-160 that
didn't hit him. So did many others, including Jackie who heard it as she
was looking to her left, which she was clearly doing well before 223. Like
the others, Nellie heard it too.
But no one heard the one at 223.
No one? That's flat-out wrong. You make these grand pronouncements you
cannot begin to support.
Well, all you have to do is prove that just ONE witness heard the shot at
223.
No, I have to establish you haven't proven your claim. I need not disprove
your claim (that's shifting the burden of proof), but I do, anyway. You
have asserted that no one heard the shot at Z223. But you've cited no
evidence in support of this claim. You've quoted no witness statements,
you've made no attempt whatsoever to establish that claim is true. All I
need do is point out your claim is unproven. And that the burden of proof
still falls on you to establish your claim.
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Clint Hill heard only two shots, and thought they were five seconds apart.
What shots did he hear? Do the math.
I think Hill had a lot more on his mind at the time, than timing the
spacing between the shots.
Respectfully, nobody cares what you think, Bob. It takes only one witness
to disprove your claim. There are several, but Clint Hill will do for now.
You are arguing with the witness, not me. Hill heard the head shot, and
another shot five seconds before, according to his best estimate. Do the
math, Bob. How much time between Z223 and Z313? Tell us. Show us your
calculation.
Post by ***@gmail.comAnd sprinting as he was, the accuracy of his
guesstimate was unlikely to be even close. That fact is further confirmed
because he only noticed two of the shots, unlike the vast majority of
others. There is more to this btw, which we will get to soon.
Well, on that basis, you should exclude what John Connally said, I guess.
He wasn't merely sprinting toward the car, he was struck by a bullet.
Don't you think Connally had a lot more on his mind than remembering the
sequence of the shots, and his accuracy of that recollection was unlikely
to be correct? And isn't his inaccuracy confirmed by the fact he only
noticed two of the shots, unlike the vast majority of the others?
But you accept Connally's recollections as pretty much gospel, and discard
the statements of Clint Hill. Why?
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)=== QUOTE ===
Mr. HILL. This is the first sound that I heard; yes, sir. I jumped from the car, realizing that something was wrong, ran to the Presidential limousine. Just about as I reached it, there was another sound, which was different than the first sound. I think I described it in my statement as though someone was shooting a revolver into a hard object--it seemed to have some type of an echo. I put my right foot, I believe it was, on the left rear step of the automobile, and I had a hold of the handgrip with my hand, when the car lurched forward. I lost my footing and I had to run about three or four more steps before I could get back up in the car.
...
I'm sorry Hank, did I overlook the part where he said that last one
sounded like two gunshots?
He said he heard two shots and something else, that sounded like an echo,
or a bullet hitting something metal. Three sounds in total.
Post by ***@gmail.comMost loud gunshots HAVE an echo of some kind. But virtually no one
mistakes that for two separate shots.
Straw argument... that's not my argument and you know it. I've explained
it enough times. But if you cannot counter my argument with facts and
logic I guess you have no recourse but to resort to mistating my argument,
misinterpreting my claims, and trying to rebut that.
Clint Hill was quite specific he heard two different sounds at the end of
the shooting, the gunfire and something else, an echo, like a bullet
hitting something metal. I've pointed out that the head shot did in fact
hit the metal chrome at the front of the car. Hill could be hearing that,
or the impact on the President's skull.
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Mr. SPECTER. Now, what is your best estimate on the timespan between the first firecracker-type noise you heard and the second shot which you have described?
Mr. HILL. Approximately 5 seconds.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, did the impact on the President's head occur simultaneously, before, or after the second noise which you have described?
Mr. HILL. Almost simultaneously.
So, Hill thought 5 seconds was almost simultaneous???
Post by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)=== UNQUOTE ===
One was the one that struck the President in the head at Z313, right? The
one at Z223-ish was about 4.91 seconds before the head shot. What shots
did Clint Hill hear, Robert?
We know for a fact, that there was at least one shot prior to 223.
No, we don't. How come you don't answer the question I asked, Robert, but
avoid it entirely?
Post by ***@gmail.comIf
Oswald had fired it, the people nearest to Kennedy would have been exposed
to a 130 decibel shock wave, roughly 20 times louder than the level that
will provoke involuntary startle reactions. That's why they reacted as
they did to the shots at 285 and 313.
How is it possible that Hill only heard one of those shots?
Maybe because there was only one of those shots. The one at Z223. As I've noted, there are other witnesses who affirm Hill's statements.
Roy Kellerman said there was five seconds between the first and last shots.
=== QUOTE ===
Mr. SPECTER. To Mr. Lawson. All right. Was there any timespan which you could discern between the first and second shots and what you have described as the flurry?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I will estimate 5 seconds, if that.
Representative FORD. But this flurry took place while you were occupied with these other activities; is that correct?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right, sir.
Representative FORD. You don't recall precisely a second shot and a third shot such as you did in the case of the first?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Let me give you an illustration, sir, before I can give you an answer. You have heard the sound barrier, of a plane breaking the sound barrier, bang, bang? That is it.
Representative FORD. This is for the second and the third, or the flurry as you described it?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right; that is right, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. On your 5-second estimate, was that in reference, Mr. Kellerman, to the total timespan from the first noise until the flurry ended?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right; that is right.
=== UNQUOTE ===
Post by ***@gmail.comHe would have had to have been deaf.
Alternately, there was no earlier shot.
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)He also described the President grabbing at himself after the first shot
he heard. Do you think the President reacted to a shot at about Z150 by
grabbing at himself, or did this happen after the shot at Z223-ish?
He heard the shot at 150-160, just like John Connally and the others did.
NONE of them heard the shot at 223.
That conflicts with Hill's testimony. He said there were five seconds
between the two shots (with the second shot the head shot), and the
President grabbed at his throat after the first shot. You are arguing with
the witness now, not with me. When you do the math, what shots do Hill's
estimate of the time span of the shots match up with? It's okay, you can
say it. We all know what it is.
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)=== QUOTE ===
Mr. SPECTER. You testified just a moment ago that the President grabbed at himself immediately after the first noise which you described as sounding like a firecracker.
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you tell us with more particularity in what way he grabbed at himself?
Mr. HILL. He grabbed in this general area.
Mr. SPECTER. You are indicating that your right hand is coming up to your--to the throat?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. And the left hand crosses right under the right hand.
Mr. HILL. To the chest area.
=== UNQUOTE ===
Which shot at what point in the Z-film matches Hill's testimony the best,
Robert? Which shots did Clint Hill hear, Robert?
You're cherry picking his testimony, my friend:-)
Hill-arious. No, I'm taking his statements and comparing them to your
scenario. He said two shots is all he heard, and the time span of the two
shots was "five seconds, if that." What shots in your scenario best match
up with Hill's statements? Why are you not showing us your math, and your
explanation?
Post by ***@gmail.com"And I heard a noise from my right rear, which to me seemed to be a
firecracker. I immediately looked to my right and, in so doing, my eyes
had to cross the Presidential limousine and I saw President Kennedy grab
at himself and lurch forward and to the left."
First, he heard a "noise".
Then he looks to his right. Obviously, he was not startled and didn't
realize he had heard a gunshot. It would have taken a couple seconds to
begin that turn. Then, he sees Kennedy's hands rise. That happened at
frame 225.
He could ONLY have heard the shot prior to 223 - probably circa 150-160 -
just like the others.
You're arguing with the witness, not with me. It was Hill's statement
there were no more than five seconds between the two shots he heard. It
was his recollection he heard the shot and in looking to the right he saw
the President clutching at himself. Why couldn't he have heard the Z223
shot and saw the President in Z230 or thereabouts?
Post by ***@gmail.comThere is more to this story btw; take a close look at Hill in the Altgens
photo, snapped at exactly frame 255.
http://jfkhistory.com/pix/altgensBIG.jpg
He hasn't moved. Notice the relaxed body language - 22 frames after 223
and 85 frames after 160.
He didn't think he had heard a gunshot then. Like some of the other
witnesses, Hill thought Kennedy was clowning around in response to the
firecracker.
At no point did Hill ever say he thought the President was clowning
around. Stop putting words in Hill's mouth. Quote Hill to establish your
point. Or is it you cannot quote Hill saying anything like that? I quote
Hill, you tell me he was inaccurate and had other things on your mind...
discarding what Hill actually said and resorting to making up stuff Hill
never said.
Post by ***@gmail.comHad Hill reacted immediately as he claimed, he would never have felt that
terrible, almost suicidal guilt over the years. He would have known that
he did the best he could possibly do.
But the guilt he felt, knowing that he could have probably saved JFK, if
he had recognized the first shot and jumped immediately, must have been
unbearable. Listen to his 60 minute interview.
Hill was provoked to jump by the NEXT shot. Do I have to give you the
frame number?
What was the distance between Hill and the back of the Presidential limo,
at their closest? How fast was the limo travelling? You think Hill covered
that distance in about 1.5 seconds? Do the math, show us how fast Hill
would have had to run, and the distance he would have had to travel
between Z285 and Z313... and please allow time for Hill to hear the shot,
recognize it as a shot, and then finally react. Show us your work.
Why did you ignore all the below, Robert?
Particularly the fact that Connally attested to hearing two separate loud
sounds at the time of the head shot - one of which was the impact on the
head - and the fact that your argument for Z285 is circular - just like
your argument for silenced shots?
Post by ***@gmail.comPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Post by ***@gmail.comOf greater importance, no one was startled by either of those early shots.
No one reacted even remotely like the limo passengers did, to the shots at
285 and 313, both of which had to have come from high powered rifles. To
the ears of the limo passengers, the earliest shots would have been the
loudest and most startling - IF they had been fired by Oswald.
The early shots came from one or more suppressed weapons, perhaps like
those used in WW2. The first of those shots was audible, only because it
struck the pavement, causing sparks and a "firecracker" sound but it was
much weaker than the unsuppressed rifles used at 285 and 313.
The 223 shot only struck flesh and so, was completely silent.
Clint Hill (and others) appear to have heard it. You can ignore Hill's
testimony all you want, but it doesn't go away just because you choose to
look away from it.
Post by ***@gmail.comThat's why most witnesses reported only one early shot and then the
closely spaced shots later.
Or the "closely spaced shots" were the sound of the rifle firing the
bullet that killed JFK and the sound of the impact of the bullet on the
skull. Clint Hill referenced the difference in sound, like firing a bullet
into something metal.
Even Governor Connally heard two separate sounds - the rifle blast and the
impact on the head - and said that.
=== QUOTE ===
... and then, of course, the third shot sounded, and I heard the shot very clearly. I heard it hit him. I heard the shot hit something, and I assumed again--it never entered my mind that it ever hit anybody but the President. I heard it hit. It was a very loud noise, just that audible, very clear.
=== UNQUOTE ===
"I heard the shot hit something" is what Connally said. "I heard it hit.
It was a very loud noise, just that audible, very clear." Now, could that
"very loud noise" of the impact been heard by other witnesses as a
separate shot, very close to the head shot?
Post by ***@gmail.comBut what about the one at 285?
The one that doesn't exist? The one you imagine and assert, but do not
prove?
Post by ***@gmail.comIt didn't hit anyone directly. That shot passed above the limo and went on
to strike the pavement where it shattered, sending a chunk of lead to
strike the curbing and a small fragment to nick witness James Tague. He
testified that his small wound was from the second shot.
285 was the SECOND audible shot that day.
Your argument as I understand it is circular here too.
We know there was a loud shot at Z285 before we can see all the people in
the limo reacting. We know the people are reacting to a loud noise because
there was a loud shot at that time.
Hank
