The gun was a starter pistol, so no one was hurt. The event had been staged as way to demonstrate how different people will experience the same event differently. (It may seem an extreme demonstration these days, but it occurred just a year after John Kennedy was assassinated and many Americans had witnessed Jack Ruby's shooting of Lee Oswald on television).
After writing down what we thought we had seen, the information was read aloud. There were several different interpretations of what we had all just seen happen. Some of the "testimony" was totally "off the wall" to me. There were differences of opinion on the sequence of events, things that were said, how many shots were fired, and even who fired the gun! It would have been interesting to have had it on video tape to play back, but in those days the "audio visual aids" were limited to 16mmmamamammillimeterrrrrr mmmmovieee projjectttorsss which often didn't function too well anyway.
I will never forget that lesson, for it taught me that "eye witness" testimony - often touted as "bullet proof" by prosecutors - is pretty damned worthless unless you have several people who do not talk to each other beforehand (or are influenced by a biased party like the police or prosecutor) all testify to the same thing. Accident investigators know this fact well and focus on the physical evidence instead. A good police officer at an accident scene will also separate witnesses for this reason.
By the way, you should take my own version of events as related in the first paragraph with a grain of salt as well. ;^)
So, here's another awareness test. This one is on video, so you can play it back. Pay close attention and see how good your observational skills are! Ready?